The "Conciliation," however, can bring no conciliation between the employers and workers, because that is unnatural. On the contrary, the hatred of one side to the other is intensified and war breaks out oftener and a.s.sumes a more bitter and more obstinate character.
Thus viewing the two struggling cla.s.ses of capitalist society, revolutionary industrial unionism comes to the logical conclusion that between capital and labor there exists nothing in common, that the struggle must go on and peace can come only when economic oppression will cease, which is possible only when the program of revolutionary unionism will be realized; namely, when the workers will take over the means of production and abolish the system of private ownership. The autocratic control of industry, the unequal division of products will then disappear and society will be built on a socialist foundation, where the industries will be owned and operated by the workers, organized in a truly democratic manner, and where the individual will receive the full product of his labor.
These are the principles of revolutionary unionism, the principles of the international proletariat. They are the true expressions of the cla.s.s struggle and because of that, revolutionary unionism attracts more and more followers whose ideal is to develop within the working ma.s.ses a consciousness of their historic mission."
In the words of an eloquent representative of the organized workers in the United States, I exhort the working men and working women of America: Keep your eyes on Russia. Watch what is going on there and what the capitalist plunderbund will try to do. Do not be misled by the lies and slanders that are daily dished up to you. Bear in mind that those who tell you these yarns have an interest to mislead you. They want to use you as a makeweight in their game of wresting from the Russian workers their dearly-won liberty. It is of no use to enumerate the lies that have already been punctured because they will invent new ones faster than one can write and print. Let your reason guide you. Think yourselves into the shoes of your Russian fellow workers. Think how you would act if placed in the same position and then draw the conclusion that they act about the same way that you would, because they are like you moved by the same emotions, the same desires, the same aspirations.
You, too, would like to keep for yourselves the fruits of your toil, if you only knew how to go about it, if you had the organization that would make it possible. But as yet you do not know and you have not that organization. In politics you still vote against one another in the Republican or Democratic camp. You will have to wait until you do know and until you do have the means--the Industrial Unions of the entire working cla.s.s that will be able to take and hold and administer industry for the reason that it will have the might, the power to do so. And when you have expressed through the ballot your will for that new society, which will guarantee to you the full fruits of your labor, remember the slogan of revolutionary Russia: "All power to the Soviets," and let your slogan then be: "All power to the Industrial Unions!"
These are prophetic words written fifty years ago by Frederick Engels:
Since the historical appearance of the capitalist mode of production, the appropriation by society of all the means of production has often been dreamed of, more or less vaguely, by individuals, as well as by sects, as the ideal of the future. But it could become possible, could become a historical necessity, only when the actual conditions for its realization were there. Like every other social advance, it becomes practicable, not by men understanding that the existence of cla.s.ses is in contradiction to justice, equality, etc., not by the mere willingness to abolish these cla.s.ses, but by virtue of certain new economic conditions....
So long as the total social labor only yields a produce which but slightly exceeds that barely necessary for the existence of all; so long, therefore, as labor engages all or almost all the time of the great majority of the members of society--so long, of necessity, this society is divided into cla.s.ses....
But if, upon this showing, division into cla.s.ses has a certain historical justification, it has this only for a given period, only under given social conditions. It was based on the insufficiency of production. It will be swept away by the complete development of modern productive forces. And, in fact, the abolition of cla.s.ses in society presupposes a degree of historical evolution, at which the existence, not simply of this or that particular ruling cla.s.s, but of any ruling cla.s.s at all, has become an obsolete anachronism....
With the seizing of the means of production by society, production of commodities is done away with, and, simultaneously, the mastery of the product over the producer. Anarchy in social production is replaced by systematic, definite organization. The struggle for individual existence disappears. Then for the first time man, in a certain sense, is finally marked off from the rest of the animal kingdom, and emerges from mere animal conditions into really human ones.... It is the ascent of man from the kingdom of necessity to the kingdom of freedom.
The capitalist countries are ruled through banks, and a bank is necessarily an inst.i.tution of the owning cla.s.s.
Russia is ruled through Soviets, and a soviet is necessarily an inst.i.tution of the working cla.s.s.
Banks and Soviets are so many headquarters for big unions. In capitalist countries the banks are such for the one big union of the owners, and in Russia the soviets are this for the one big union of the workers. These big unions cannot co-exist and flourish in the same country.
All owners everywhere see the necessity for their one big union and in all capitalistic countries, nowhere more than in the United States, they have the advantage of being on the ground floor and indeed on all the floors of all the sky sc.r.a.pers with their union which is the most universally inclusive and the most relentlessly efficient organization on earth.
Some workers everywhere see the necessity for their one big union, but nowhere is it seen as generally and clearly as in Russia,--the only country in which the workers have held the ground floor for any considerable time against all comers.
In all countries a beginning has been made by the workers in laying the foundation for their one big union, but in only one country, Russia, has progress been made with the superstructure, and here as everywhere the owners have hindered the workers so that they must defend themselves with their right hand while they build with their left. Nevertheless wonderful progress is being made and when the industrial structure has been completed, as it soon must be, else the world is doomed to destruction, it shall tower above its capitalist rival as a mountain over a foot hill.
After all, the power of the owner is money and it is not a real potentiality, for within the social realm there is in reality only one potentiality, the power of productivity which exclusively belongs to the worker.
In the sky there is no G.o.d, and on earth there is no king or priest like unto Labor, the lord of G.o.ds, the tzar of kings and the pope of priests.
Labor is high above all potentialities. The motto, "All Power to the Workers," which the cla.s.s-conscious proletarians inscribe on their banners, is not the expression of an ideal fiction, but the declaration of a practical reality, the greatest among all realities, that reality in which the whole social realm lives, moves and has its being.
Down with the one big union of the owners. Long live the one big union of the workers.
II. G.o.d AND IMMORTALITY.
We have done with the kisses that sting, With the thief"s mouth red from the feast, With the blood on the hands of the king, And the lie on the lips of the priest.
--Swinburne.
Many critics contend that socialism and supernaturalism are not, as I represent, incompatibilities; but they lose sight of four facts: (1) this is a scientific age; (2) Marxian socialism is one of the sciences; (3) the vast majority of men of science reject all supernaturalism, including of course the G.o.ds and devils with their heavens and h.e.l.ls, and (4) only in the case of one of the sciences, psychology, is this majority greater than in the science of sociology.
The truth of the last two of these representations will be overwhelmingly evident from the chart on the next page. It and its explanation given in the following quotation is taken with the kind consent of the author and also of the publishers of a book ent.i.tled G.o.d and Immortality, by Professor James H. Leuba, the Psychologist of Bryn Mawr College. This book is having a great influence and I strongly recommend it to all who think that I am wrong in the contention that conscious, personal existence is limited to earth; that, therefore, we are having all that we shall ever know of heaven and h.e.l.l, here and now, and that whether we have more of heaven and less of h.e.l.l depends altogether upon men and women, not at all upon G.o.ds and devils. The second edition of Professor Leuba"s book is now in the press of The Open Court Publishing Company, 122 South Michigan Ave., Chicago, Ill. Here is the quotation in support of our contentions:
[Ill.u.s.tration: Chart XI
PARTIAL SUMMARY OF RESULTS]
What, then, is the main outcome of this research? Chart XI, Partial Summary of Results, shows that in every cla.s.s of persons investigated, the number of believers in G.o.d is less, and in most cla.s.ses very much less than the number of non-believers, and that the number of believers in immortality is somewhat larger than in a personal G.o.d; that among the more distinguished, unbelief is very much more frequent than among the less distinguished; and finally that not only the degree of ability, but also the kind of knowledge possessed, is significantly related to the rejection of these beliefs.
The correlation shown, without exception, in every one of our groups between eminence and disbelief appears to me of momentous significance. In three of these groups (biologists, historians, and psychologists) the number of believers among the men of greater distinction is only half, or less than half the number of believers among the less distinguished men. I do not see any way to avoid the conclusion that disbelief in a personal G.o.d and in personal immortality is directly proportional to abilities making for success in the sciences in question.
A study of the several charts of this work with regard to the kind of knowledge which favors disbelief shows that the historians and the physical scientists provide the greater; and the psychologists, the sociologists and the biologists, the smaller number of believers. The explanation I have offered is that psychologists, sociologists, and biologists in very large numbers have come to recognize fixed orderliness in organic and psychic life, and not merely in inorganic existence; while frequently physical scientists have recognized the presence of invariable law in the inorganic world only. The belief in a personal G.o.d as defined for the purpose of our investigation is, therefore, less often possible to students of psychic and of organic life than to physical scientists.
The place occupied by the historians next to the physical scientists would indicate that for the present the reign of law is not so clearly revealed in the events with which history deals as in biology, economics, and psychology. A large number of historians continue to see the hand of G.o.d in human affairs. The influence, destructive of Christian beliefs, attributed in this interpretation to more intimate knowledge of organic and psychic life, appears incontrovertibly, as far as psychic life is concerned, in the remarkable fact that whereas in every other group the number of believers in immortality is greater than that in G.o.d, among the psychologists the reverse is true; the number of believers in immortality among the greater psychologists sinks to 8.8 per cent. One may affirm it seems that, in general, the greater the ability of the psychologist, the more difficult it becomes for him to believe in the continuation of individual life after bodily death.
Within the generation to which I belong Darwin and Marx, the greatest teachers that the world has had, went over the top of entrenched ignorance with the greatest books of the world, worth infinitely more to it than all its bibles together. Darwin did this in 1859 with his Origin of Species by Natural Selection and Marx in 1867 with his Capital, a Critique of Political Economy.
Darwin with his book is driving the Christian church out of its trench of supernaturalism and uniqueism by showing that the different kinds of vegetable and animal life are not, according to the representation of its bible, so many separate creations by a personal, conscious divinity, but interrelated evolutions by an impersonal, unconscious nature, the higher out of the lower, and that, therefore, man is so far from being a special creation, having his most vital relationships with a celestial divinity and his most glorious prospects in a heavenly place with him, that he is really more or less closely related to every living thing on earth, and is as hopelessly limited to it, as an elephant, a tree or even a mountain.
Marx with his book is driving the states out of the trench of imperialism and capitalism.
As Darwin is driving the conscious, personal G.o.ds out of the realm of biology, placing all animal and human life of body, mind and soul on essentially the same footing, so Marx is driving all such divinities out of the realm of sociology, placing all life of family, state, church, lodge, store and shop on essentially the same level.
According to Darwin, all animal life is what it is at any time by reason of the effort to accommodate the physical organism to its environment.
According to Marx, human civilization is what it is at any time because of the economic system by which people feed, clothe and house themselves.
This Darwinian-Marxian interpretation of terrestrial life in general, and of the human part of it in particular, is known as materialism. It is the materialistic, naturalistic, levelistic interpretation of history, and differs fundamentally from the spiritualistic, supernaturalistic, uniqueistic interpretation of Christian preachers.
The contrast between these interpretations is especially strong in the case of human history.
On the one hand the Christian preacher says, man"s history is what it is because of the directing providence of a G.o.d, the Father, Son and Spirit, and because of His directing inspiration of great leaders, such as Washington, Luther, Caesar and Moses.
On the other hand Darwin and Marx agree in saying that both the triune G.o.d and the inspired leader are what they are, because society is what it is; that, again, the character of society depends upon the economic system by which it feeds, clothes and houses itself, and that finally all such systems owe their existence to the machinery in use for the production of the basic necessities of life, the primal machine being the human hand to which all other machines are auxiliaries.
The most insatiable and universal among all human longings is for freedom--freedom from economic want, social inequality and imperialistic tyranny, also freedom to learn, think, live and teach truths.
Socialism of the Marxian type is the gospel of freedom, because a cla.s.sless G.o.d, nature, reveals it in the interest of a cla.s.sless world: therefore, it is true, and slavery, of which there never was so much before on the earth, and nowhere is there more than in the United States, is utterly incompatible with truth, and cla.s.sless interests.
All the supernaturalistic gospels are revealed by a cla.s.s G.o.d (Jesus, Jehovah, Allah, Buddha) in the interest of the capitalist cla.s.s: therefore, they are false and freedom is utterly incompatible with falsehood and cla.s.s interest.
Ignorance is the destroyer-G.o.d and capitalism is the diabolical scourge by which he afflicts the wage-earner with many unnecessary sufferings, especially the crushing ones arising from the great trinity of evils, war, poverty and slavery.
Knowledge is the saviour-G.o.d and Marxism is his divine gospel of freedom from these capitalistic sufferings.
III. MYTHICAL CHARACTER OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT PERSONAGES.
What man of sense will agree with the statement that the first, second, and third days, in which the evening is named and the morning, were without sun, moon and stars? What man is found such an idiot as to suppose that G.o.d planted trees in Paradise like an husbandman? I believe that every man must hold these things for images under which a hidden sense is concealed.--Origen.