Instant Ebooks Textbook Orgasm Bible 1st Edition The Download All Chapters
Instant Ebooks Textbook Orgasm Bible 1st Edition The Download All Chapters
com
https://ebookgrade.com/product/orgasm-bible-1st-
edition-the/
https://ebookgrade.com/product/flavor-bible-the/
ebookgrade.com
https://ebookgrade.com/product/esv-reformation-study-bible-the-
reformation-study-bible/
ebookgrade.com
https://ebookgrade.com/product/housebuilders-bible-13th-
edition-b07vx88326-the/
ebookgrade.com
https://ebookgrade.com/product/fusion-marketing-bible-the/
ebookgrade.com
Position Sex Bible The
https://ebookgrade.com/product/position-sex-bible-the/
ebookgrade.com
https://ebookgrade.com/product/introduction-to-the-hebrew-bible-third-
edition/
ebookgrade.com
https://ebookgrade.com/product/powerscore-gmat-critical-reasoning-
bible-the-powerscore-gmat-bible-series-book-1-the/
ebookgrade.com
https://ebookgrade.com/product/mens-fitness-exercise-bible-the/
ebookgrade.com
Other documents randomly have
different content
electing a single representative. The The soviet basis of
people who live in a given territorial area representation.
are assumed to have a common interest by reason of their
living close together. Under the soviet system this is
considerably changed. Occupation as well as territory is the
basis of representation. Groups of voters unite in choosing
delegates because they work at the same trade, not because
they live in the same neighborhood. For example, all the
workers in a particular factory, or all the farmers in a certain
district begin by choosing one or more representatives.
These representatives come together and form the city
workers’ soviet or the township soviet. The city workers’
soviet is made up of one or more delegates from every
factory. Each local soviet, moreover, appoints delegates to
higher soviets and these, in turn, choose delegates to the
All-Russian Congress of Soviets, which is the supreme
governing body. As this congress is too large to do the
routine work of government, it delegates this function to a
cabinet or Council of Peoples’ Commissars.[308]
The Soviet Plan of Government in Practice.—This is
the theory of soviet government. The supreme political
authority is constituted by the workers alone, through a long
process of indirect election. The national executive is several
steps removed from the control of the people. He is not
directly responsible to the people as in the United States. In
actual fact, moreover, this elaborate plan of indirect
representation has become, in Russia, little more than a
scheme on paper. Many of the provincial Soviets have chosen
no delegates at all. There is no assurance that those who
now hold the reins of power in Russia are the real
representatives of the masses of the people. To keep
themselves in office the Commissars have throttled all
opposition. They have set at naught all Some results of the
the securities for personal liberty which soviet rule.
exist in democratic countries. Arrests have been made
without warrants, thousands of them; men and women have
been held in prison and put to death without public trial;
freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of
assembly have been denied. The soviet leaders admit all this
but argue that these measures are necessary in order to
prevent a counter-revolution.
The Economic Aspects of Communism.—The Russian
revolution did not confine itself to political reconstruction
alone. It was an economic revolution as well. All private
trade, of whatever sort, was, in theory at Relation of
least, abolished throughout Russia and communism to
all industries taken over by the industry.
government. The factories, shops, stores, and all other
instrumentalities of business were placed in charge of
officials to be managed for the benefit of the workers. These
workers were assigned to the various industries by the soviet
authorities, compulsory labor being decreed by law and a
fixed standard of wages established. Trade unions and co-
operative societies were put under the ban. Workers received
their pay in the form of requisitions or orders on the
government stores for food and other supplies. Strikes were
forbidden on penalty of imprisonment. All land was declared
to be owned by the state, but the peasant farmers were
allowed to retain their farms upon giving the government a
share in the produce.
Although the government did its best Breakdown of
to carry through the foregoing program, communism in
economic communism in Russia broke Russia.
down.[309] Factories and stores went out of business; the
peasants could not be coerced into supplying food for cities;
foreign trade stopped almost entirely; the railroads failed to
function; everywhere there was misery and starvation. So
the soviet authorities in 1921 decided upon a partial return
to the system of privately-managed industry. Factories and
shops, to some extent, have been reopened under individual
ownership; the trade unions have been permitted to
reorganize; the rules relating to compulsory labor have been
relaxed; and differences in the rate of wages paid to different
workers are once more permitted. The country has swung
back to a modified form of individualism and capitalistic
production.
The great lesson of communism in The Russian lesson.
Russia is that no system of economic
organization can long survive unless it succeeds in producing
enough to feed, clothe, and shelter the people. When the
incentive of private gain is taken away, some equally strong
incentive to production must be put in its place; otherwise
production will decline and there will not be enough to go
around. That is what happened in Russia. Neither
compulsion nor appeals to the loyalty of the worker availed
to keep production up. Fewer goods were produced and
there was less to distribute. Equality of distribution avails
nothing when there is too little to be distributed.
The International Aims of the Communists.—
Communism is not merely national in its aim; it is
international. Its motto is: “Workers of the World, Unite!” Its
goal is the violent overturning of the existing political and
economic organization in all countries so that soviet
governments may be established and all private industry
abolished. This is the program of the Program of the
Third International, a body made up of Third International.
communist delegates from all over the world. In order to
promote this program the Russian authorities have
endeavored to carry on a propaganda in all other countries,
sending out literature and agents wherever possible. The
communists realize, however, that the prospects for such a
revolution are not good in countries like the United States,
Great Britain, and France so long as the trade union
movement makes progress and gains advantages for
organized labor. Hence they aim to secure the destruction of
unions, to promote “outlaw” strikes, and to encourage every
form of industrial discontent.
Moderate Socialism and Socialism and
Communism Distinguished.— communism are
Communism, as it has been exemplified widely different.
in Russia during the past few years, should be distinguished
from socialism as the latter term is commonly understood,
although extreme forms of socialism may go substantially as
far. Socialists do not propose that all except the workers shall
be excluded from a share in government. They do not
propose to wipe out the political rights of the individual, or to
destroy trade unionism, or to provide for labor conscription.
Orthodox socialism does not aim at a “dictatorship” of any
kind.
State Socialism.—The program of Socialism defined.
the moderate socialists is commonly
known as state socialism. Briefly stated, it proposes that all
the land, the mines, the forests, the factories, the railroads,
and every other instrumentality of production or distribution
should be managed in the interests of the whole people.
Under the system of individualism, according to the socialist
argument, these things are now managed primarily in the
interest of private owners. The worker creates values in far
greater proportion than the wages he receives. This surplus
value goes to the employer in the form of profits. The
socialist would abolish profits. The entire net earnings would
go to the worker. The basis of government would not,
however, be revolutionized. With some changes to make
democracy more effective (for example, the wider use of the
initiative and referendum), state socialism would leave
government about as it is. The workers, being in the
majority, would control government through their numerical
superiority at the polls; they would not deny the suffrage to
non-socialists. State socialism proposes the doing of all this
through the ballot-box, not by violence or armed revolution.
The Case for Socialism.—Many books have been written
in advocacy of state socialism and many arguments
advanced in its behalf. The case for socialism rests largely
upon certain propositions which may be briefly stated as
follows: Wealth is largely the product of The present
labor, yet labor does not get its rightful industrial injustice.
share in the product. Capital and management, on the other
hand, get more than their rightful share. Hence the rich are
growing richer, and the poor are growing poorer. The control
of industry, and with it the well-being of many million
workers, is passing steadily into the hands of a very few
men. Inequalities of wealth lead to discontent; the present
organization of industry results in unemployment; and men
are engaged in a perpetual class war with one another. Great
wastes, moreover, result from the system of competition.
Several milkmen, for instance, go up and down the same
street, each serving a few families. Think of what the
postage rates would be if we had a similar state of affairs
under free competition in furnishing postal service! Socialism,
it is claimed, would unify production and distribution, thus
preventing waste.
Now the remedy for this is to abolish What socialism
private capitalism, to have the proposes as a
government take over the industries, remedy.
divide the earnings fairly, giving every worker his rightful
share, thus securing a more nearly equal distribution of
wealth and happiness. By this means, also, poverty and
unemployment would be abolished. If all the products of
labor were given to the worker (rent, interest, and profits
being abolished), there would be enough to give everybody a
reasonable day’s work and a comfortable living. There would
be steady employment for all. The great majority of the
people are workers. Their welfare should be the first care of
organized society; but their welfare can never be secured so
long as practically complete power over the conditions under
which the workers labor and live is exercised by the private
owners of industry. Socialists also claim that a moral gain
would result, inasmuch as the present class conflict would
give way to a recognition of human brotherhood. Co-
operation, not conflict, would be the watchword of industrial
society.
The Case Against Socialism.—The advocates of
socialism, in their arguments, frequently assume something
which they have not been able to prove. Are the poor
They proclaim that the rich are growing growing poorer?
richer and the poor are growing poorer, that the middle class
is being crushed out, and that soon there will be only two
groups, the very rich and the very poor. It is true that wealth
is increasing and that there are more rich men today than
ever before in the history of the world; but it is also true that
the middle class is more numerous and the worker much
better off than at any previous time. The standard of living
among American wage-earners today is higher than it was
among well-to-do people a hundred years ago. The average
worker is better housed, better clothed, better fed, and has
more of the comforts of life than the employer of a century
ago.
But apart from this the crucial The chief argument
question concerns the way in which against socialism.
production would be maintained and how the earnings would
be distributed under a socialist system. Today the main
incentive to work is the expectation of reward. Most men
work because they expect to be paid for it. Cut down their
pay and they will usually stop work and try to persuade other
people from working. There are exceptions to the rule, of
course; but when men and women work hard and try to do
their best it is because they hope to get promoted, to get
their wages raised, to secure an easier job at higher pay.[310]
Socialism would abolish this exact relation between skill and
wages. Everyone would work at whatever task he was best
fitted to perform and would be given enough to live on
comfortably. Or, as the socialists put it, everyone would
produce according to his ability and be paid according to his
needs.
This, however, begs some very Some practical
important questions of a practical questions.
nature. Who would determine the work that you or I should
do? Who would determine that you must labor in the coal
mines while I go abroad, as a foreign ambassador? Who will
determine your needs and mine, so that we may be
rewarded accordingly?
The answer is that authorities would Socialism and
have to be established with power to compulsion.
settle these things and to apply compulsion where necessary.
We would have industrial autocracy. Men and women would
have no complete freedom to choose their own occupations.
The socialists say that if the existing wage system were
abolished everyone would do his best to increase production
in order to make the new plan a success; but where
socialistic experiments have been tried the contrary is true;
the workers do less and produce less. Let us remember, also,
the increased danger of corruption which would come if the
authorities were given so great an increase in power. The
whole resources of the country would be placed in the
control of an official class; the entire labor-force of the nation
would be put at their disposal. The socialist answers that if
officials proved arbitrary or corrupt the people would turn
them out of office. Does our experience with other forms of
government warrant any such expectation?
Two methods of getting work done Socialism and
have been tried by the world at one time human nature.
or another. In ancient and mediæval times most of the work
was done by slaves. The slave got no wages; he did his work
because he was compelled to do it. In modern times, since
slavery and serfdom no longer exist among civilized people,
most of the work is done by free men who do it because
they expect to be paid for doing it. And since there are
differences in the abilities of different men, some get more
pay than others, even though the opportunities be the same
for all. If the capable worker were not paid more than the
less competent, he would not exert himself to do his best. To
get the best out of any free man he must be given the hope
of a reward in proportion to his efficiency, and for the great
majority of people this means a reward in dollars and cents.
That is human nature.
It is sometimes said that human Can human nature
nature may change and that, in a new be changed?
environment, men might work unselfishly for the common
welfare without reference to their rate of wages or profits.
True enough the motives of men may and do change
somewhat; but when we trace the course of human history
through twenty centuries we find that the dominant traits of
mankind have altered very little in all that time. Human
nature itself affords the greatest obstacle to the success of a
socialist system.
Socialism and Liberty.—Liberty does not include political
freedom alone. It comprises the right of the individual to
choose his own career, to make his own bargains, and to
become his own employer if he can. An industrial system in
which all men are compelled to do as some higher authority
dictates would establish the very negation of liberty. Under
socialism the complete control of all economic life would be
vested in some supreme authority. It matters little how that
authority might be chosen; the concentration of such vast
powers anywhere, in the hands of any group of men, would
make individual liberty a meaningless expression. It may be
replied that under our present system of private industry the
worker has in fact very little liberty; that many employers are
despots and that the worker is subjected to tyranny. That is
to a certain extent true. But in so far as there is an undue
and needless restriction under present conditions of industry
the remedy is to promote the liberty of the worker through
the power of his own organizations and by the laws of the
land.
Socialism and Democracy.—Socialism and democracy
can never be good friends. Democracy is government by the
people; in other words it is government by amateurs. It is
not government by a professional class. The government of
the German Empire before the war was largely in the hands
of a professional class, a bureaucracy it was called. Now a
democratic government, being managed by the rank and file
of the people, is often wasteful and clumsy in its handling of
business affairs. We have had some notable examples of this
in the United States; for example, the building of airplanes
and ships during the war, the operation of the railroads
during 1918-1920, and the construction of public buildings. A
bureaucratic government, conducted by professional
administrators, is much more efficient. It Socialism would
is not improbable, therefore, that professionalize the
socialism, by placing upon the public government.
authorities the entire management of every form of industry,
including factories and shops as well as railroads and
telegraphs, would mean the breakdown of the democratic
ideal and the professionalizing of government. The entire
industrial system of the country could not be successfully
managed by amateurs. To save it from collapse under
socialism the government would have to be reorganized on
bureaucratic lines.
Can Democracy Solve Its Problems?—But if not
socialism, what then? Certain it is that we are facing great
problems both at home and abroad today; and these
problems must be solved in the interest of human happiness.
We cannot close our eyes to them and trust that somehow or
other they will work out their own solution. Can democracy
and our present system of private industry master them?
Well, democracy and our present industrial system have
overcome a great many obstacles in the past and it is only by
studying the past that we can make any forecast of the
future. The land surveyor, when he wants to project a
straight line from a given point, walks back some distance so
that he may align his pickets in the ground. Let us for a
moment pursue the same plan, walk back a dozen decades
in American history and take a sight along the great
landmarks to the present time. What have democracy and
individualism contributed to the well-being and happiness of
the American people?
What America Has Done.—In the Democracy and
past one hundred and twenty years the American progress.
people of the United States have increased their territories
ten-fold, their numbers twenty-fold, and their wealth at least
a thousand-fold. They have, with one great exception,
composed their internal quarrels peaceably during the whole
of this long period. They have developed a government
based upon the consent of the governed and have placed
the capstone upon it by the grant of universal suffrage. They
have kept the various branches of government within their
own respective fields and have thus prevented the growth of
despotic power anywhere. The people’s direct control over
the policy of the government, moreover, has been greatly
augmented during the past generation. It is indeed doubtful
whether Washington, Hamilton, and Madison, if they were to
arise from their graves, would recognize the present
government of the United States as their own handiwork, so
far has it moved along lines of greater democracy. In the
states and the cities this steady drift to more direct popular
control has been very marked. One need only mention such
things as the initiative, referendum and recall, direct
primaries, popular election of senators, the short ballot, the
commission and city-manager forms of government, and the
extension of suffrage to women—all of which are the product
of the last twenty-five years—to indicate how strong has
been the tide of popular control.
Most striking of all American achievements, however, has
been the wide diffusion of material comforts among the
masses of the people. In no other country is there anything
approaching it. The standard of living among wage-earners
is higher than it is anywhere else, much higher. The average
American worker is better housed and better provided with
food than is the typical workman in any other country. He
and his children get better educational opportunities and a
better chance to rise in the world. The way in which
immigrants have been flocking to our shores during the past
hundred years is a proof that millions of men and women
have looked upon America as a land of opportunity. This is
not to imply, by any means, that there are no slums in
American cities, no poverty, no misery, and no industrial
oppression. We have, in truth, far too much of all these
things. But it is also the truth that we have relatively less of
them than any of the other great industrial lands.
Not all of this progress and prosperity is due, of course, to
the political and economic system which America has
maintained during the past century. The rich natural
resources of the country and the steady industry of its
people have been fundamental factors. But no matter how
vast their resources or how unremitting their industry a
people cannot achieve lasting prosperity and contentment
unless they possess a political system and an economic
organization which is well suited to their needs.
What Democracy Has Failed to Do.—It would be idle
to regard democratic government everywhere as an
unqualified success. No scheme of political organization will
of itself secure a government which is both efficient and
popular. The active efforts of the people are required to
achieve this end. Not merely the consent of the governed but
the participation of the governed is essential. By reason of
popular indifference the institutions of democracy in America
have frequently been perverted and abused by men whom
the people have placed in power. What Some examples.
passes for public opinion is at times
nothing but propaganda, organized to promote some selfish
interest. Democracy has not yet succeeded, moreover, in
preventing wars or inducing all nations to deal justly with
one another. It has not prevented the rise of opposing
classes among the people, or kept groups of individuals from
setting themselves in antagonism to each other. Democracy
has not reconciled labor and capital; it has not carried its
principles very far into our industrial organization. These are
serious failings, no doubt; but the friends of democracy can
fairly say, “Would any other system have done better?”
Democracy is what the people make it, and its faults point to
the defects of human nature.
The Citizen’s Duty in a Democracy.—No form of
government gives the citizen so much as democracy, and
none makes greater demands upon him in return. We are far
too much concerned about the rights of men and women; far
too little concerned about their obligations to society, to the
state, and to their fellow-men. Voting at elections is but a
small part of the citizen’s duty. His share in the forming of a
sound and enlightened public opinion constitutes an
obligation upon him every day in the year. When public
opinion takes an unwise course it is because the people
make up their minds hastily, without careful thought, and
without the guidance which should be provided by the
educated men and women of the land. Every individual is a
unit in the forming of public sentiment; he can be a helpful
factor if he will. Education is the chief corner-stone of
democratic government, and it must also be the chief prop to
any plan of industrial democracy which hopes to be
successful and permanent. Education makes men and
women tolerant of other people’s opinions, gives them
confidence in mankind, and faith in what mankind can
accomplish.
Democracy has passed through many raging storms. In
the dark days of the Civil War there were many who feared
that in America it was about to perish utterly. But it survived
and grew stronger than before. Without the faith of the
people in it, and the work which is the exemplification of
faith, democracy can accomplish nothing; with these things
there is no problem that it need fear to face.
General References
E. M. Friedman, American Problems of Reconstruction, pp. 45-55;
Bertrand Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, pp. 186-212;
R. C. K. Ensor (editor), Modern Socialism, pp. 65-89;
N. P. Gilman, Socialism and the American Spirit, pp. 46-89;
H. G. Wells, What is Coming, pp. 96-124;
O. D. Skelton, Socialism: A Critical Analysis, pp. 16-61;
John Spargo, Social Democracy Explained, pp. 1-49;
C. J. Bullock, Selected Readings in Economics, pp. 668-705;
J. R. Commons, Industrial Government, pp. 110-134;
F. A. Cleveland and Joseph Schafer, Democracy in Reconstruction, pp.
165-192;
Sidney and Beatrice Webb, A Constitution for the Socialist
Commonwealth of Great Britain, passim;
William Macdonald, A New Constitution for a New America, pp. 127-
139.
Group Problems
1. What industrial democracy means. The traditional organization
of industry. Relations of employer and employee. The representation of
the workers in the management of industry. Methods of securing this
representation. Shop councils. Merits and defects of the plan. Other
proposals. Effects of industrial democracy upon production. References:
G. D. H. Cole, Guild Socialism Re-stated, pp. 42-77; Ibid., Self-
Government in Industry, pp. 24-47; R. W. Sellars, The Next Step in
Democracy, pp. 246-272; J. R. Commons, Industrial Government, pp. 77-
109; Ida M. Tarbell, New Ideals in Business, pp. 134-162; Sidney and
Beatrice Webb, A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great
Britain, pp. 147-167.
2. The worker in the socialist state. References: Hartley Withers,
The Case for Capitalism, pp. 138-168; H. G. Wells and others, Socialism
and the Great State, pp. 69-119; R. W. Sellars, The Next Step in
Democracy, pp. 135-156; O. D. Skelton, Socialism: A Critical Analysis, pp.
177-219; John Spargo, Social Democracy Explained, pp. 50-84.
3. The newer problems of democracy. References: F. A.
Cleveland and Joseph Schafer, Democracy in Reconstruction, pp. 25-66; E.
M. Friedman, American Problems of Reconstruction, pp. 447-464; F. J. C.
Hearnshaw, Democracy at the Crossways, pp. 11-78; Graham Wallas, Our
Social Heritage, pp. 158-186; L. T. Hobhouse, Democracy and Reaction,
pp. 167-187; H. F. Ward, The New Social Order, pp. 35-75; J. H. Tufts,
Our Democracy; its Origins and its Tasks, pp. 268-298.
Short Studies
1. How the workers manage business enterprises. C. R. Fay,
Cooperation at Home and Abroad, pp. 222-237.
2. Anarchism: its teachings and methods. Bertrand Russell,
Proposed Roads to Freedom, pp. 32-55; F. J. C. Hearnshaw, Democracy at
the Crossways, pp. 262-287.
3. Syndicalism: its organization and aims. John Spargo, Social
Democracy Explained, pp. 244-277; J. G. Brooks, American Syndicalism,
pp. 73-105.
4. Communism. Leo Pasvolsky, The Economics of Communism, pp. 1-
17; 48-83.
5. Bolshevism. R. W. Postgate, The Bolshevik Theory, pp. 13-41;
Bertrand Russell, The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism, pp. 119-156;
John Spargo, Bolshevism, pp. 262-323.
6. The soviet experiment in Russia. H. N. Brailsford, The Russian
Workers’ Republic, pp. 37-79; Frank Comerford, The New World, pp. 118-
169; 281-305.
7. Guild socialism. G. D. H. Cole, Guild Socialism Re-Stated, pp. 9-41;
Hartley Withers, The Case for Capitalism, pp. 189-235; Graham Wallas,
Our Social Heritage, pp. 102-121.
8. Marxian socialism. B. L. Brasol, Socialism vs. Civilization, pp. 61-
110; John Spargo, Socialism Explained, pp. 123-157.
9. State socialism: the arguments for and against. Hartley
Withers, The Case for Capitalism, pp. 138-168; A. E. Davies, The Case for
Nationalization, pp. 12-29.
10. The individual and the new society. A. B. Hart (editor),
Problems of Readjustment After the War, pp. 98-128.
11. Women in the new social order. H. G. Wells, What is Coming,
pp. 159-188; H. A. Hollister, The Woman Citizen, pp. 142-178.
12. Fiscal reconstruction. E. M. Friedman, American Problems of
Reconstruction, pp. 427-446.
Questions
1. Why has the movement for political and social reconstruction
become stronger in recent years?
2. Explain how “the soviet form of government is a repudiation of the
entire scheme of government which has been described in this book”.
3. Make a diagram showing the organization of the soviet government
in Russia. Show how much more direct is the control of the people over
their government in the United States.
4. What is the lesson of the economic breakdown in Russia?
5. Explain what is meant by the International. What are its aims?
6. State any arguments for socialism which are not given in the text.
Any arguments against socialism. Is it true that “as a general rule there
are only two ways of getting work done in this world”? In a socialist state
what would be the incentive to work? Would it be sufficient?
7. Would the establishment of socialism necessarily involve the
abandonment of democracy? Argue the point.
8. Name the principal achievements of American democracy during the
past hundred years. Which of them do you regard as the most important
and why?
9. Name some present-day political and economic injustices which you
would like to see set right. Suggest what might be done about them.
10. Are you a more earnest or a less earnest believer in democracy by
reason of your having studied Social Civics?
Topics for Debate
1. Representation in government should be based on occupations
rather than on territorial divisions.
2. The laborers should be given a voice in the management of their
respective industries.
3. The condition of the laborer is better under private capitalism than it
would be under socialism.
APPENDIX
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
PREAMBLE
We, the people of the United States, in order to form a
more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the
general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.
ARTICLE I
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
Section 1. Two Houses
Section 3. Senate
Section 4. Impeachment