May15th Review

A CRITICAL SURVEY OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM

TenCents

VOL. III. 10c a Copy. Putlisned on tke first and fifteentk of tke montn. * 6<> a Year- No. 6

CONTENTSPAGE

THE SOCIALISM OF THE SWORD 25Louis C. Fraina.

CURRENT AFFAIRS 27L. B. Boudin.

THE WAR IN THE FAR EAST 29Nicholas Russel.

"THE CONSCIENCE OF THE NORTH" 32Covington Hall.

SOLIDARITY AND SCABBING 34Austin Lewis.

BILLY SUNDAY AS A SOCIAL SYMPTOM 36Phillips Russell.

PAGE38THE NOVELS OF DOSTOEVSKY

Floyd Dell.BOOK REVIEWS 39

TREITSCHKE;; GERMAN SOCIALIST WAR LITERATURE; REVOLUTIONARYFUTURE OF RUSSIA.

A SOCIALIST DIGEST 41THE TREND TOWARD STATE SOCIALISM IN THE BELLIGERENT NATIONS;

THE GERMAN SOCIALISTS' PEACE TERMS; THE BRITISH SOCIALISTSAND PEACE; INTERPRETING JAPAN'S DEMANDS UPON CHINA; BERN-STEIN AND THE FRENCH SOCIALSTS.

CORRESPONDENCEFrom Felix Grendon; Floyd Dell.

45

Copyright, 1915, by the New Review Publishing Ass'n. Reprint permitted if credit is given.

The Socialism of the SwordBy Louis C. Fraina

T HE military State Socialism imposed upon thebelligerent nations by implacable necessityis not a new phenomenon in the scope of its

purpose; it is a new phenomenon in its applicationand social consequences.

The theory of the older Socialism of the Swordwas lucidly stated by Benjamin Franklin.

"Property is the creature of society and society isentitled to the last farthing whenever society needsit."

This is a recognition of the right of the state toprotect itself and the power of the state to seize itscitizens and their property as means of protection.The language of Franklin, "Society is entitled to thelast farthing," indicates the method,—taxation andexpropriation. Property was taxed, destroyed,stolen by the state, but economic activity was notfundamentally altered by the decrees of the state.Socially, that was not State Socialism; it was an ac-tion of the state economically and socially destruc-tive, and not constructive.

The ancient prerogative of a state to protect itselfassumes the form of State Socialism only when thestate denies the right of private property in indus-try ; only when the state regulates economic activitythoroughly and arbitrarily and absorbs within itselfthe means of production of the nation. Formerly thestate simply taxed property; now it RE-ORGANIZESindustry. The change is tremendous and funda-mental. Previous wars while being waged werepurely destructive; constructive economic and socialchanges usually followed after and not during the

war. Now, however, these constructive changes oc-cur in the midst of war itself. While the armies ofthe nations slaughter each other, the state organizesand transforms the internal social system. The Na-poleonic wars destroyed the old order of things inEurope, but except in France the new order wasdeveloped many years later. The Great War, how-ever, is constructing the basis of the new order ofthings at the same time that it destroys the old. Thework of destruction and construction proceeds simul-taneously. In this new phenomenon lies one of thegreat hopes of progress as a consequence of the war.

The belligerent nations are instituting State So-cialism by the absorption of economic activity withinthe control of the state. This was impossible in asociety of isolated individual production; it is pos-sible and practicable only in a society in which in-dustry is highly developed. This pre-supposes econ-omic unity within the state, the reality or illusionof common economic interests, national enthusiasmand solidarity; all of which pre-supposes or producesthe war of peoples in place of simply the war of na-tains. States are no longer organized as competingmilitary powers, but as basically competing eco-nomic groups. Out of this proceeds the implacablenecessity of State Socialism during the war. In allthe belligerent nations—in Germany most, in Russialeast—the economic forces are mobilized for war,offensively and defensively.

In the fact that it is a war of peoples and a warof economics lies the dynamic social significance ofthe Great War. It is a war of peoples not alone be-

26NEW REVIEW

cause of universal military service and its hugearmies, but because the people at home are fightingin a very real sense as much as those at the frontand because they believe they have a stake in thecountry worth protecting—are a part of the nation.It is a war of economics not alone because industryis mobilized, but because all the forces of the nation,close-knit by economic unity, are brought within thescope of the war—utilized, affected, transformed.A war possessing these social characteristics mustnecessarily produce fundamental and permanentchanges, economically, politically, culturally.

Considering its economic basis, the State Social-ism of the belligerent nations, while an expedient ofwar, is not necessarily a temporary expedient. Allthe more does it possess the quality of permanencybecause the emergencjy acts of the governmentsstrengthen a previously-existing and powerful StateSocialist tendency. Internationally the war is boundto modify national individualism in favor of federa-tion of nations; nationally the war strikes a power-ful blow, perhaps the final blow, at the decrepit sys-tem of economic individualism.

The war does not produce new forces and a newline of progress, but caps the climax of the evolu-tionary developments proceeding in the bosom ofpacific society. It destroys that which was on theverge of destruction and strengthens that which wasascending into power.

Those who still cling to the system of economic in-dividualism imagine the compulsory collectivism ofthe war to be temporary because "this whole gov-ernment regimentation has meant great sacrifices formany classes." But these sacrifices are the sacrificesof war; part and parcel of the Socialism of theSword, they are incidental and temporary in StateSocialism itself.

The old argument of inefficiency is being revived.It is pointed out that graft and corruption andvicious speculation are actively at work. Thesetriple evils, however, are nothing new; present inall wars, they were actively at work in the AmericanCivil War and in the wars of the French Revolution.They were incidental to the social changes proceed-ing during those epochs, just as they are incidentalto the social changes implied in military State So-cialism. Besides, graft and corruption are a moreor less normal phase of Capitalism.

Prejudices are more pertinacious than economics.While titanic events marking the birth of a new eraare revolutionizing the economics of the world, im-mediately and potentially, the arguments and ideo-logical conceptions of a moribund system of thingsstill persist and will continue to persist. Ideologicalsuperstructures do not change as easily as theireconomic and social foundations.

The devotees of economic individualism desper-ately hope that labor will prevent permanent State

Socialism. The New York Evening Post expressesthis attitude beautifully:

"The man with the tools is to be regulated as mi-nutely as the man with money. And there can be nodoubt at all that Kitchener methods enforced uponBritish workmen after the war would lead to loud,protests and a political revolt. ... It would be,to them, only one more oppressive display of thepower of the capitalistic state."

Exactly; but it has never been assumed by revo-lutionary Socialists that State Socialism meant any-thing else than the governmental regulation alike oflabor and capital. American progressivism has madethis clear.

The potential revolt of the workers and the capi-talist fear of the proletariat would strengthen in-stead of weakening State Socialism.

The despotic control of industry exercised by aState Socialist regime would impress upon the work-ers the idea and necessity of industrial self-govern-ment. The class struggle, while transformed andsimplified, would become more acute and pervasive.The unity of the heterogenous elements of the capi-talist class implied in State Socialism wouldstrengthen that class, and greater resistance pro-voked among the workers.

State Socialism strengthens the potentiality ofproletarian revolt—in that lies the promise and so-cial mission of State Socialism. But the proletariatwould not revolt to re-introduce the economic indi-vidualism of the bourgeois; it would revolt to intro-duce industrial self-government, that is to say, So-cialism.

BOARD OF EDITORS

Frank BohnWilliam E. BohnLouis B. BoudinFloyd DellW. E. B. Du BoisMax EastmanLouis C. Fraina.Felix GrendonIsaac A. Hourwich

Paul KennadayRobert Rives La MonteJoseph MichaelArthur LivingstonRobert H. LowieHelen MarotMoses OppenheimerHerman SimpsonWm. English Walling

ADVISORY COUNCILArthur BullardGeorge Allan EnglandCharlotte Perkins GilmanArturo GiovanittiReginald W. KaufmannHarry W. LaidlerAustin LewisJohn Macy

Gustavus MyersMary White OvingtonWilliam J. RobinsonCharles P. SteinmetzJ. G. Phelps StokesHorace TraubelJohn Kenneth TurnerAlbert Sonnichsen

Published by the New Review Publishing Association256 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY

ALEXANDER FRASERPresident

JULIUS HEIMANTreasurer

LOUIS C. FRAINASecretary

Subscription $1.50 a year in United States and "Mexico; six months.$0.75. $1.75 in Canada and $2.00 in foreign countries. Single

copies, 10 cents.

Entered at the New York frost-office as second-class mail matter.

CURRENT AFFAIRS 27

Current AffairsBy L. B. Boudin

Trial by Jury and the Working Class

J OHN R. LAWSON, Executive member of theUnited Mine Workers of America and leader

of the striking miners in Colorado during the recentstrike, has been convicted of murder in the first de-gree. Concededly Lawson did not actually kill any-body, and the prosecution rested on a legal fiction,which, if permitted to become the law of the land,will place every strike leader within the shadow ofthe gallows. It is therefore up to the working classof this country not only to see to it that this par-ticular conviction is annuled,—one of the most in-famous in the long list of outrages perpetrated byour Capitalist Class against the workers within thelast few years under the forms of law; but that theprinciple upon which it rests be not permitted tobecome part of our jurisprudence.

There is another phase of the subject which the.working class ought to consider very seriously. Noamount of legal fiction could have convicted Lawsonif the jury which tried him had not been as eagerto send him to the gallows or life imprisonment aswas the prosecutor himself. Remember the readi-ness with which other juries have within the lastfew years been convicting all those who participatedin the class-struggle on labor's side, no matter howabsurd the charges or insufficient the proof. Now,trial by jury has justly been considered one of thebulwarks of our liberties and one of the principalsecurities provided in free countries against injus-tice and oppression. Why, then, has trial by jury•failed to protect the working-class of this countryagainst palpable injustice?

The answer is: the working class never reallygets trial by jury. What it gets is a sham and afraud, palmed off under the forms of trial by jury.Trial by jury does not mean a trial by twelve meninstead of by one or three; nor does it mean trialby laymen instead of trial by men learned in thelaw. What it really means is a trial by one's peers,that is a trial by men of the same condition of life,members of one's own class. Magna Charta there-fore declares that: "No freeman shall be arrested,or detained in prison . . . unless by the lawfuljudgment of his peers." And the judgment of one'speers is just as necessary for the protection of lib-erty in a struggle between one class and anotheras it is in a contest between a subject and his king.

But a workingman is never tried by a jury ofhis peers. There were no workingmen on the Law-son Jury. And when a workingman is tried foran offense growing out of the class-struggle he isnot only not tried by a jury of his peers, but the

jury is usually composed of members of the classagainst which he has committed the offense forwhich he is being tried. How can he expect justiceat the hands of such a jury?

The Political Mood

THE wave of reaction which has come overthis country since the last presidential elec-tion shows no signs of receding. On the con-

trary, the indications are that it is still on the up-ward sweep, and will continue to rise for some timeto come, probably until the next presidential elec-tion is over. In the language of the New YorkTimes and its confreres—"the country is tired of po-litical agitation" and wants a rest.

The manifestations of the "chastened mood" ofour electorate are many and diverse, but they allpoint one way—the way backwards. Those of ourradicals and progressives who have not themselvesbeen "chastened" by the backward sweep of the po-litical trend look with dismay upon their shatteredhopes, whether those were pinned upon the officialProgressive Party or upon "progressivism" gener-ally. Wisconsin, the great "Experiment in Democ-racy," the State of Hope of all the academic andjournalistic "me too" Socialists, has turned out afalse light, a fata morgana. And the ProgressiveParty, in which the more practical among themplaced their faith, lies shattered in pieces.

This has put our radicals and some of our Social-ists in a quandary: What of the morrow? Untilnow the task before them seemed to be clear enough:Put the People in control. The People in control oftheir political machinery, free from the incubus ofcorrupt political bosses and the shackles put uponthem by the "special interests," will right every-thing and we shall enter upon a glorious era of"progress" and social reform. But now that ThePeople untrammeled and unbossed have turned theirface backwards, as they have done in Wisconsin andthe West generally, who shall turn the tide? Andour poor radicals stand bewildered, not knowing howto account for the strange and, to them, inexplicablebehavior of "The People"; nor what to do next.Some of them have themselves become chastenedunder the influence of the prevailing political mood,and intend henceforth to move slow, very, very slow.And the rest are just wondering, troubled in spirit,and without light or leading.

Social Reform and Taxes

I T is of course impossible to discuss adequately inthe space of a brief note all the reasons for the

collapse of the progressive movement in this coun-try. And we shall not attempt to do so here. Butthe main reason may at least be pointed out. It isthis:

"The People" as such are neither progressive nor

28NEW REVIEW

radical; no more than they can be said to be con-servative. Whether or not "the people" will be pro-gressive depends entirely on who are "the people"we look to and what kind of "progressivism" we ex-pect from them. It so happens that "the people"whom our quondam progressive movement lookedto were the farmers and the lower strata of thebourgeosie, the so-called "small man." Now youcan get your "small man" interested in and evenenthusiastic over "progressivism" as long as thatmeans more political power to himself, particularlywhere it is intimately connected with his economicneeds, such as lower freight rates, cheaper publicutilities, and similar things. But you cannot gethim interested in, much less enthusiastic over, "pro-gressivism" when that comes to mean labor legisla-tion, or social legislation on such a scale and of sucha kind that he doesn't get most of the benefit accru-ing from it.

You may, by adroit manoeuvring, get him to putsuch "planks" into his "progressive" platform, aspart of a political plan to get the working man tovote for his "progressive" ticket. But you can dothis only so long as you can make him believe thatthe workingman's progressivism, if meant at allseriously, is to be brought about at the expense ofthe "special interests." The moment he discoversthat it may be done at his own expense, or at theexpense of the community at large, that is at theexpense of the taxpayers, he is done with progressiv-ism. Your "small man" is the most implacableenemy of high taxes that the world has ever pro-duced. He may hate bosses and political corrup-tion, but he hates high taxes more. In fact his chiefobjection to bosses and political corruption is thatthey have the hateful tendency of increasing thetax rate.

The progressives of Wisconsin and the Westgenerally have discovered that the kind of pro-gressivism which their leaders have been preachingof late, owing to the political exigencies of the situa-tion, is not their own progressivism pure and unde-filed, but the kind that raises the tax-rate. Theydiscovered, for instance, that their beloved LaFol-lette, the hero of so many campaigns against the"special interests," suddenly developed a propensitytowards workmen's compensation and similar ex-travagances which reflected painfully on the taxlists. So down went the noble hero to smash, andperhaps to political oblivion—a warning example to"progressive leaders" to make sure what kind of"progressivism" their following will stand for. Andit would be well if some of our Socialists, too, wouldexamine the progressive movement of this countrya little more closely so that they may know the kindof progressivism they are dealing with before theymake it the basis of their actions or prognostica-tions.

The Constitutional Convention

IT is very unfortunate that the Convention to re-

vise the fundamental law of the State of NewYork should meet at a time of general reaction.That the reactionary wave should be particularlysfrong in the Empire State, is, of course, only na-tural. New York has always prided itself upon its"conservative temper," and this pride has on thewhole been justified. In the election of 1914 this"conservative temper" took the form of a Kepub-lican landslide, which brought about, among otherthings, the election of Mr. James W. Wadsworth,Jr., as the first popularly elected United States Sen-ator from the Empire State. This proved clearlythat the people can do for themselves what manyimagined only Murphy and Barnes could do forthem.

Just where the reactionaries intend to drive theirprincipal wedge is hard to tell just now. But theindications are that whatever else they do, the Ju-diciary Article is going to receive their most seriousconsideration. Our elective judiciary has long beena thorn in the side of our "best citizens." Their idealis an "independent judiciary"—that is a judiciaryindependent of any political machine and thereforethoroughly devoted to the interests of the capitalistclass as a whole. Such a judiciary is to be had onlyunder an appointive system. So long as "progressiv-ism" and "radicalism" were in the ascendant andthe people were clamoring for the recall of judges,an appointive judiciary could only be an ideal to becherished secretly. But now that reaction is ram-pant many feel that the time is ripe for the realiza-tion of this fond dream. Nice little plans have,therefore, been submitted to the Convention for anappointive judiciary, under the plea of taking thejudiciary "out of politics."

The Convention and the Socialist Party

THE New York State Executive Committee has

appointed a committee to prepare a plan ofaction in connection with the Constitutional Con-vention.

A Conference on May 22 is to decide what de-mands are to be made by it upon the ConstitutionalConvention, but the Socialist Party will submit tothe Conference a list of demands for consideration.

This action is to be heartily welcomed. Of course,such conferences are likely to open the doors widefor all sorts of questionable political adventures.But a Socialist Party must not abdicate its functionsof leading and directing the working class, in orderto preserve its own innocence. Action is the law ofall life, including the life of parties. We must there-fore take some risks rather than do nothing. Par-ticularly since the history of our own party has con-clusively proven that we may soil our hands evenwhile doing nothing or next to nothing.

THE WAR IN THE FAR EAST 29

The War in the Far EastBy Nicholas Russel (Japan)

H UMAN history is the history of man's rela-tions and corresponding attitude towardshis environment—elemental and social.

The roots of these relations are deeply buried in theanimal struggle for existence; their branches vanishin the still foggy heights of the "brotherhood ofman" based on principles of solidarity and harmoni-ous, co-ordinated, spontaneous co-operation.

We started as slaves of our elemental environment,which we symbolized first as the bloodthirsty, crueltyrant of the Old Testament, a tyrant who delightedin contortions of the burning body and the smell ofburning flesh. It was the state of absolute, uncondi-tional submission. Primos deos fecit timor.

With the growth of knowledge grew our ascend-ancy over the environment. Our symbols softened.In the New Testament man regards the god-environ-ment as a merciful and loving father. In our owndays, when Jove with his thunderbolts has beenbrought down from Olympus and put to the task ofmessenger boy and motor driver, our ideas of, andour attitude to, the elemental environment assumethe monistic aspect: we pride ourselves in being aliving part of one great living whole, of the greatuniversal entity.

Recent research in Mesopotamia has shown civili-zation possessed of a common root. It startedamong the Akkadians or Simmerians (of Turanianstock) some 7,000 years ago. To them we owe ourcalendar, our numeral system and a number of im-portant inventions and discoveries. Civilized lifespread in two opposite directions: east and west,from Mesopotamia. After a long journey aroundthe globe civilization recently met on the shores ofJapan.

The difference in the attitude of man towards hiselemental and social environment is the key to theunderstanding of the fundamental difference be-tween the two civilizations; between the East andthe West, the Eastern and the Western man, theEastern and the Western mind.

The fortunes of the two waves were quite differ-ent in this respect. With the Western wave, aftermany vicissitudes and tribulations, ups and downs,man ultimately emerged triumphant over the ele-mental environment; he gradually emancipated him-self from the bondage; first, in the domain of intel-lect (ancient civilizations and later European Re-naissance) ; then in the domain of conscience (Ref-ormation) ; still later, politically from the tutelage ofthe state, to whom the power of the elemental en-vironment in the course of evolution was delegated,(French Revolution and English Magna Charta).

Finally in Socialism we see the dawn of the ap-proaching economical emancipation. Such are theprincipal mile-posts marking the epochs of Westernhistory.

A different fate awaited the Eastern wave. Theawe-inspiring majesty of the physiographical envir-onment: high mountain chains, large rivers, stormyseas, extensive deserts, extreme continental tempera-ture variations, proved so many unsurmountable ob-stacles on its way, on the way of human progress,obstacles that kept man what he was—an abjectslave of this environment; the slave who had nochoice but to regulate his conduct in accordance withits dictations; never to lose sight of the past, lest helose the Ariadne's thread of tradition, sever the um-bilical cord attaching him to mother nature. Theonly guide was the experience of the past,—"thewisdom of ancestors." Every departure from it wasa sacrilege. Wherever and whenever through col-lective effort and some fortunate combination of cir-cumstances he succeeded in partly emancipating him-self from his surroundings, the same elementalforces (as manifested in social organization) steppedin and asserted their sway. Such was oriental des-potism. At the best, it was but a change of masters:elemental forces of social character replacing the di-rect categorical imperatives of the ambient sur-roundings.

After 7,000 years' journey in opposite directionsthe two waves have effected their connection in theFar East, as if animated with antagonistic prin-ciples : on one side man was found in control of theelemental environment (and to some extent of so-cial) ; on the other, environment in control of thebody and soul of man. Two confluent rivers, sayblue and white, like the Rhone and Arve in the neigh-borhood of Geneva, for quite a distance run in thesame bed as the two parallel ribbons until graduallytheir waters mix and assume a uniform color.

Here is the source of all the sharp contrasts char-acteristic of life in the Far East, contrasts makingthe sum total of the Far-Eastern situation. Thegradual neutralization of these contrasts by armingthe East with the knowledge of the West, Westernprinciples and Western methods, producing man'scontrol of his surroundings, will constitute the warpand woof of the future history of this part of theglobe, the history into whose future we propose tocast a glance.

Qualitatively and quantitatively war is the ulti-mate manifestation, the culminating point of thecompetitive system. Qualitatively—because it is aresult to the ultima ratio of all competition—physical

30NEW REVIEW

force. Quantitatively, because it represents the finaland supreme effort, the maximum of stress of ac-cumulated energy.

The antidote for war lies in the substitution of theprinciple of co-operation for that of competition.The pendulum, after having reached its extreme,must swing back.

The Great War is the last phase, the last act ofsocial-economical strife and elemental national-po-litical division. It is their last word: reductio adabsurdum. The system of armed peace, a silly inven-tion of Prussian Junkers, is at bottom nothing but arace between the taxpayer and the inventor, the raceinevitably resulting in the triumph of the secondand the bankruptcy of the first. From this impassethere is but one way out—the abolition of competi-tion in international relations and of the strife be-tween capital and labor, or rather the transfer, theraising of both forms of competition to a higherplane, that of intellectual and moral achievements,of further victories over the elemental nature, bothin its outer and especially social manifestations.

The unprecedented strides in scientific and tech-nical knowledge during the last half century, espe-cially through the conquest of space, caused the ter-restrial globe, as the habitat of our race, to contractto one-tenth of its former dimensions. Throughsuch contraction continental Europe practicallyfound itself as one household, felt itself as one familyliving under the same roof and clamoring for the re^moval of vexatious traditional elemental, class andnational divisions; for the readjustment of all "su-perstructures" resting on an economic foundation inaccordance with the new conditions. Such is themeaning of the present war.

We know that intellectual age does not coincidewith the physical one, neither with individuals, norwith social classes. With both mental evolution isliable to be arrested and become stationary. Theresult is that we meet bearded and whiskered menenjoying boyish games, and entire classes mentallylingering in former centuries. With individualsthis phenomenon is called "oslerization" in honor ofProfessor Osier, who gave much attention to thatsubject. The same phenomenon observable withclasses ought to be designated as "Shaefflerization,"since it was Prof. Shaeffler that called our attentionto the fact that the mentality of different strata ofsociety corresponds to different centuries.

It happened that the German nation saw fit to re-tain in its midst the pugnacious Junker class of biglandholders, who as a class are part and parcel ofmediaeval feudalism, whose psychology and ideals ofvalor are those of the XVII century. It was like adead tooth remaining in a healthy jaw. Parallelwith the preservation of this social relic Germanypreserved in its mass psychology another mentalrelic of medisevalism, the counterpart of the junkers'arrogant pugnacity—a negative to a positive—obse-

quious pusillanimity of the mediaeval villein. It pre-vented Germany from pulling the dead tooth herselfbefore it became a public nuisance. The old Michelbore patiently the agony of the dead tooth and all itsabominations, until a painful boil developed. Thenhe made such a racket that all the neighbors had torun to his assistance and pull the tooth.

Feudalism has to be destroyed, lock, stock and bar-rel. Delenda est Carthago. The bulwark of reac-tion, the Bastille, barring the highway to human ad-vance, the mediaeval feudalistic survival, the Prus-sian Junker class, must be annihilated. Thronesand the rest of the mediaeval furniture to be movedto the garret or disposed of to antiquarians andcurio collectors to find final resting place onmuseum shelves.

You seldom meet men who realize the magnitudeand import of the present international conflict.Reasoning in terms of the past, they expect that in afew months peace will be concluded: France will getAlsace-Lorraine, Russia the Straits, Italy Triest, andso forth. Such is not the case. This war representsa social upheaval similar to the great French Revolu-tion. Generations will live on it. Its consequencesare countless and incalculable. It removes one of thecards from the very foundation of the elaboratelycomplex card-structure of modern society. And withit the whole structure collapses.

The war deals a mortal blow to the principle ofnationality as the foundation of political division.The new Europe, that will arise from the ashes, willbe built exclusively on the principle of territorialsolidarity, regardless of all traditional and elementaldistinctions. The new Europe will discard the prin-ciple of centralization by dividing itself into a fewhundred sovereign states more or less correspondingto the present and old provincial divisions, form onesolid federation with the Federal centre somewherein The Hague or rather Brussels; constitute itselfinto The United States of Europe cemented by terri-torial solidarity.

The new Europe will destroy the system of armedpeace, will disband armies and navies replacing themwith but one at the disposal of the Federal Govern-ment.

The new democratic Europe will carry the demo-cratic principle deep into economics, wresting themeans of production from the hands of the capitalistclass and returning them to whom they belong inequity—to the associations of workers, to municipal,county, state and federal authorities.

How fast all this constructive work will be real-ized is hard to tell, but it must be fast since lifeamong roofless ruins is not pleasant.

The great international cataclysm constitutes aprelude to a series of great events. It is the lastgasp of the expiring capitalist system and the firstbreath of the social revolution. All prominent So-cialist thinkers, including Marx and Engels, have

THE WAR IN THE FAR EAST 31

predicted that social revolution will be initiated witha great international conflict.

Parallel with the European continental federationEngland with her colonies may form another similarconstellation. Central and South America will fol-low suit and North and South Africa will not remainlong behind.

Assuming that the above prognostications areprobable, we may revert to our subject—the influ-ence that European events will exert upon the futureof the Far East.

Let us remember first that the keynote of this fu-ture will remain the amalgamation of Eastern andWestern civilizations, the lifting of the Eastern manto the Western level through arming him with West-ern knowledge, thus asserting his mastery over theelemental environment.

Hitherto the United States has and still plays thepart of the principal school teacher, and one mayexpect that it will continue in that role for a longtime. For a long time its moral and intellectual in-fluence will predominate. The United States is nota conqueror. The territorial acquisition of thePhilippines, Hawaii, etc., was incidental and irrele-vant to the all important mission that it has fulfilledthus far in this part .of the world. The concatena-tion of facts such as the opening of Japan to theworld's intercourse; the essential contribution to thebuilding of the Japanese educational system; the en-lightment of China by a host of American teach-ers and missionaries, enlightment that resulted inthe overthrow of the monarchy; finally, the educa-tion and democratization of the Philippines cannotbe explained away by chance combination of circum-stances or the gravitation towards oriental markets.There must lie at the bottom of all this reasons by nomeans occult or mystical, but belonging to a highercategory of sociological knowledge not unlike thecontrapunt or thorough bass in music. Every greatnation had her world's mission. As examples I maypoint to the Reformation in Germany, the GreatFrench Revolution, the English Magna Charta andconstitutionalism, her championship of individualliberty.

Why should the United States be an excep-tion?

Why should the United States have come to theFar East (as one of the "republican" PhilippineCommissioners—for Public Instruction, too—Elliotby name, expressed himself in a public address inManila), "to trade on the principles of the opendoor and equal opportunity"?

Japan had started her part on the Far Easternstage first, as a promising pupil; after graduationshe was promoted to the important post of the assist-ant school teacher. If this simile is correct, anyfisticuff conflict in the school room between the two,with pupils around as spectators, would constitutethe most amusing chapter of "The Comedy of Uni-

versal History." Whatever conies, let us hope, wewill not lose our temper and debase ourselves to suchridicule.

I do not believe that Japan, at least as long as thePhilippines in some shape or other are attached tothe United States, cherishes any serious designs inthat direction. In case of abandonment there maybe some temptation, and that is reason enough forAmerican retention of the Philippines.

The mass of the Philippine people is doing wellunder the present regime, and, being a-politic isentirely indifferent to "independence." This ques-tion of independence is agitated exclusively by theambitious and office-hungry class of politicians. Themiddle and upper classes find themselves too com-fortable to tempt providence, to take the risk of fall-ing into the pit of Mexican pronunciamentos. Atthe best, the question of Philippine independence isbut a huge misunderstanding. Real independence isin local self-government, of which the Philippineshave full measure. As for certain sovereign rights:foreign relations, war and peace, tariff, etc., everyState of the Union has it delegated to the Federalauthorities, and in this respect the Philippines arenot worse off than New York or California. I donot intend to convey the idea that the presentAmerican regime is perfect. Far from it; it is toobureaucratic, paternalistic and unprincipled, toomuch flavored with the corner grocery spirit, but itis the best that the Philippines can have under thecircumstances. A true Philippine patriot, such asJose Rizal, in these circumstances would ignore poli-tics and use his best efforts to emancipate the Philip-pine people from their worst and most dangerousenemies: hookworm, padres and professional poli-ticians. The outside danger to the Philippines (ifdanger it is) lies in the fact that, at a most con-servative estimate, they are capable of sustainingone hundred and fifty millions of population in lieuof the present eight millions; and with hookworm inthe intestines, padre on the neck and a politician inevery pocket, the Philippines seem unable to popu-late the land with their own resources. The ethnicalpressure is too uneven on both sides of the Chinesesea. Notwithstanding all restrictions and enforce-ment of the United States emigration law, the in-filtration of Chinese goes merrily on. They consti-tute the majority of the commercial class and ofskilled labor, especially in the country. They inter-marry with Philippines and procreate mestizos of ahigher intellect, character and efficiency than any ofthe numerous pure Philippine nationalities. Peace-ful Chinese absorption of these islands racially, aswell as of the rest of the Malay group, seemsinevitable.

The immediate effect of the titanic struggle inEurope upon the Far East will be the relaxation, ifnot the total collapse, of the deleterious military,diplomatic and capitalistic pressure of foreign na-

32NEW REVIEW

tions. The attention of the European powers willfor a long time be riveted on home affairs and can-not admit of any active policy in this part of theworld. For a long time the Far East will be left toits own resources, so that with the moral, intellec-tual and probably economic influence of the UnitedStates, there remain in the Far Eastern stage buttwo actors: Japan and China. Their mutual atti-tude and relations will constitute the fundamentalaspect of future events. What will those rela-tions be?

Before attempting even a problematic answer tothat question, we must remember that the Europeansocial-economical and national-political upheaval re-sulting in social revolution, economic and politicalinternationalization, decentralization and democ-ratization, will not fail to profoundly influence theFar East. One may expect that both the Chineseand Japanese will take a lesson and spontaneouslyfollow suit in the great transformation. How farand how fast will they go? They cannot keepabreast with the West, being economically and psy-chologically not fully prepared, but their advancewill be faster than was ours. They will not have torepeat the evolutionary phases through which wepassed, no more than they need repeat experimentsof Fulton and Watts. They will accept and imitateour latest productions. Their task in social, eco-nomic and political relations, as in industrial tech-nique, will be so much easier; and one must expectthey will not lag behind too much. They will rapidlysummarize untold centuries of Western evolution,as the human embryo summarizes the life-historyof the race.

In order to unravel with some degree of prob-ability the main features of the future relations ofJapan and China one must consider the profoundpsychological and social difference between thesetwo great oriental nations, the difference in localityand of the elemental and social environment.

The Chinese are slower but steadier both inthought and action as compared with the more quickand more inflammable Japanese. They feel an or-ganic distrust of authority, being collectivistic in theirnature. Whereas Japan beats Germany as a classicalcountry for all kind of state socialistic experimentsemanating from above, China's initiative and plansof action invariably come from the people, from allkind of secret and open organizations and associa-tions. Compared with the peace-loving, soldier-despising Chinaman, the Japanese in the mass ispugnacious and aggressive when led by a constitutedauthority. Like Germany, with all the decorativeconstitutionalism (about 2 per cent, of populationvote in the elections), Japan is still in the hands oftwo military clans, Satsuma and Choshu, of whomone controls the navy and the other the army. Towhat extent European disarmament will be followedby Japan it is impossible to say. Taxation is al-

ready crushing the masses. The small farmer, thebackbone of the country, finds his vocation alreadyunprofitable because of the heavy taxation. Accord-ingly he sells his small holdings, which fall into thehands of large holders and land speculators. Inspite of such ominous facts, the peacefully inclinedpremier, Okuma—President of the local PacifistBranch—favors the formation of two army divis-ions and the building of new superdreadnoughts. Itis hard to believe that Japanese disarmament willproceed as fast and be as radical as one is justifiedto expect in Europe. In any event hardly any stepswill be taken in this direction before Japanese rela-tions to China and the United States will fully clearup. The demands from China as formulated by thepresent Japanese Government justify the belief thatJapan intends to assume military and economicdominance in China with a view to a prospectivefederation, in which Japan will reserve first fiddle toherself. So far all the advantages are on the Jap-anese side; China is helpless. She.is bound to fol-low the policy of non-resistance to evil and sullenlyadmit the intruder, and later on ... deal with thenew intruder as she dealt with the numerous in-truders in her hoary past: swallow and digest him ina calm, systematic fashion, as a phagocyt does witha microbe.

11The Conscience of the

North ''By Coving ton Hall

IT is well sometimes to "see ourselves as others

see us," wherefore, I propose to try to showthe North how its much boasted "conscience"

looks to us of the "Repressed South."The spirit to write this exposure of "the con-

science of the North" came over me on reading Mr.Joseph C. Manning's article in the NEW REVIEWfor March on "The Repressed South," which is, inthe main, absolutely correct, and far worse true.

But who aided and abetted the "Democratic" partyin its infamous suppression and betrayal of theSouth ? It is certain that the old slave owning Aris-tocracy is no longer a power in Dixie, for its propertyrights were long ago expropriated and its sons anddaughters are now scattered to the four winds of theearth, the vast majority of them, even in the South,being either wage workers or working farmers orprofessionals. Their property rights being de-stroyed, their political power is, according to Marx,and in truth and fact, non-existent. Therefore, whoaided and abetted the "Democratic"- party in thepeonizing of the "New South" ? What and who arethe economic powers behind this party, the mostshameless political machine that ever engineered thelooting and enslavement of any land?

"THE CONSCIENCE OF THE NORTH" 33

Not only does Mr. Manning tell the entire truthwhen he shows how the "Democratic" oligarchy dis-franchised the Negro and Colored voters, but alsowhen he points out that they used the "race ques-tion" (which, as he well says, is no question at all)to disfranchise the majority of the white votersalong with them. But it is also true that there musthave been some strong economic power behind andurging on the "Democratic" party to commit thiscrime against their own people; nor was disfran-chisement by any means the worst and foulest crimecommitted against the people of the South—the loot-ing of vast natural resources was their crime ofcrimes and the "race question" was and is onlyraised to divide the wage workers and workingfarmers and thus render more easy the taking of theloot.

Who got this loot? For it is on this loot that thepresent industrial and political system of the Southrests. It is from it that peonage and tenantry andall their degrading evils have come. On this lootrests the economic power that controls the modernSouth. Around and for its protection is organizedall the political and other repressive forces by whichthe people of the South are held in a subjection likeunto that of Mexico under the reign of Diaz TheDamned.

Therefore, who got this loot?—Northern Capital-ists got it, Capitalists who own practically the en-tire state of Louisiana. They are our Lumber, Cot-ton, Sugar, Fruit, Railroad, Shipping, Banking, Oiland Sulphur Kings. They are the dominant eco-nomic power in Louisiana and all other Southernstates today and the "Democratic" party is nothingbut their political chattel slave, self-sold and for aprice that Benedict Arnold would have scorned andspurned.

They are the fathers of peonage, the most gruel-ing and pitiless form of slavery ever devised, since,unlike chattel slavery, the master has no monetaryinterest in the body and welfare of his servant andneed not, therefore, care what comes to him or ofhim, as the old time slave holders were forced to do,since, just prior to the breaking out of the war, com-mon laborers cost, in Louisiana, as much as $1,500apiece. This forced his master to watch over atleast the slave's physical welfare and that of his chil-dren, just as he was forced to watch over that of hishorses and their colts—because it paid, and I wouldhave liked to have seen any detective, gunman ordeputy sheriff, even though he were "duly and law-fully commissioned" by the "Democratic" party, at-tempt to murder or manhandle such a slave, or tocommit against the slaves the thousand and onecrimes the hellions of the Lumber Trust daily andhourly inflict upon its peons, white as well as black.The old planter aristocracy would have had the hel-lion attempting any such deeds landed in jail or onthe gallows "before sundown." They would have

been outraged at his deeds, because he was injuringtheir property. Not so is it with the peon masters—they have nothing to lose by an injury to or the deathof the peon; he cost them nothing., Therefore theyowe him no duty, yet they demand of him all service.Peonage is, as it were, a marriage of wage and chat-tel slavery, in which the slave has none of the bene-fits and all of the evils of chattel slavery. And peon-age is the form of slavery inflicted on the Southernwage workers and working farmers by the economicmight of Northern Capitalists.

Therefore, to what "conscience of the North" doesMr. Manning, and the rest who are always mouthingthis phrase, wish to appeal? That part of "the con-science of the North" which is profiting by this in-famous system of slavery is not going to be touchedby any such appeal. As a matter of fact it is tryingto extend this system over the entire Continent. Ifthe wage workers and working farmers of the Southlie down and wai tuntil any conscience in the North,or elsewhere, wakes up and comes and saves them,they are going to wait a mighty long time. Besides,a people who can't save themselves are not worthsaving. If that's the best we can hope for, to besaved from "on high," the sooner we are sent to hellin a hand-basket the better.

Economic power disfranchised the Southern work-ers and looted us of our native land. It was eco-nomic power, that here and in West Virginia, Michi-gan, Colorado, Montana and elsewhere, abrogatedand abolished the "rights" "guaranteed" in and bythe Constitution of the United States, all of whichhas led me to the conclusion that the Syndicalistsare about correct when they assert that "constitu-tional rights" without the economic power to enforcethem are not worth the paper they are written on,and that whether that piece of paper be the holy con-stitution of the United States or the beautiful con-stitution of Mexico.

The first thing the Southern workers should at-tempt is not the waking of "the conscience of theNorth," but their own class conscience, and, not toseek first and mainly political re-enfranchisement,but to begin at once the organization of powerful in-dustrial unions, class organization that will have themight to make good every right they think worthtaking.

It is in this connection that I charge the Socialistparty as being the most cowardly political organiza-tion in America today and I hold "the conscience ofthe North" mainly and principally responsible forthe present debacle in the American Socialist andLabor Movement. It is from you that have come the"leaders" who have led nowhere but into the quag-mires of compromise and middle class politics andunionism. It was you who gave us "Centralism"and bureaucracy, those twin curses of the LaborMovement. It is you who pracaically control ourentire press. It is you who advise us to wait and

34NEW REVIEW

vote, we, the vote-less, in the midst of terrific strug-gles like that of the Louisiana Lumberjacks. It isyou who waste reams and reams of ink and paperon philosophical dissertations on the European warwhile the "Democratic" "leaders" of Texas are send-ing Rangel, Cline and their comrades, men whoacted in the cause of liberty, to the filthy prisons ofthat looted state and, while they were doing the willof their Northern masters, you had hardly a wordto say—you let the Scalawags of the South wreaktheir will on these defenseless comrades with barelya line in their behalf—you, "the conscience of theNorth"!

If there is one thing on earth we Southerners havegood reason to look on with super-suspicion, it is"the conscience of the North." Capitalistically it has

looted and enslaved us; revolutionarily (?) it haspassed anti-sabotage laws against us; it has tenantedand peonized us; added insult to injury; so, fromwhat and all we have seen of it, it is no wonder thatit looks like the most conscienceless thing we everbutted into. Therefore, we say let "the conscienceof the North" and the constitution of the UnitedStates go to hell. Let's wake up the fighting con-science of the workers. Come alive! You're deadand don't know it and we are dead and do. That'sthe only real difference between your hamstrung"conscience" and ours. Lastly, the least "conscience"we are burdened with in the waging of the class warthe sooner will victory perch on the banners of theworking class, the sooner will the State be crushedby the Commonwealth.

Solidarity and ScabbingBy Austin Lewis

WE are all familiar with the punishment of

the scab and the approval which suchpunishment meets among working people.

This approval, even of actual violence, is an ab-horrent surprise to the middle classes. That onecannot work when he likes where he likes and forwhat he likes, strikes at the very foundations ofthat individual liberty which underlies the middleclass state and which the ordinary middle classcitizen regards as essential to his welfare. Butsuch liberty has been found to be incompatible withthe prosperity and even with the life of workingpeople, and hence, the workers obedient to the or-dinary ethical code as they are, are obliged by thecircumstances of their life to make another ethicalcode, which transcends the value of the former sinceit is obligatory upon them, or to use the currentterm, "makes for life."

With the advent of the solidarity notion howeverthe question of scabbing becomes even more im-portant than before, for it is vital to organized laborthat it should be able to maintain itself intact andpresent affirm front to its enemies.

It could only do this in the future as it has fre-quently done in the past by virtue of a sort of ter-rorism combined with sentimental appeals if itwere not for the growth in the idea of labor soli-darity. But the development of industry, with thegradual substitution of unskilled for skilled labor,has worked a recent and rapid change in the con-ditions with which skilled labor is confronted intimes of strikes or lock outs.

Under the system in which the skilled had a sortof monopoly by virtue of his skill, the justificationof the use even of violence against scabs is veryapparent. The strikers, or the men locked out, were

engaged in a fight which tended to improve or main-tain conditions in the particular craft. All whopractised that craft share, of necessity, in the gainsmade for it by organized labor, even though theywere not members of the union. The treachery ofthose who, for a transitory and monetary advantagetook the place of their fellow craftsmen and thusreduced the standing of the entire labor body isvery apparent. None but the very meanest andmost contemptible of men would act as scabs undersuch conditions, and there is no question of themoral inferiority of the scabs of that period.

But it may happen and indeed increasingly hap-pens that the skilled craft is artificially and unso-cially maintaining conditions which are uneconomicand have no industrial justification. This is shownby the fact that unskilled can be substituted forskilled in the event of a strike or lock out. Thishas been done repeatedly in recent times. In factunskilled Italians have been known' to break a strikein the metal trades and to become so-called skilledworkers in the course of a few months.

It is hard for the skilled trades to find any realground of complaint against these scabs. They donot belong to their organization, they do not evenbelong to their craft. Benefits which might ariseto the craft from the strike do not appeal to them forthey will never be members of the craft. They areworking in iron today, they may be working in woodtomorrow. There is no appeal to be made to themon any common ground from the trade union pointof view.

Indeed they are in such a position that they havea grievance against the skilled crafts which havenot only not done anything for them but have actu-ally put obstacles in their way and have made the

SOLIDARITY AND SCABBING 35

tiresome work of earning a living even more diffi-cult than necessary.

So bitterly is this grievance felt in fact that attimes the so-called unskilled so far as organizedthey have frequenty resolved to carry on a cam-paign against the skilled trades from whom theyhave had so little sympathy and so much antagon-ism. But they have always refrained from puttingtheir threats into deeds because of that tendencytowards solidarity which is so much more effectivein the weak than in the strong. Moreover, the feel-ing, at least among the leaders, that war betweenthe various sections of labor could have nothing buta detrimental effect upon the movement as a whole,has been so powerful that the malcontents have hadno chance to put their threats into effect.

Only the most earnest feeling of solidarity couldcompel men in such a condition as are the unskilledto refrain from scabbing. For the work to whichthey could gain access by scabbing on the skilledoffers so many opportunities for better pay thatvery marked self denial is required for its refusal.

The extent of the growth of the solidarity notionmay be gauged by comparing the conduct of the un-skilled in this respect with that of the organizedskilled crafts who frequently scab upon one another.In most of such cases jurisdictional disputes arefundamental causes and, as a result of the ill-willand actual hatred engendered by these disputes, wefind members of the same craft destroying eachother and using actual physical violence in the pros-ecution of their hatreds.

The strike of electrical workers on the PacificCoast in 1913 was one of the most notable amongmany of such occurrences. In this case one organi-zation of electrical workers sided with the employ-ers and when the other union went on strikepromptly supplied scabs and worked with the re-sult that hundreds of men were ruined and theefforts made towards improvement in conditionswere thrown away.

This case in fact is merely typical of a large num-ber of such which have all tended to make the craftunion form more and more popular.

Yet such actions are quite justifiable on an hy-pothesis which does not set up a standard of soli-darity. In fact the case of the electrical workerswas regarded in trade union upper circles as dis-ciplinary and as tending to assert the authority ofthe Federation officers who had declared againstone union on the ground of lack of submission toauthority.

Still the action of the union which scabbed uponthe striking union was popularly regarded as ut-terly reprehensible and the great majority of theunionists on the Pacific Coast had sympathy for thestriking union. Nothing but its defeat really recon-ciled the mass of the workingmen to the situationwhich was, of course, hopeless after that. An occur-

rence like this tends to show that the solidaritynotion is making headway even among the tradeunionists and that another standard than mere craftwelfare is being set up.

In this connection we may note the criticism ofJim Larkin in his article "The Underman" in theMarch, 1915, number of the International SocialistReview.

Larkin is a labor leader of tremendous vigorand ability who has managed to get results frommaterial hitherto considered as impossible by theaverage labor manager. His success has lain in theefficient organization of unskilled labor. ConcerningAmerican Federation manifestations in this countryhe says:

"The Railway Workers are organized in thirteendifferent unions, each of them charged with havingscabbed on the other, and one is humiliated as aworker by being compelled to listen to a gentlemannamed Brandies boasting that a union spent a mil-lion dollars in assisting a shoe manufacturer tobreak a strike."

In all these instances we find the old ethic, whichis not the solidarity but the craft ethic, influencingthe actions of the members of the skilled unions.The contrast between this and the new solidarityethic as exemplified in the actions of the skilledunions as far as they have been organized is suffi-ciently obvious.

But whereas the trades unions do not scruple toscab upon one another they have naturally still lesshesitation in scabbing upon the unskilled.

When a strike has continued for a few weeks andthe pinch begins to be felt, numbers of the skilledmen on strike are obliged to turn to unskilled laborin order to live. They invade the constructioncamps and farms and orchards and as they do notlook forward to any prolonged period of employ-ment at such occupations they are not particularlyinterested in maintaining any standards. Theywork under conditions and for rates of pay whichthe unskilled who are obliged to make their liveli-hood permanently at such occupations are strug-gling to improve, and they thus reduce the generalstandard for the unskilled and render their attemptsat betterment all the more difficult.

This has occurred many times in the West in thehistory of the attempts of unskilled labor to im-prove itself. Even where strikes of the unskilledhave been made we find the same willingness onthe part of the organized craftsmen to actively op-erate against the strikers. This was true in thevery important Big Creek strike in California whichwas conducted under the auspices of the IndustrialWorkers and was really vital to the interests of menengaged in the basic Western occupation of con-struction work.

The case of McKees Rocks, in which an actuallyvictorious strike of unskilled workers was ruined

36NEW REVIEW

by the scabbing of skilled men is one of the mostdisgraceful episodes in the history of recent tradesunionism.

But in all these cases the actions of the tradesunionists did not spring from any wanton desireto injure. They were caused by the fact that themen so scabbing did not understand that they werescabbing. Their ethic reached only to the effects oftheir actions upon organized trades and not uponworkers as workers.

In this respect their joint of view is not unlikethat of the ancient Greeks whose civism extendedonly to those who had a panoply and who conse-quetly had no moral resposibilities towards theirinferiors who were not so fortunately situated.

Regarding the philosophical concepts behind thesemanifestations, we are all aware that they are butthe persistent natural rights notions which as Rob-ert Rives La Monte (NEW REVIEW—March) hasagain reminded us are the product of petty handi-craft. His remarks in that connection are worthrepeating. He says:

"Petty handicraft was moribund in England inthe seventeenth century, it was all but dead andburied at the dawn of the nineteenth, and here weare in the second decade of the twentieth still de-fending or attacking capitalism with weapons forgedon the intellectual anvil of petty handicraft."

These words are still more applicable to the ac-tions of organized labor as far as it has so far man-ifested itself not only in this country but elsewhere.

The ethical teachings of the machine process havenot as yet begun to make themselves felt, unlesssomewhat feebly among the unskilled workers whoare its more immediate victims. These consequentlyrespond more readily to the solidarity idea for inthat notion is their sole hope of relief.

If it were possible for a class to change the viewpoint which the circumstances of its origin forcedupon it, that class could save itself. But historyhas shown that such a transformation is impossible.Hence it is extremely improbable, to say the least,that the trades unions can transform themselvesinto an organization having an ethical basis restingon solidarity rather than on natural rights.

Still, the machine industry is at work and theethical effects of that industry must of necessitymake their impress upon the brains and conduct ofthe members of the trades who are brought intocontact with it. The process is going on as we cansee by the sympathy which has risen spontaneouslyin the ranks of organized labor for the unskilled,as in the Wheatland case. But it has so far notproceeded far enough to affect conduct and it can-not do so without transcending the limits of craftunionism and importing an ethical concept whichtrades unionism is not capable of supporting.

The higher industrial form should, as a matterof necessity, imply the higher industrial ethical and

really does so. La Monte says that he sees no signof the action of the machine industry upon the eth-ical consciousness of the workers, and he claimsthat Veblen is unable to discover such signs, exceptin the phenomenon of syndicalism. But consciousSyndicalism is in reality the least of these signs.The new life appears everywhere inside the organi-zation even in its present form. Where they appearhowever they also threaten the organization, as itnow exists. Proof of this is to be found in mani-festations which can only be apparent to the closeobserver of actual phenomena in the world of laboritself. To see them one must be in close contactwith the workers themselves. They are necessarilyhidden from the student and the critic. If givenan opportunity I should be glad to deal with someof these manifestations in later articles.

Billy Sunday as a SocialSymplon

By Phillips Russell

THE state of Pennsylvania is at present suffer-ing from a pestilence of religious revivalists.Like locusts they have settled down upon a

population already sorely beset by the thousand evilsthat accompany a highly developed industrial sys-tem. A Philadelphia newspaper recently containedaccounts of no less than six "big" revivals in prog-ress in six of the important manufacturing centersin the eastern part of the State. The very heavensresound with cries of "Repent ye!" and the midnightsilences echo with the clink of the after-servicecounting of collections.

It is not without significance that almost coinci-dent with the arrival in Pennsylvania of the Rev.William Ashley Sunday, there was launched by cer-tain mysterious powers a tremendous agitation forlaws restricting the sale of liquor and a sudden waveof protest against the passage by the State Legis-lature of a workmen's compensation law. It mayseem peculiar to connect Mr. Sunday's religious cam-paign with the latter two, and yet that such a con-nection exists is fairly evident.

The manufacturers of the State, than whom thereis no more reactionary or purblind group of capital-ists in the world, conducted their agitation againstthe compensation law for some weeks, but made lit-tle headway. The new Governor favored the pass-age of the measure for political reasons; and publicsentiment, which generally means middle class senti-ment, was behind it for no particular reason exceptthat it was felt that Pennsylvania ought not to lagbehind other "great" states in social legislation.

So the manufacturers decided to make the best ofthe situation, saying, in effect: "Oh, very well; takeyour old compensation law. But, mind you, if we

BILLY SUNDAY AS A SOCIAL SYMPTOM 37

have got to pay for accidents that happen in ourestablishments, there aren't going to be any moreaccidents. Or if we do continue to have accidentsand we do have to pay for them, our profits have gotto be increased enough to make up for the difference.We aren't going to have a workingman go out forlunch, take a drink, and then come back into the shopwith vision obscured or brain fuddled enough tocause him to lose a hand that will cost us $500. Norare we going to permit a man to come in 15 minuteslate on a Monday morning because there has been aSunday night beer party at his house. Booze mustbe put beyond our workmen's reach. We have got tohave more regularity in working hours, more pro-ductiveness and more efficiency."

There are two methods, favored throughout his-tory, of separating a man from the thing that hedesires. One is to work on his superstitions andmake him believe that it is sinful for him to have it;and the other is to work on his fears and threatenhim with punishment if he does have it.

The capitalists of Pennsylvania are using bothmethods in their determination to make the workerefficient, that is, profit-producing.

I have heard Mr. Sunday preach and I have readhis sermons. He is not a new thing under the sun,not a freak, not necessarily a crook or a dishonestman. He is simply the Apostle Paul in a 1915 model,well tailored business suit, with St. Paul's outlookon life, but with none of that saint's prosinesa orpessimism. Paul was a reformed roue and there isnothing so tiresome as a one-time Don Juan'spreachments against the sins that he is too old longerto commit.

The Rev. Billy was "one of the boys," too, as heoften remarks, with a scarcely suppressed smack-ing of the lips. So vivid is his description of thewine-bibber's sinful pleasures that he imparts to onean almost overpowering thirst. I don't know whenI have absorbed a long, tall, cool glass of beer withmore lustfulness, wth more Bacchic abandon, thanthe minute after I had issued from the Sunday tab-ernacle where I heard the evangelist for the firstand only time.

But it is when the Rev. Billy excoriates the sinsthat are associated with women that he is at his best.Behind each adjective peeps the satyr, behind eachjest lurks the saloon loafer with his beery stories.So inflaming to the imagination is his description ofthe illicit indulgences of the dance, of the exposureof the feminine person seen in the musical comedychorus, that it is not to be wondered at that a formerMarine Corps surgeon who heard him in one of hisearly sermons in Philadelphia, went to his room andso mutilated himself that he died.

St. Paul's virtues were all negative. Refrain fromsin, he said; live clean, be faithful to your masters.So preaches Billy—abstain from liquor and fromwomen, be "on the level" wth your boss. In short:

don't drink, because it impairs your efficiency as aprofit producer; don't sport with Amaryllis in theshade or play with the tangles of Naera's hair, be-cause you will stay up late and won't feel like work-ing the next day; do your damndest for your em-ployer, because he supplies you with a chance towork for him.

So much for the Rev. Billy as regards Pennsyl-vania. Why he was brought to Paterson, every oneknows. In the most open fashion it was stated thathe was needed there to allay the discontent, to divertthe minds, of the silk mill workers whose revolt up-set the state two years ago.

In addition, there may be another and larger rea-son for Billy's popularity with the capitalist classand the capitalist press. From remarks heard andsigns noted here and there, I have reason to believethat certain large employers of labor were severelyfrightened by the activities of Frank Tannenbaumand the unemployed in New York last winter a yearago. New York is not, in the strict sense of theword, an industrial center; it is not dependent uponone, two, or a dozen establishments which employgreat armies of men. New York's capitalists canafford to be careless and to take chances. But Phila-delphia's and Paterson's cannot. Hence the impor-tation of the sooth-saying Billy.

Does Billy earn his pay? He must have done soin Philadelphia. Listen to the words of a Pennsyl-vania Railroad official at the farewell banquet givento Mr. Sunday:

"Our employees are more courteous, more faith-ful to their duties, more efficient, since Billy came totown."

The italics are mine.

Russia and Germany

THE apologists of Germany and of the action ofGerman Socialist deputies in the Reichstag in

voting the war credits love to dwell on the greatdifferences between Russia and Germany. One wayof doing it is to dwell continually on "Russian hor-rors." One of these apologists introduces an articlewhich he recently contributed to the New York Callwith the following words: "Russia is more than everlike a prison from which only the shrieks of the tor-tured prisoners reach the outside world"—the impli-cation being, of course, that Germany is ever somuch better. We cannot admit that one is betterthan the other; although we are quite willing to con-cede that one is worse than the other. The mostimportant difference just now is this:

In Russia a Socialist parliamentary representa-tive is disciplined by his comrades when he votes forthe government, while in Germany a Socialist par-liamentary representative is disciplined by his com-rades when he votes against the government.

38NEW REVIEW

The Novels of DostoevskyBy Floyd Dell

IT is an experience of the first magnitude to read

the novels of Dostoevsky. There has beennothing like them in the world's literature—

nothing so volcanically powerful, so searchinglytrue, so terribly and wonderfully revelatory. Theirdefinite importation into the common stock of lit-erature accessible in English, through the transla-tions of Constance Garnett now being published atthe rate of two a year by the Macmillan Company,1is likely to be an event of significance in Englishand American literature.

Fiction can hardly remain the same after it hasbeen touched by Dostoevskian influence. It is an in-fluence which changes our sense of fiction values; itmakes us demand as readers, and should make usdesire to achieve as writers, those larger boun-daries, those abysmal depths and terrific heights ofexperience which Dostoevsky's art includes. Itgives us a new sense of truth which makes the rev-elations of our standard English novelists seempaltry and insignificant. It must give a tremendousimpetus to the fictional expression of the terror andbeauty of life.

—Somewhere in the early nineteenth century,people began to believe in civilization. They ob-served that the earth, the sea, and even in prospectthe sky, were being brought under the control ofman; they observed that there was a steady im-provement in the machinery of production, broughtabout by invention, and in manners and morals, bylaw. They idealized this process, with the resultthat a great value was set upon seeming a little bet-ter this year than we were last year. Attention wascentered upon a gradually improving mediocrity.The result in science was the popularization of thedoctrine of "evolution." The result in literature wasthe disappearance of the old-fashioned hero and theold-fashioned villain, and the centering of attentionon the ordinary citizen, who was neither very goodnor very bad, but just a little better than peoplewere a short time ago. Extreme wickedness andextreme goodness went out of fashion in good litera-ture. And this change of literary fashion reflectedthe current dogma that the human soul was really arespectable affair, something far, far beyond thesavage, and aspiring only in a quiet evolutionaryway to the sanctities of a Utopian future. Such, in-deed, is the view that most of us hold of ourselvestoday.

1 The House of the Dead, by Fyodor Dostoevsky. From the Russianby Constance Garnett. $1.50 net. The Macmillan Co.

The Brothers Karamasov. $1.50 net.Crime and Punishment. $1.50 net.The Idiot. Sl.fio net.The Possessed. $1.50 net.

But a change is coming over us. We are begin-ning to wonder if after all it isn't easier to be a sav-age or a saint, or both at once, than it is to be a re-spectable citizen. We are beginning to suspect thatwe are not really the respectable citizens that weseem, slowly evolving mediocrities, but a medley ofviolent extremes of good and evil. A science hasalready come forward, in the shape of Psycho-analysis, to teach us this. And so perhaps we areready to learn the same thing from the novels ofDostoevsky.

Five of these novels have already been publishedin this series: The Brothers Karamazov, The Idiot,The Possessed, Crime and Punishment, and TheHouse of the Dead. Of these, Crime and Punish-ment has indeed long been known to English andAmerican readers as a profound study of the lightand darkness of the human soul.

But one book alone cannot convey the Dostoev-skian view of life. One book may leave the readerwith the idea that he has been looking into a peculiarand "morbid" soul. It is only several of these booksthat can impress upon the reader that this peculiarand morbid soul is the soul of mankind. That fact—for under the conviction of Dostoevsky's art one ac-cepts it as a fact—is at first terrifying, then pro-foundly illuminating. One sees the soul of man asever containing infinite possibilities of cruelty andinfinite possibilities of love—one understands how,maugre our nineteenth century ideas of a graduallyevolving mediocrity, life can still shape forth appal-ling wickedness. and miraculous good.

Among these books, the latest one to be published,Dostoevsky's House of the Dead, is not the mostpowerful, but it is interesting as showing howDostoevsky got his insight into life. He got it inprison, where life both in its good and its evil standsmost nakedly revealed. From these personalities,people who were under no constraint of pretendingto be respectable mediocrities, who were perhaps inprison because they could not successfully make thatpretense, he found out the truth—that the humansoul is devilish and sublime. For in prison, as inthe dreams to which the psycho-analysts go to learrithe truth about human nature, all that is too wildlybad or good to fit in with our conception of whatwe ought to be, is found.

Dostoevsky's novels have been called nightmares.But reflect that nightmares may be the clue to ourself-deceitful lives. Under the pretty painted exte-rior of the ordinary soul may be the lightning-rivengulfs of Dostoevsky.

TREITSCHKE 39

Book ReviewsTreitschke

I T is a peculiarity of human nature,particularly in times of stress andturmoil, to personify, individual-

ize events and hatreds. This peculiar-ity expresses itself in the immemorialcustom of choosing a scape-goat, acustom of great social significance.The Great War has produced scape-goats innumerable. Among these isTreitschke; and if we are to believecertain hysterical detractors of Ger-many, Treitschke is responsible for thewar, if not directly responsible surelychief accessory before the fact—amighty achievement for a man deadthese twenty years!

The reactionary interpretation ofhistory is a pivotal point in the repres-sive culture of to-day. In Germany his-tory is more than that—it is a methodof government, the justification and thefaith of imperial policy, the answer ofreaction to progress. "We invoke themen of the past against the present,"says Treitschke. We should not be ledastray by partisan denunciation ascrib-ing great events to individuals, and theimportance of Treitschke has beendisproportionately emphasized. ButTreitschke articulated the spirit of hisage, and his philosophy is usually thephilosophy of Germany's contemporaryrepresentatives. Bearing this in mind,the significance of Treitschke while notdecisive bulks large, socially and his-torically.

It is unfortunate that Treitschkeshould have been introduced to theBritish and American public with apartisan bias and for partisan pur-poses. Nor is the available translatedmaterial1 sufficient for a comprehensiveand complete judgment. It is suffi-cient, however, for the purpose of abroad, outline sketch.

The Germany of Treitschke was aGermany awakening to material powerand gradually becoming drunk with thepower of material things. Treitschkesays: "Germans to-day no longer, as in

1 Treitschke: His Doctrine of German Destinyand of International Relations. Together withA Study of His Life and Work, by Adolf Haus-rath. New York, Putnam's. $1.5U.

Germany, France, Russia, and Islam. ByHeinrtch von Treitschke. With a Foreword byGeorge Haven Putnam. New York, Putnam's$1.25 net.

The Confessions of Frederick the Great withLife by Treitschke. Edited, with an Introduc-tion, by Douglas Sladen. New York. Putnam's.$1.25 net.

The Political Thought of Heinrich vonTreitschke. By H. W. C. Davis. New York,Scribner's, $1.50.

Selections from Treitschke's Lectures on Poli-tics. Translated by Adam L. Gowans. NewYork, Stokes, 75c.

Schiller's day, escape from the stressof life into the still and holy places ofthe heart." This was a necessary andinevitable development, and it is absurdto regret "the Germany of Schiller andGoethe" and use the regret as a clubto smite the Germany of to-day. Itwas a time of shattered republicanideals. The revolution of 1848 hadended in disaster and the exile of thebulk of the revolutionary class. Thencame the victory of power—militarypower—and the unity of Germany. TheGerman bourgeois became rapt in vis-ions of power and profit, cast aside theremnants of its liberal ideals andadopted the policy of "blood and iron."Bourgeois, Junker and autocrat becamethe Holy Trinity of the new Germany,political Reaction and Power the Fatherand the Son.

Treitschke's intellectual developmentparallels this developement. Particularmaterial facts produced a particularnational psychology, and Treitschke wasits expression.

Starting as a liberal and constitu-tionalist, Treitschke ended a completereactionary and fervent devotee of theabsolute monarchy. Hausrath gives asympathetic and critical account ofthis change. Bismarck and Prussiawere the chief transforming factors.Having grasped the purpose of Bis-marck, Treitschke "frankly declaredthe strengthening of Prussia to be thesupreme national duty." He becamefilled "with deep disgust" by the "mean-ingless mendacity of our average liber-alism," and decided that "our fate willclearly be decided by conquest." Hishatred of France seems to have beenlargely a hatred of French liberalismand its traditions. Hausrath has thisto say about Treitschke's hatred of theFrench:

"In regard to our sympathy forFrance, which he reviled as the RhineConfederation sentimentality, it wouldbe difficult for him to place himself inour position. During the last centurywe had received nothing but kindnessfrom France, namely, deliverance fromthe Palatine Bavarian regime, fromJesuits and Lazarists, from episcopaland Junker rule, from guild restric-tions and compulsory service: all thisand the very existence of the coun-try we owed directly or indirectly toNapoleon and the Code Napoleon, fromwhich the hatred of the French arose.This, it is true, I fpund quite natural,considering Napoleon weakened Prussiaand abused Saxony."

Prussia, with its lust of power andconquest and its conscious use of war

as a method of imperial policy, becameTreitschke's ideal; and his history was,in Prof. J. H. Morgan's phrase, "akind of hagiography of the Hohenzol-lerns." He created a philosophical andhistorical justification for Prussianpolicy, opposed universal suffrage, ridi-culed parliamentary government, andexpressed a metaphysical faith in themonarchy. "Roughly," says H. W. C.Davis, "Treitschke accepts the rule ofAristotle, that the people should be al-lowed to criticise, but not to originatemeasures."

The cult of power—the will to power—was dominant in Germany. Treit-schke was the reactionary expressionof this social tendency, as Nietzschewas its revolutionary.

The central tenet of Treitschke'steachings is the concept of the state aspower. He concludes that "all thestates known to history have arisenthrough wars." He seems to have hadno conception of the evolutionary so-cial and economic basis of the state.Germany in the seventeenth centurydegenerated, according to Treitschke,"through theological controversies andthe coarse sensuality of a sluggishpeace," and "left it to the Dutch tobreak the naval power of the Spaniards,and afterwards to the English to sub-due the Dutch conquerors." In otherwords, had Germany at the time beenpossessed of the "will to war" andwaged war instead of clinging to a"sluggish peace," she could have wrest-ed world-supremacy from the Spanish.That Germany lacked the economic, so-cial and political organization neces-sary to the task is unworthy of con-sideration in Treitschke's military in-terpretation of history.

His conception of history is defectivein another sense—it is rigid and seeksto control the present and the futurethrough the actions of the past. Thisand that happened in the past, so itmust happen again. Civilizations de-veloped along rivers and there havebeen struggles for these rivers, so Ger-many must seek full control of theRhine—which would mean the conquestof Holland. War has been an instru-ment of policy and progress, and waris therefore necessary, inevitable, im-mutable. This is a denial of a funda-mental law of history, that each evolu-tionary epoch produces new forms ofprogress and new forces, and eithertransforms or entirely supersedes theforces and forms of the epoch preced-ing.

The available material indicates thatTreitschke was not a fundamental and

40NEW REVIEW

original historical thinker. The manwas intensely, fanatically sincere, buthe seems to have lacked vision and in-sight. He was a propagandist, thepropagandist of a particular necessity,as was Macchiavelli; but where Mac-chiavelli considered transitory the ne-cessity as well as the means—he fav-ored autocracy as a means of unifyingItaly, but simultaneously hoped that,Italy being united, autocracy wouldgive way to the Republic—Treitschkeconsidered means and necessity perma-nent. Marx was a propagandist, butwhile Marx based his propaganda uponhistory, Treitschke based history uponhis propaganda.

Louis C. FRAINA.

German Socialist WarLiterature

WITHIN the last two months

German Socialists have pub-lished a number of pamphlets

and several books on the war. Amongthe new pamphlets those which deservethe most attention have been reviewedin Die Neue Zeit, which gives the fol-lowing summary of a pamphlet byWolfgang Heine, ironical throughout:

"The war, on the German side, isheld to be no imperialistic enterprise.Only the French, and the Russians andEnglish, desired conquests. That it isa question of the economic existence ofGermany in this war cannot be doubt-ed for a moment. The interest whichthe German capitalist has to developexports, as against other nations, theGerman workingman has to a stillhigher degree. By imperialism wemust understand 'all efforts of one stateto extend itself at the cost of another.'Even if Germany were a social republicto-day, it would have to sell goodsabroad and for this purpose 'to developan export trade if not to carry on adirect policy of expansion; so that thisrepublic also would have to be imperial-istic.

" 'All those who are against the Fath-erland and against its support by theSocial Democrats in the present strug-gle which Germany is waging for itsexistence' continues Heine, 'cloak them-selves now very cleverly as friends ofpeace.' But peace does not dependupon Germany since victory has not yetbeen won. All agitation for peace andall discussion of peace are thereforeonly harmful.

"All the difficulties which our SocialDemocracy has met in the last twentyyears rested upon the belief that it wasindifferent to the Fatherland. Now thisaccusation has been contradicted byfacts, and so altogether new possibili-ties and prospects are opening out forthe Party and especially for the laborunions. But everything would be ruined

if the anti-war group succeeded inspoiling the magnificent impressionwhich the conduct of the Party and thelabor movement in Germany has hith-erto created."

Heine has always represented thereformist wing of the Party. Lensch,formerly editor of the Leipzig Volks-zeitung, and Haenisch, a member of thePrussian Landtag, were leaders of theradicals. Both are now ardent sup-porters of the war. Die Neue Zeit re-views the pamphlet of Lensch in thesame critical tone as it does that ofHeine. It attributes to Lensch the fol-lowing sentiments:

"The interests of freedom and de-mocracy are incompatible with the vic-tory of France. A victory of the Allieswould mean the destruction of Social-Dsmocracy and the 'perpetuation' ofcapitalism, the tearing to pieces of Ger-many, renewed hostility between Franceand Germany, and the hegemony of theCzarism in Europe, endless armament,and the danger of more war. But a de-feat of the Allies would mean the op-posite of all this: the rapid developmentof Social-Democracy even in Anglo-Saxon countries, the general advanceof the working class, the solution of theGerman question, the economic advanceof Hungary, reconciliation betweenFrance and Germany, army reforms inthe direction of a citizen army, the de-velopment of central Europe towardsfreedom, the overthrow of the Czar-ism."

Vorwaerts also quotes the two fol-lowing passages from the book ofLensch:—

"The driving forces that caused thewar were the tendencies of capital toexpand. But as soon as war existed itwas no longer a question of these ten-dencies alone. . . . Everythingwhich originally brought on the warhas now passed into the background.Now the questions at issue are the fol-lowing: Shall the German people con-tinue to exist as a great independentnation, or shall a great part of its pop-ulation be torn away from it in theEast and West and forced under for-eign dominion? For Germany—bywhich we mean the German Empireand Austro-Hungary—the question ofthe expansion of capitalism has becometransformed into a question of nationalexistence."

Die Neue Zeit does not recommendvery highly any of the current publi-cations, except those of Bernstein andKautsky. It does, however, give highpraise to the work of Rohrbach, recentlytranslated into English. Rohrbach isan anti-Socialist imperialist but his po-litical economy is considered by DieNeue Zeit to be very largely sound, andtherefore he discloses the true natureof imperialism. W. E. W.

The RevolutionaryFuture of Russia

ONE of the most interesting

things about Russia are theprospects of revolutionary

movement there. Has it been crushed?Prof. Wiener,' himself a Russian

by birth and education, thinks not.The spirit of the revolution has notbeen dissipated, and the unanimous sup-port of the government in the war isnot at all an acceptance of autocracy:

"If Russia is victorious it will returnto the chaotic state which preceded thewar, and the nation must ultimatelywin those individualistic liberties whichhave constantly cropped out even underthe most crushing oppression. It isdoubtful whether a revolution will everaccomplish this, but it is evident thatthe constitutional ideas, which in thebeginning of the nineteenth centuryfound a lodging only among a smallband of officers and intellectuals, noware understood and propagated amongthe workingmen and students at large."

Prof. Wiener believes that "the possi-bility of a successful revolution frombelow is still very remote," and that theimpending intellectual emancipation ofthe peasants "presages a far more pow-erful revolution than the one aiming atmere political liberty." The peasantswill be the decisive factor:

"When reformers will once come tosee that their only hope of saving thecountry lies in giving the masses thateducation which they themselves needand want, and not that which the the-oreticians want to foist upon them fortheir own advantages, they will lay thefoundation for that greatness which iscertainly in store for Russia."

Prof. Wiener gives this sympatheticand suggestive interpretation of theRussian people:

"Here paganism and barbarism havesurvived until our own day, strangelymingling with the highest achievementsof the human mind. Meekness and bru-tality, communism and the most ad-vanced individualism, the strongestState and the weakest political con-sciousness, absence of race hatred andthe most cruel 'pogroms,' the deepestreligious nature and the most abject su-perstition, an all-pervading democracyand the most absolute monarchy, allthese and more contradictions are the re-sult of this unique jostling of mythicalantiquity and stark reality—an eternaland inextricable enigma to the Westernobserver. Hence the totally contradic-tory valuations which are found inbooks on Russia, on the basis of thesame data." J. D.

1 An Interpretation of the Russian People. ByLeo Wiener, Professor of Slavic Languages andLiteratures, Harvard University, New York:McBride, Nast & Co. $1.25.

TREND TOWARD STATE SOCIALISM 41

A Socialist DigestThe Trend Toward State Socialism in the

Belligerent NationslE governments of the belliger-ent nations have been forced toundertake innumerable gigantic

enterprises in direct connection withtheir armies. They have been obligedto take over, or to operate, or to re-organize and control, industry after in-dustry. In order to supply theirarmies they have been compelled toorganize a considerable part of thetotal production of the countries atwar. In order to feed the people athome they have been forced, in scarcelysmaller measure, to organize the dis-tribution and sale of food. If theprocess is carried as far in the nexteight months as it was in the firsteight months of the war, it will hardlybe an exaggeration to say that all thesenations will be well on the road—forthe time being—to governmentally op-erated industry, or collectivism, or StateSocialism.

It is true that the Socialists have notbeen and will not be chiefly responsible,or even largely responsible, for any ofthese policies. But their Socialistictendency is shown by the fact that theSocialists were everywhere the first todemand them. They have followed thelines laid down by the Socialists, andif we wish to see where they may leadin the immediate future we cannot dobetter than to look at the criticismsand the further demands the Socialistsare now making.

Let us turn, for example, to the Ger-man Socialists' programme elaborateda few weeks after the outbreak of thewar, let us compare it with what thegovernment has carried out, and notewhat is still demanded. The Germanprogramme was put forth as a demandfor the governmental organization ofconsumption—especially of the foodsupply. This leads at once to the or-ganization of agricultural productionand as it will be noted to other radi-cal steps related to this:

(1) Measures for the regulation ofproduction.

(a) To organize the harvest and itsutilization.

(b) To make it the duty of farmersto raise specified crops. Immediateplanting of waste land with rapidly-growing edible greenstuffs and vege-tables. Organization of cattle anddairy production.

(2) Measures for the provision ofthe means of production.

(a) To supply fertilizers and seedsthrough public institutions and to regu-late their use.

(b) To provide machinery by meansof community organizations to encour-age intensive agriculture.

(c) To open up woods and moorlandsto the public for the production oflitter.

(3) Measures for securing laborpower.

(a) Public regulation of employ-ment.

(b) Fixing of a minimum wage.(c) Abolition of servant laws and

exceptional laws against farm hands.(4) Measures for the use of food-

stuffs.The prohibition of the use of pota-

toes and grain for the production ofspirituous liquors, regulation of the pro-duction of beer, sugar and starch.

(5) To make it the duty of farmersto sell their products to public institu-tions (imperial, national, and com-munal).

(6) To fix prices for means of pro-duction and products for producers andmiddlemen.

(7) To encourage production of food-stuffs and the regulation of their dis-tribution by communities.

(8) The suitable application of theseregulations to the fishery, forestry,coal-mining, and chemical industries.

The above programme was passed onthe 13th of August and was supportedby the Federation of Labor Unions aswell as the Party.

In the middle of November, both or-ganizations once more put their pro-gramme before the government in theshape of the following demands:

(1) The obligation of producers andtraders in the means of life, to sell theirproducts to public bodies (imperial,state, and local).

(2) Lowering of the maximum pricescontained in the order of the ImperialCouncil of October 28th.

(3) Fixing the minimum prices uponall kinds of grain, potatoes, sugar,flour, bread, alcohol, and petroleum forproducers and middlemen.

(4) Lowering of the supplies for theproduction of spirits. Limitation ofbreweries.

(5) Abolition of the sugar taxes.(6) The addition of potato meal to

flour on the basis of 10 parts by weightto 90 parts of rye flour.

(7) Measures against speculation inindustrial raw materials.

The only one of these policies thatVorwaerts admits was carried out onradical lines was that aiming to pre-vent speculation in raw materials.

The internal war programme of theBritish Socialists, worked out underthe direction of the Webbs and theFabians, is no less scientific and radicalthan that of the Germans.

The programme includes the follow-ing demands:

"Labor representation (both men andwomen in proportion to the workers inthe area concerned) on all national andlocal committees of a public characterestablished in connection with the war.

"The inauguration of a comprehen-sive policy of municipal housing.

"The establishment pf co-operativecanteens in connection with the army,to insure that food is supplied at rea-sonable prices to the soldiers in campor barracks.

"(a) Provision of productive work,at standard rates of wages for the un-employed.

"(b) Where the provision of work isimpracticable, maintenance to be grant-ed on a standard sufficiently high to in-sure the preservation of the home andthe supply of what is necessary for ahealthy life, and the immediate aban-donment of all the inquisitorial meth-ods now too often used in order to re-strict the amount of relief.

"(c) Trade unions to be subsidizedout of national funds to such anextent as will permit them (where pro-vision of work is impossible) to paymembers unemployed benefit withoutbankrupting other resources.

"The encouragement and develop-ment of home-grown food supplies bythe national organization of agricul-ture, accompanied by drastic reductionsof freight charges for all produce, inthe interests of the whole people.

"Protection of the people againstexorbitant prices, especially in regard tofood, by the enactment of maxim andthe commandeering of supplies by thenation wherever advisable.

"National care of motherhood by theestablishment of maternity and infantcenters, the provision of nourishmentfor expectant and nursing mothers, ofdoctor or midwife at confinement, andof help in the house while the motheris laid aside.

"The compulsory provision of mealsand clothing for school children, threemeals a day, seven days a week.

"The continuance of national controlover railways, docks, and similar en-terprises at the close of the war, witha view to the better organization ofproduction and distribution."

Like the Germans, the British So-cialists demand the inauguration of a

42NEW REVIEW

legal minimum wage. If this is estab-lished—no matter how incompletelynor how low the wage—it is needlessto state it will in itself mean a revolu-tion in the organization of labor andof industry.

Direct war needs, however, compelleda far more rapid evolution, as wit-nessed by the law giving the govern-ment power to take over any establish-ment for war purposes. Such establish-ments will not remain in the govern-ment's hands after the (war. Butmany new methods will be introduced,especially in the handling of labor, anda large part of these will doubtless bepermanent. Moreover, wherever thegovernment will have proved equallyefficient with, or more efficient than,the private owners, an unanswerableargument will have been given for laternationalization or municipalization. AsLloyd George pointed out, the successof this policy will be the strongest pos-sible argument for collectivism, "sincethe British people are essentially a peo-ple who act on example, and experi-ment rather than on argument."

The German Socialists'Peace Terms

EARLY in the war Socialist lead-

ers of Munich adopted a peaceprogramme in which the follow-

ing were the principal items:"Indemnifications determined by just

claims and financial responsibilities."Plebiscites conducted by interna-

tional committee in disputed territories:Alsace-Lorraine, Schleswig, RussianBaltic provinces, Finland, Poland,Trentino, Balkans.

"International possession of Euro-pean states: Bosphorus, Dardanelles,Suez Canal, Gibraltar, Kiel Canal."

This was before the taking of Ant-werp and Lodz. We have alreadyshown that Kautsky and Bernstein op-pose all indemnities. The latter nowalso opposes a plebiscite in Alsace-Lor-raine—as a condition of peace.

Eduard Bernstein takes a liberalview of the Alsace-Lorraine question.At the same time it will be recalledthat he defended the invasion of Bel-gium as a military necessity, and isagainst an indemnity. He is in favorof peace and does not want the war tobe prolonged for the purpose of crush-ing England, but he does not accept thepeace conditions favored even by themost pacific of the Socialists of the Al-lies and leading neutral countries.

While he is not opposed to a plebisciteto settle the Alsace-Lorraine question,he wishes this matter to be left entirelyto the decision of the Germans. Hisargument is as follows:

"Our French comrades do not at alltake the point of view that the fate of

Alsace-Lorraine should be decided bythe fortune of arms. In a number ofdeclarations they have limited them-selves to the demand that the popula-tion of these provinces should be giventhe opportunity to decide as to theirown fate.

"We Social-Democrats would be giv-ing a very poor testimony of our feel-ing for democratic justice if we madeany criticism of this French demandfor the right of self-government forAlsace-Lorraine. The objection wehave to make to the French is quiteanother one. We should and must tryto make clear to them that this de-mand, under present conditions, meansan indefinite prolongation of this mur-derous and wasteful war, since neitherthe rulers of Germany nor the majorityof the German people can be won overto the view that the question, to whichcountry Alsace and Lorraine shouldbelong, can be decided now duringthe war; since any solution which isforced in war leaves with the con-quered the desire to win back by forcewhat has been taken away. But apeace which would only be a truce isas little in the interest of the Frenchas of the German people. We can notask that the French should abandonthis demand for justice. But we canadvise them, because of our mutual in-terest, not to insist upon it as a condi-tion sine qua non."

The peace program of the Germanradicals was first definitely formulatedin the manifesto of Liebknecht, Lede-bour, Mehring, Rosa Luxemburg, ClaraZetkin and Otto Ruehle (who voted withLiebknecht against the third war loan).The manifesto first printed in The La-bour Leader of April 1st was accom-panied by a significant letter datedMarch 12th, from which we take thefollowing sentences:

"Dear Comrade, do help us to makean end to this murderous war (beforestill other countries join) and to makeour Comrades in France, as well asin Britain and Belgium, take the roadof International Socialism."

This should be read in connectionwith the following passage of the mani-festo itself:

"It is said that propaganda for peacewould be interpreted as a sign ofweakness. Against that we say:Wrong interpretations are thwarted byhard facts. And the incontestable factis the favorable military position ofGermany. The frontiers are secure,and the war is being carried on on theenemy's ground. It is for this veryreason that we can be the first to pro-claim the word, 'Peace.'"

It is precisely the incontestable factof the superior past achievements andpresent position of the German armiesthat is given by the French Socialists

as their reason for opposing immediatepeace, on the ground that nothing couldbe done with the German governmentunder present conditions. And one oftheir chief grounds for supposing thatthis condition can be changed is theirhope that Italy and certain of theBalkan nations will join in the war.

But it is in the peace terms of thispro-peace group that the greatest diffi-culties are found. For they do not evenmention the vital issues. Here are theterms:

"No annexation;"Political and economic independence

of every nation;"Disarmament;"Compulsory arbitration."Not a word about a plebiscite in

Alsace-Lorraine, nor about an indem-nity for Belgium.

However, one, at least, of the signersof this manifesto is disposed to do jus-tice to Belgium. The Berne Interna-tional Conference of Women Socialists,held about the middle of April, wasconvened by Clara Zetkin. And shesigned a resolution—passed unanimous-ly—which contained the followingclause:

"A general resolution was adoptedafter discussion calling for 'a speedyending of the war by a peace whichshall expiate the wrong done to Bel-gium, impose no humiliating conditionson any nation, and recognize the rightof all nationalities, large and small, toindependence and self-government.'"

The adoption of this clause by theLiebknecht group would indicate thata handful at least of German Socialistleaders share the views of the Britishpro-peace faction. From this beginningthe peace movement might conceivablygrow—before many months—until itincluded a considerable minority of theGerman Party. But even this smallbeginning has not yet been made.

About the middle of April the Ger-man and Austrian Socialists held aConference in Vienna to discuss peaceterms. The following resolutions werepassed and are widely approved by thecapitalist and pacifist press of Amer-

International arbitration courts mustbe developed into obligatory tribunalsfor settling all differences between na-tions.

All treaties and agreements of statesmust be subjected to the democraticparliamentary control of a representa-tive assemblage.

International treaties for limitationof armaments must be agreed upon,with a view to disarmament.

The rights of every nation to deter-mine its own destiny must be recog-nized.

German Socialists in America are

BRITISH SOCIALISTS AND PEACE 43

not so enthusiastic. The New YorkVolkszeitung refuses to believe that theconference did nothing more Socialisticthan to pass these high-sounding"pious wishes." The organ of theAmerican German Socialists is stillmore severe on another of the resolu-tions passed. This Vienna Conferenceresolved:

"The fact that Socialists of belliger-ent States are defending their countryin war must not be made a barrier tomaintaining the international relation-ships of all Socialist parties or to ac-tivity in their international arrange-ments."

To which the Volkszeitung retorts:"If this last resolution means that thesupport of the war by the parliament-ary representatives of a Socialist Partyshall form no obstacle against thatParty's membership in the 'Interna-tional of Labor,' then the prospects fora reconstruction of this internationalare poor."

Are the British Socialistsfor Peace ?

AREPORT has been widely pub-lished in the newspapers thatthe two British Socialist parties

at their recent congresses took up aposition against the war. What is thetruth of this report? We shall see thatit is far from accurate.

Shortly after the London Conferenceof the Socialists of the Allies counter-tendency appeared where least expect-ed. The British Socialist Party de-clared :

Five peace resolutions and twoamendments were adopted at the An-nual Conference of 1915, most of themwith large majorities, and one amend-ment—of pronounced jingo tendencies—was handsomely defeated.

The peace resolution, which wasadopted by 78 branches against 57,reads:

"This Conference of the British So-cialist Party condemns the cry raisedby the capitalist parties in every bel-ligerent country for a fight to a finish.

"This Conference therefore fully in-dorses the efforts of Socialists in neu-tral countries to terminate the war,and declares unhesitatingly that it isthe supreme duty of the Socialist Par-ties throughout the world to work foran immediate peace on such terms aswill prevent the repetition of a similarwar."

A resolution which declared for thepreliminary destruction of the "CentralEuropean autocracies," after which theworkers should begin to work for peace,was defeated, 46 branches voting forand 81 against it.

In its annual congress, held at Nor-wich on April 5th, the IndependentLabor Party accepted a report fromthe National Administrative Council ofthe Party setting forth that the Partydeclared that it was the duty of thelabor movement to secure peace at theearliest possible moment. The resolu-tion was in part as follows:

"The labor movement reiterates thefact that it had opposed the policieswhich produced this war, and that itsduty now is to secure peace at theearliest possible moment on such con-ditions as provide the best opportuni-ties for the re-establishment of ami-cable relations between the workers ofEurope."

J. R. MacDonald and at least threeout of the four members of the Na-tional Administrative Council of thisParty had been delegates a few weeksbefore at the Conference of the Social-ists of the Allied countries at London,at which it was voted unanimously thatthe war must be continued until vic-tory was won. Had Hardie, Glasier,Anderson, and MacDonald changedtheir opinion? Or could their positionat the April Conference in favor of im-mediate peace be reconciled with theirprevious stand? This question wasbrought up at Norwich. We take thefollowing account from the LaborLeader of April 8th:

"Mr. Burgess (Bradford) directedattention to a phrase in the declarationissued by the Conference of Socialistsfrom the Allied countries which saidthat 'the invasion of Belgium andFrance by the German armies threat-ens the very existence of independentnationalities,' and that 'a victory forGerman Imperialism would be the de-feat and the destruction of democracyand liberty in Europe.' He askedwhether Mr. MacDonald was as allegedthe author of these sentences. He alsoquoted from the declaration the phrase'whilst inflexibly resolved to fight untilvictory is achieved,' etc., and asked if itrepresented the view of the I. L. P.

"Mr. Bruce Glasier said the NationalAdministrative Council had issued itsown manifesto, and by that it must bejudged. The Conference of Socialistsfrom Allied countries was a privateConference, and no account of whatoccurred was to be published. The dec-laration adopted was a compromise. Itdid not represent his (the speaker's)view, but each side had to yield some-thing. The declaration was a greatadvance on previous statements issuedby the Belgian and French Socialists atthe beginning of the war, and exceptfor the efforts of the I. L. P. it wouldhave been very different and, in hisview, harmful to the international So-cialist cause. They had exercised avery moderating influence. (Applause.)

"Mr. Burgess: Does the N. A. C.consider this declaration to be authori-tative?

"Mr. Bruce Glasier: It was not in-dorsed generally by the N. A. C."

Mr. MacDonald offered the followingexplanation:

"The phrase 'fighting the war to afinish' must be interpreted in a Socialistsense and not in the popular sense.The war had got to finish, and at thepresent moment it was no use to talkabout 'stop the war.' He challengedanyone to point to clearer declarationsthan his that the war ought not to becarried further than the political pointwhen the forces of democracy in Ger-many were liberated and preparedthemselves to crush their own militar-ism, and thus place European peace ona firm foundation. The end of the warmust date from the time when the dem-ocratic forces of Europe were ready totake things into their own hands."

The Congress apparently acceptedthese explanations, as the National Ad-ministrative Council was re-elected byoverwhelming majorities and its reportwas accepted by a vote of 188 to 3.

MacDonald thus adds a third clauseto the conditions under which he andhis followers will favor peace. Prac-tically all British Socialists and Labor-ites had demanded a Belgian indemnityand a plebiscite in Alsace-Lorraine. Henow demands, further, that the warmust not end until the democraticforces of Germany are "liberated andprepared to crush their own militar-ism." Clearly this is not exactly theview of the majority of the I. L. P.But its resolution, like that of the Brit-ish Socialist Party, is somewhat ambig-uous. To get the real sentiment oo. theI. L. P., we must refer to another reso-lution, about which the discussionchiefly raged. The Conference dividedalmost evenly on the problem as towhether the present war was to be op-posed, along with all wars, whether so-called offensive or defensive, decidingby one vote (121 to 120) to pass overthis question. The majority of theCongress, then, was not for immediatepeace at any price. A considerable fac-tion, as the applause showed, sharedMacDonald's views, while the Congressas a whole refused to rebuke its repre-sentatives for voting for the resolu-tions of the London Conference

The following resolution was passedby a vote of 243 to 9:

"This Conference expresses its strongdisapproval of the action of the LaborParty in taking part in a recruitingcampaign, and of I. L. P. members ofParliament speaking from platformson which attempts were made to justifythe war, and the foreign policy of theLiberal Government which led to thewar."

44NEW REVIEW

Finally, by the very close vote of 120to 121, the following resolution of op-position to the present war and allother wars was defeated:

"This Conference is of opinion thatthe Socialists of all nations shouldagree that henceforth the Socialist Par-ties should refuse support to every warentered into by Capitalistic Govern-ments, whatever the ostensible objectof the war, and even if such war isnominally of a defensive character."

Japan's Demands UponChina

THE rapid march of events in the

Far East is arousing fearsamong the organs of interna-

tional High Finance. Japan is saidto threaten the spoliation of China, hersubjugation and permanent suppres-sion. American militarists are usingthis event as an argument for morepowerful armaments. Japan is beingreviled by the American press; andan expression of the New York Timesis typical:

"For two good reasons Japan oughtto make a treaty of firm and lastingpeace with Germany before she pro-ceeds to enforce her ultimatum uponChina. The first is that, according tothe general understanding of the West-ern world, she is attempting to assumecontrol of the Government, the for-tunes, the destiny of the Chinese Re-public in a distinctly German manner,in the manner which the great teachersof political theory in Germany havedeclared to be the true method of in-creasing the territorial domain, thecommerce, and the power of a State.For a second reason, if she now pro-ceeds by armed force to enforce thedemands China has rejected, she willtear up, as unconsidered scraps ofpaper, two solemn treaties, one withGreat Britain and one with the UnitedStates."

The whole thing is complicated bythe fact that Japan and China areeach using the situation for purposesalien to the situation itself. And theinformation concerning recent eventsis meagre and conflicting. The NewYork Evening Post gives a significantanalysis of Japan's demands:

"How incomplete and confused is theinformation upon which the sinisterinterpretation of Japan's motives isbased, appears from an examinationof such versions of the Japanese de-mands as are actually available. OnFebruary 18 the Chicago Herald pub-lished a list, 'obtained through Chinesesources,' of Japan's specifice demands,including those which she is supposedto have withheld from the knowledgeof the other Powers. On February 17the Peking correspondent of the As-

sociated Press cabled his own version.In one version or the other there areoverstatements and omissions of vitalimportance. Take, for example, thefollowing clauses in the AssociatedPress account:

" 'Before granting railroad conces-sions to any third Power, China mustagree to consult Japan.

" 'Before endeavoring to obtain cap-ital for loans from any third Power,China must consult Japan in advance.'

"Here is apparently an attempt toestablish a Japanese control of thefinancial and railway policy of the en-tire Republic. But when we turn tothe Chicago Herald version, we findthat China must obtain Japan's consentto negotiations with third Powers overrailroads, or loans, or the hypotheca-tion of revenues, in South Manchuria,and eastern Mongolia. Since Japan hasconsented to defer consideration of east-ern Mongolia, we are left with thesimple fact that Japan is claiming pref-erence over other Powers in the sphereof influence everywhere recognized asher own, the terrain she won by hervictory over Russia ten years ago.

"Turn, on the other hand, to theHerald summary of the famous Article5, over which the break between Tokioand Peking is threatened. The firstand third clauses look formidable:

" 'The central Government of Chinashall employ influential Japanese sub-jects as advisers for conducting admin-istrative, financial, and military affairs.

" 'China and Japan shall jointlypolice the important places in Chinaor employ a majority of Japanese inthe police department of China.

"Certainly, if China 'shall' employJapanese advisers and Japanese police-men in the 'important places in China,'the charge of vassalage would almostbe justified. But what does the Asso-ciated Press summary say?

" 'Before choosing any foreign politi-cal, military, or financial advisers,China must consult Japan.

"'// China employs foreigners ascontrolling advisers in police, military,or financial departments of the entirecountry, Japanese shall be preferred.'

"Other clauses stipulate the right topropagate religious doctrines in China,various railway concessions, China's ob-ligation to purchase half of her mili-tary supplies from Japan, and the ob-ligation to consult Japan before grant-ing railway, harbor, or mining conces-sions in the province of Fukien, whichfaces on Japanese Formosa.

"Thus, if one studies the list of Jap-anese demands as reconstructed fromthe different versions and in the lightof authoritative comment at Tokio, theimpression is hardly avoidable that,while Japan is plainly resolved uponbettering herself in China, she plansto do so, not by imposing her authority

upon China, but by improving her posi-tion as against the other Powers. Theright to advise, guide, and administer,in the affairs of the Republic is madeconditional upon China's inclination toavail herself of foreign assistance ingeneral. From the Japanese point ofview this may be fairly described asan assertion of mere equality with theother Powers, or a preference overother Powers where Japan believes sheis entitled to the preference, as in thematter of policing China if it shouldcome to a foreign police. For the'spoliation of China we find no evidence.Japan has promised to give back Kiao-chau, and in the stipulation that China'shall not alienate or lease to othercountries any port, harbor, or islandon the coast of China' the Tokio Gov-ernment has declared that 'other coun-tries' includes Japan.

"In the facts, as we have them, novital assault on China's independenceor integrity is apparent, though an ex-tension of Japanese influence is plainlyforecast."

Bernstein on the Social-ists of France

Bernstein has published a collectionof Socialist documents bearing on theWar under the title "Die Internationaleder Arbeiterklasse und der europaischeKrieg." Vorwaerts notices the follow-ing important points brought out inthis pamphlet:—

At the outbreak of the war, Vor-waerts was in complete agreement withthe Party executive. [The radical anti-governmental character of the declara-tion in Vorwaerts was shown in theNEW REVIEW for October and Novem-ber.]

Bernstein says further:—"The oppo-sition against the war on the part ofthe French Socialists was so strongthat in spite of their unfavorable judg-ment of the behavior of the Austrianand German governments, one groupwished to vote against the war and thewar credits, another group was for ab-stention from the vote, and only a mi-nority was of the opinion that underthe changed situation there was no wayof avoiding voting in favor of the warcredits. The declaration of Germanyagainst France, which then followed,and Germany's declaration of its inten-tion to march into France through Bel-gium, had the result that on the 4th ofAugust the Socialist group in theChamber of Deputies voted unanimous-ly for the war credits."

Thus Bernstein gives us data which,as he clearly believes, largely exoneratethe French Socialists for supportingtheir government.

SHAW ON EDUCATION 45

CorrespondenceShaw on Education

To the NEW REVIEW:

MR. WALLING'S adventures incriticism are as startling asVachel Lindsay's adventures

in the Congo. In his letter about myreview of "Shaw on Education" hesays he has discovered the existence(hitherto unsuspected) of an AmericanShavian. Not content with this dis-covery, he announces that BernardShaw has no philosophy, is neitherSocialist, democrat, nor radical, holdsmanifestly bourgeois ideals, dodges theeconomic basis of educational reform,drifts irresponsibly on a sea of con-tradictions, and—to complete the gayperverseness of his conduct—stoops(once a month or so) to reactionarypositions, for conclusive and final evi-dence of which the unbiased reader isreferred to the index of any one ofWaiting's books.

It is clear from the "errors" ofwhich Walling convicts Shavians thathe does not yet understand the species,and so I had better explain it to himwithout delay. When a Shavian bowsthree time to the East at the mentionof the name of Bernard Shaw, this isnot, as Walling rashly infers, an actof idolatrous worship. It is a publicexpression of gratitude at the exist-ence, on an earth teeming with medi-ocrities and dullards, of a man whocan quicken the soul with aspirationand the world with wonder. In short,a Shavian is one who unaffectedlyacknowledges his debt to the inspiredutterances that cross his path, whetherthese come from Da Vinci, Voltaire,Shelley, Rodin, William James, orStrauss. As soon as Walling graspsthis point and observes that a discipleof Shaw is frequently a Butlerian anda Wagnerite to boot, he will understandwhy the true blue Shavian is littlelikely to be nonplussed if it ever beproved (as Walling charges) that Shawis "reactionary" in his economics"desultory" in his theories of educa-tion, "superficial" in his philosophy.

But Walling has not made thesecharges good. A cat may look at aking, and any fool may echo Waiting'sbland declaration that Shaw's philos-ophy has no foundation. I assumethat Walling, whose reputation for sin-cere and dispassionate investigation Ihave always respected, has examinedthe well co-ordinated system of thoughtthat Shaw has spent a life time inriveting together. But if he has doneso, how can it have escaped him thatShaw's philosophy—like every soundphilosophy, like every philosophy that

does not lead to a wild and inhumanabsurdity—is based upon faith? Ordoes Walling reject faith as an inse-cure foundation? If so, I invite hisattention to the fact that even Euclid,having no demonstrable first premise,built his work upon faith. And lesthe misconceive what I mean by faith,I assure him in advance that I meanwhat Shaw means and what SamuelButler says, namely, that "faith con-sists in holding that the instincts ofthe best men and women are in them-selves an evidence which may notlightly be set aside."

It is, however, not so much at theShavian foundations as at the Shaviancontradictions that Walling rebels.This is because his reverence for sin-cerity and consistency rises so highthat he not only prefers to see Truthrobed in pomp and circumstance, butfinds it a blasphemy and a scandal thatShaw should occasionally robe her inthe maddest levity. Curiously enough,Walling shares this feeling with thecompact middle-class idealist whosesense of correctness and consistencyShaw has so often outraged. But canit be that, in any important respect,Walling is in the same boat with theunspeakable bourgeois, the same bour-geois whose breath is as a stench inhis nostrils? "What an ignominiousand irresponsible contradiction," someanti-Wallingist might cry. Yet, if thishappened, we should comfort Walling.We should tell him that life is full ofcontradictions and that our poor phil-osophers of life must cut their clothto fit their pattern. I have myselfread all of Walling's books and notedhis well-meant endeavor to classify theuniverse and its anti-nomies underhalf-a-dozen ironclad and rigidly con-sistent heads. But I swear I can provethat the undertaking was a failure,Walling being far too clever a man tobe guilty of no contradictions whatever.Perhaps he will repudiate this state-ment as in itself an intolerable contra-diction. It makes no difference.

Having given Shavians a piece ofhis mind, Walling eventually falls afoulof Shaw's views on education. He de-clares with much feeling that Shawhas wilfully evaded the economic basisof educational reform, inasmuch as hefails to clamor for a reduction in thesize of school classes and for a conse-quent increase in the school budget tothe tune of four or five hundred percent. Walling evidently regards thisomission as dishonest. Perhaps it is,but it is no more dishonest than a re-cruiting poster which invites men ofsound health and of specified height

and weight to enlist, while it omitsto mention that a one-legged man whomeets these requirements need not ap-ply. If we Socialists may never openour mouths without twaddling about"the economic basis of the subject,"we shall soon be as pathetic a lot ofhalf-wits as Betsy Trotwood's Mr. Dickwho, it will be recalled, never got be-yond two sentences without twaddlingabout the head of Charles I. Every-body in America, save apparently Wal-ling, knows that when a Socialist urgeseducational reform, it is self-evidentthat he is striving for a condition ofaffairs in which the child of a ditchdigger shall be in as small a class inschool and shall have as big an in-come at home, as the child of a rail-road president. This is the mark thatShaw deliberately aims at, when hechampions the rights of children andadvocates an equal income for everychild, woman, and man in the com-munity.

Naturally, he doesn't waste his timebegging the ruling classes to opentheir purses in order to bestow an ex-pensive educational training upon theinexpensive children of the poor. Heleaves that sort of poppycock to others.Walling, however, whose heart bleedsfor the working people, cries out uponso much brutal common sense andangrily calls Shaw a reactionary fornot endorsing a plan that limits classesto eight pupils, a plan proposed byBebel some thirty years ago. I might,with as much reason, call Walling areactionary for not endorsing a planlimiting classes to seven pupils, a planproposed by Milton (in his famousTractate) three hundred years ago.The fact is, most of us realize, whatWalling seemingly overlooks, namely,that society pays a railroad presidentso handsomely that he is able to sendhis valuable children to fashionableprivate schools where Milton's small-sized classes have been the rule sincelong before Walling was born. Whenthe railroad president and the ditchdigger get the same income, societywill esteem the ditch digger's child noless highly than the railroad presi-dent's, and will take care to offer eachof its valuable children, regardless ofparentage, an equally sound and ex-pensive education. There really is nodisputing the fact that as long as wehave big incomes and little incomes,we shall also have education, food, andclothing, of a finer and more expensivequality, accessible to those whosepurses are better filled. Those of uswho do not like this condition, can

46NEW REVIEW

either lump it, or work, (like Shaw andWalling in their several ways) to in-duce society to make the obviouschange. Meanwhile, we must leave topolitical amateurs the game of joshingthe public with the easy assumptionthat rich men's school taxes can everbe increased five hundred per cent, forthe benefit of poor men's children.

"Shaw adopts the employer's educa-tional ideal of cutting down schooltaxes by making the pupil pay hisown way." This is Walling's extraor-dinary comment on an innocent pro-posal made by Shaw (and by Butler,James, Wells, and many other thinkers)that minors, from an early age on, beexpected to render such periodical ser-vices to the community as their years,their leisure, and their capacity mayallow. Now, I have known boys, who,in the summer intervals of their schooland college careers, have "paid theirway" as ship boys on coastwise steam-ers, as boys-of-all-work on the farmsof Dakota or Maine, or as artisans'helpers in various trades, and havepronounced these experiences to be tentimes more valuable than all their for-mal school instruction put together.But we are told that Dewey and thenew educators regard any sort ofyouthful knocking about in vocationsas wicked and unpedagogic, and sinceShaw desires the State to turn thiswickedness to its profit, Walling holdshim up to public execration as aMachiavellian imposter. Walling goesfurther. He tears the mask of hypoc-risy off Shaw, and pictures him run-ning to the side of the big employers,wringing their hands very hard, andassuring them, while sobs choke hisvoice, that their school taxes shallnever, never be increased—save overhis dead body! Now all this is highlydiverting. But how in the world didWalling's eyes construct this pictureof Shaw? Titania, we know, fell inlove with the face of an ass under theimpression that it was the handsomestface she had ever seen. But there wassome excuse for Titania's delusion in-asmuch as her sight was bewitched byOberon's monkeyshines. But what ex-cuse is there for Walling? To thisable Socialist and author, Shaw's worksare as open as they are to me. I takeit that he knows as well as I do thatShaw stands for the taxation of un-earned incomes at the rate of one hun-dred cents on the dollar, and for thegradual redistribution of the nationalincome (by the simultaneous pressureof Collectivism from above and TradeUnionism from below) until all chil-dren, women and men shall enjoy theonly kind of equality possible amonghuman beings, and that is an equalityof income measured in dollars andcents. Does any one believe that the

employers get much comfort fromShaw's pursuit of this goal, say asmuch comfort as the Forty Thievesgot from AH Baba? And can anyonebe mad enough to infer that, after thecommnnity has begun to pay our chil-dren a dignified income from the mo-ment of their birth, a crime will becommitted if adolescent citizens areasked to give the community a smallreturn in useful work during a partof their leisure? We must always bearin mind that it is strictly on this basisof the pecuniary equality of childrenand adults that Shaw's educationalproposals are advanced; on any otherbasis, the thorough, scientific anddemocratic training of the young mustremain a madman's dream. It seemsto me that as soon as Walling realizeswhere his criticism of Shaw's econom-ic? has led him to, there will be noth-ing left for him but to call high heavento witness that he never meant to sayanything half so outrageous.

Having spent nine years as a pupilin English schools and some years asa teacher in American schools, I amunable to share Walling's cocksure as-sumption that education in the UnitedStates is far ahead of that in England.We all know that the English authori-ties have not abolished religious in-struction. But is that such incontro-vertible evidence of inferiority as Wal-ling alleges? Take my own case. Ihad the usual Bible course in the Oldand New Testament books as pre-scribed in British schools. What wasthe result? When I read the story ofEve's daring adventure in behalf ofknowledge with its sequel in Adam'signoble cringing to the Lord, I becamea Feminist; when I got to the tale ofthe cruel punishment God visited onCain after first goading him to furyby mercilessly partisan discriminations,I became a Socialist; and when Ireached the place where John the Bap-tist enjoins the Pharisees to look fortruth in deeds not words, I became aPragmatist. Probably thousands ofother boys passed through the sameavenues to the same awakening, andstepped as lightly as I did from theold religion to the new religion, I meanthe religion of modern men and womenwho put their God at the End of theworld instead of at the Beginning.

Now the Bible may hold many bar-barous errors and delusions. But itis, nevertheless, the ancient literatureof a very remarkable people, and itcontains, in the words of Christ andof the great Prophets, an inspirationthat redeems its crudest superstitions.What do American educators put inthe place of this literature? What butthe typical sawdust schoolreader withpiffling insipidities and aimless puerili-ties by Henry W. Longfellow and

Phoebe Gary? Worse than no litera-ture at all, in short. As between thissubstitute and the Bible, give me theBible, say I. And so says Shaw.

But this cruel alternative should notbe imposed upon children, as Shawemphatically points out. A child shouldbe taught, as a matter of practical in-formation, the objective facts of exist-ing religious beliefs. He should knowthat a Hindu is as well satisfied withMohammedanism, as a New Englanderis with Christianity, and that the onefeels as superior to all outsiders asthe other. What the schoolboy actuallylearns, however, (and learns by in-nuendo!), is not fact but prejudice.He learns, for example, that the Hindusset up Allah in place of Jehovah, apiece of depravity for which we shutthe gates of Christian mercy on themforever; or that the Shintoists, dis-pensing with priest, temple, and ethicaldoctrine, thereby give an exhibition ofbad taste for which they stand beneathcontempt and deservedly rank as thesocial inferiors of American gentlemen.

Shaw's chief point about religion is,however, that "the real Bible of themodern world is the whole body ofgreat literature, art, and music inwhich the revelation of Hebrew Scrip-ture has been continued to the presentday." Until we begin to put thismodern Bible at the disposal of theschool children in the United States,our social philosophers had better talkwarily about the superiorities of Amer-ican schools, and exercise discretion inentering these superiorities on the in-dex of any of their books.

FELIX GRENDON.New York City.

A Correction

To the NEW REVIEW:

EMMA V. Sanders of Stockholm,

in a letter printed in this jour-nal last month, quotes some

words of mine about "concessionswrung from capitalism for the femalepart of the working class, concessionswhich may be achieved later for thewhole of the working class—such asthe normal work day or the prohibi-tion of night work." She is under theimpression that I said that Feministswant such concessions abolished in theinterests of "equality before the law,"and takes pains to inform me that theydo not. This is interesting, but un-necessary information so far as I amconcerned; for if Miss Sanders willlook at my article again she will seethat I was saying then just what sheis saying now. If Miss Sanders wishesto disagree with me, she will have tochange her opinions.

FLOYD DELL.New York City.

PEARSONSis the only Magazine

of its kindThis is why:—Three years ago Pearson's decided tobe a free magazine.

This is what it did:—ABANDONED FANCY COVERSCUT OUT COLORED PICTURESADOPTED PLAIN PAPER

This was the purpose:—A plain form would enable the mag-azine to live on its income from sub-scriptions and monthly sales. Itwould not have to consider the effecton advertisers when it wan ted to printthe truth about any public question.

This was the result:—Pearson's now prints the truth aboutsome question which affects your wel-fare in every issue. It prints facts

which no magazine that de-pends on advertising could"afford'' to print.And, with all this, Pearsons still printsas much fiction and entertainmentarticles as other magazines. If youwant plain facts instead of prettypictures buy a copy on the newsstand for 15 cents, or subscribe bythe year for $1.50.

By special arrangement with Pear-son's we are able to make you thefollowing clubbing offer.

SPECIAL OFFER:NEW REVIEW.IYr. $1.50] -,,,„..PEARSON'S, 1 Yr. $1.50

NEW256 Broadway

REVIEWNew York City

MAKE YOUR DOLLAR GO FARIf yon are a Canadian comrade rap-port Cotton'i Weekly, published atCowanaville, P. Q. Price 60 cent*per year. In club* of 4 or more 85cent* for 40 Weeks. IT. 8. rates $1.00per year.

If yon are an American comrade rap-port the Appeal to Season, Glrard,Kansas. Price 50 cents per year.In clubs of 4 or more 25 cents for40 weeks. Canadian rates $1.00 peryear.

COTTON'S WEEKLY

THOUSANDSof GOOD Booksare to be had nowadays at

very low prices.

The following were formerly to behad in editions of $1.25 and $1.50only, and cost now 35 cents, bymail, 4Sc.:

IBSEN—Brand, trans, by F. EGarret.A Doll's House, TheWild Duck and TheLady from the Sea.Ghosts, An Enemy ofthe People and TheWarriors of Heligoland.Pillars of Society, ThePretenders and Ros-mersholm.

DOSTOIEVSKY — P o o r F o l kana The Gambler.Crime and Punishment.The House of the Dead.Letters from the Under-world.The Idiot.

TOLSTOY—Anna Karenina. 2vols.Childhood, Bovhood andYouth.Master and Man andothers.War and Peace. 3 vols.

TURGENEFF—Virgin Soil." Liza.

POUSHKIN—Prose Tales.

All above volumes contain from300 to 500 pages, are well printedand cloth bound.

Special BargainsGEORGE BRANDES, Lassalle

Published by Macmillan at $2.00net. Our Price 60, by mail 70c.

STRINDBERG, Zones of theSpirit

Published by Putnam at $1.25net. Our Price 50, by mail 60c.

Hundreds of other bargains in allbranches of Literature and SocialScience gathered for the lasttwenty years—with some under-standing of the intrinsic valuesof books.

MAISELS' BOOK STORE424 GRAND ST., NEW YORK

Statement of the Ownership,

Management, etc.

required by the Act of August 24, 1912,of the NEW REVIEW, published monthly at NewYork, N. Y., for April 1st, 1915.

Editors, Frank Bohn, 87 Greenwich Ave.,New York, X. Y.: William E. Bohn, EastGranite, N. J.; Louis B. Boudin, 302 B'way,New York, N. Y.; Floyd Dell, 87 GreenwichAve., New York, N. Y.; W. E. DuBois, 70Fifth Ave., New York, N. Y.; Max Eastman,87 Greenwich Ave., New York, N. Y.; LouisC. Fraina, 87 Greenwich Ave., New York, N. Y.;Felix Grendon, 141 E. 26th St., New York,N. Y.; Isaac A. Hourwich, 27 Cedar St., NewYork, N. Y.; Paul Kennaday, 780 Park Ave.,New York, N. Y.: Robert R. La Monte, NewCanaan, Conn.; Arthur Livingston, ColumbiaUniversity, New York, N. Y..; Robert H.Lowie, Museum of Natural History, New York,N. Y.; Helen Marot, 206 W. 13th St., NewYork, N. Y.; Joseph Michael, 115 B'way,New York, N. Y.; Herman Simpson 121 W.180th St., New York, N. Y.; William EnglishWalling, Greenwich, Conn.

Managing Editor, None.Business Manager, Louis C. Fraina, 87

Greenwich Ave., New York.Publisher, NEW REVIEW Publishing Associa-

tion, 87 Greenwich Ave., New York, N. Y.Owners: (If a corporation, give its name

and the names and addresses of stockholdersholding 1 per cent, or more of total amount ofstock.)

NEW REVIEW Publishing Ass'n, 87 Green-wich Ave., New York, N. Y.

Richard P. Appleton, 76 4th St., Newark,N. J.; Jessie Ashley, 80 Maiden Lane, New" ork, N. Y.; * • - - -

Ashley, iLouis B. Boudin, 302 Broadway,

New'York, N. Y.; Anna P. Boudin, 477 E.Yor

16th St., Brooklyn,' N. Y.; Maurice Blumlein,103 Water St., New York, N. Y.; Morris Ber-man, 1212 Beverly Rd., Brooklyn, N. Y.;Alexander Fraser, 413 First St., Brooklyn,N. Y.; Louis C. Fraina, 87 Greenwich Ave.,New York, N. Y.; Felix Grendon, 141 E.26th St., New York, N. Y.; Bertha W. Howe,Great Kills, S. I., N. YJ; Leo Hermann, 120849th St., Brooklyn, N. Y.; Louise W. Knee-land, 970 Park PI., Brooklyn, N. Y.; EleanorKneeland, 970 Park PL, Brooklyn, N. Y.;Hildergarde Kneeland, 970 Park PL, Brooklyn,N. Y.; Philip L. Liebman, 302 Broadway, NewYork, N. Y.; Robert M. Lackey, Box 272,Kingston, Jamaica, B. W. I.; Arthur A. Liv-ingston, Columbia University, New York, N.Y.; M. Michaelovsky, 235 W. 71st St., NewYork, N. Y.; Joseph Michael, 115 Broadway,New York, N. Y.; Moses Oppenheimer, 301E. 68th St., New York, N. Y.; Mary S. Op-penheimer, 301 E. 68th St., New York, N. Y.;George Oberdorfer, 2393 Eighth Ave., NewYork, N. Y.; Isaac Ortman, 106 Rivington St.,New York, N. Y.; Charles Edward Russell,1025 15th St., N. W., Washington, D. C.;Herman Simpson, 121 W. 120th St., NewYork, N. Y.; J. G. Phelps Stokes, Stamford,Conn.; J. B. Segall, Orono, Maine; RaySimpson, 203 W. 113th St., New York, N. Y.;Sarah S. Simpson, 203 W. 113th St., NewYork, N. Y.; William English Walling,Greenwich, Conn.

Known Bondholders, mortgagees, and othersecurity holders, holding 1 per cent, or moreof total amount of bonds, mortgages, or othersecurities: NONE.

Louis C. FRAINA,Business Manager.

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 15thday of April, 1915.

A. B. ROBERTIELLO,(SEAL) Notary Public, N. Y. C.

My commission expires March 31, 1917.Certificate filed in New York County.

Artists'Materials

PictureFrames

Colors and Boards of all makes

S. HALPERN3 East 30th St., near Fifth Ave.

NEW YORK CITY

Patronize NEW REVIEW Advertisers

WILLIAMENGLISHWALLING

Author of"Socialism as ItIs," "The LargerAspects ofSocialism," etc.

Ready May 15

12mo.500 pages$1.50 net.

THE SOCIALSTS ANDTHE WAR

"The Red Book" would have served as a title for this book had not Austriapre-empted it.

Three-fourths of this book consists of a very carefully selected docu-mentary statement of the position toward the war of the Socialists of allcountries where they are an organized body, with special reference to theirPeace policy.

No material has been omitted or included merely because it seemed cred-itable or discreditable to Socialists in general or to the Socialists of any par-ticular country.

The running editorial comment sets forth the conditions under which thestatements of these leading Socialists or Socialistic organizations were made,and indicates why they are important.

In addition to this editorial matter, Mr. Walling furnishes a final chaptersummarizing the revolutionary Governmental Socialist measures adopted bythe governments at war and the attitude of the Socialists toward them.

This book shows the attitude not only of the Socialists, but of the Euro-pean masses. For the first time, we have adequate answers to such questionsas these: Is there a strong anti-war sentiment among the people of France ?Of Russia? If so, just how strong? Is there a powerful pro-war sentimentamong the common people of Italy? If so, how powerful? And similar ques-tions are answered about the many nationalities of Austro-Hungary and theBalkans.

The main interest, naturally, lies in England and Germany. This is thefirst book to give a satisfactory statement of the relative strength of the pro-war and anti-war factions among British workingmen, their respective argu-ments and their real motives as well as a complete summary of the position ofShaw, Wells, Keir Hardie, J. R. MacDonald and H. M. Hyndman.

Similarly with Germany. It tells the strength of the anti-war factionrepresented by Liebknecht and the Vorwaerts; of the middle group representedby Haase, Bernstein and Kautsky which supports a war of defense againstRussia, but not a war of aggression against France, Belgium and England; otthe pro-war faction, led by Scheidemann, Suedekum, David, Heine, and Legienand other labor union leaders.

And finally the book shows the peace programs of those Germanic andAllied Socialists who favor peace and answers the all important question: Howfar do these, the only people's peace movements, have common demands, andhow far are their differences so irreconcilable that they will have to be decidedby a prolongation of the war ?

II

iiii

iiII

I

II

II

t-*1illHENRYHOLTANDCOMPANY

34WestNEW

33d Street iYORK

Patronize NEW REVIEW Advertisers