The Common-Sense of Socialism.

Maoriland Worker, Volume I, Issue 6, 20 February 1911, Page 10

The Common-Sense of Socialism.

(By WIL KRAIG.)

I want to insist on the common-sense of Socialism. In these days of " labour movements, ,, and " independent labour parties," Socialism as a world-move-ment is apt to receive scant courtesy from the men who seek a " career " as Labour leaders.

It ought not to be necessary to write such an article; but it is. The com-mon-sense of Socialism is—thank Godgreater than the common-sense of Socialists. It is right that our Ideal should be higher than our daily Practice ; else it would be no longer an Ideal, but a Habit. But Socialism will not always be an Ideal ; some day it will be a fact In that day the Communist will rise and denounce the Sordid Socialist even as our cast-iron SocialDemociat, who swears by Marx and " Das Kapital," now prods at the " bloated Capitalist." Personally, I have great joy of my comrades. I laugh at them, loud and long. Life as they would have it would be a side-splitting farce. And I am for the Joy and the Fun of Life. I am by nature a humorist, but am compelled to be serious in ord.er to earn a living. Woe is mc ! When I think what the world has lost I could feel it in my heart to pity the poor old universe, were it not that my own sorrows make mc forget those of the World. But as I say, there is such a thing as the common-sense of Socialism. Socialism is an entirely sane system of society —though I have now and then doubts as to the sanity of my comrades, who spout eloquently on the " economic interpretation of history," the " theory of value," and other subjects too deep for them, but perfectly clear to mc. Socialism is not " political " economy, but social economy. Its object is not to waste life in getting profits, but to turn life to the best use. To a certain extent, Socialism is anti-natural, because Nature is terribly wasteful, and produces about a million imbeciles before it succeeds in turning out men like George Bernard Shaw—-or myself. I do not wish it to be considered that I treat Socialism as a humorous subject. Socialists are frequently too funny for words; but Socialism is in deadly earnest. The genius of Socialism is twinsister to the spirit of optimism. The belief that Life on the whole is good ; is worth living and transmitting; can be made, even on the terms on which Nature grants it, a joyous pageant from the gardens of earth to the Elysian fields of Paradise. Life is, no doubt, a great evil to the bottom dog; but he prefers it to Death. The Love of life in man is as wonderful to mc as the starry heavens were to the German philosopher. The Lord lei the house of a brute to the eoul of a man, And the nm:n said, "Am I your debtor?" And tihe Lord: "Not yet; but make it at clean &v you can, And then I will let you a better." Socialism tends to give man the best chance to make the most of his motley make-up, in the hope that if there is another act in the drama of life he will be better fitted to play his part there. Socialism seeks to better man's material condition, so that he can build thereon his spiritual being. The idea that Socialists are goths and vandals ; that they would ruthlessly uestroy art and all that makes life beautiful; that the horny-handed proletariat would tear down the marble Venus de Milos and wallow in a sensual sty is a weird imagining that could only enter the warped mind of a paunchy stockbroker. Socialism seeks to end the terrible waste of life inevitable under this brutal system of to-day, and organise so-. ciety so that man shall arise nobler and grander, having a wide horizon, and with aspirations reaching beyond the skies.

All this to the worker who is not a Socialist is foolislmess. It is idle to deny that Socialism has to make headway against the inertia of every day life; the status quo is in possession, and possession is nine points of the law. It is easy to fall in with the established order of things; but it takes a man having an independent mind to protest and work against that state of society into which he was born, but in the constitution of which he had no part. Consequently the average man, whose mental horizon is walled in by the street, is not a Socialist. He has too much common-sense. And the average trade union leader of the Elijah J. Carey and Michael J. Reardon type cannot away with the " red flag school of economics." Such knowledge is too high for them ; they cannot attain unto it. It is with them as it was written by the Prophet Isaiah, " Here a little and there a little; precept upon precept, line upon line."

Socialist and. Labour men alike must learn, if they do not already know, that there is onry one kind of Socialism. True, there are many kinds of Socialists — the Christian Socialist, the Scientific Socialist, the Evolution-

ary Socialist, the cast-iron non-com-promising Social Democrat, the Fabian, and others of the same. I prefer to bunch them all together, and. call them mostly fools. The cant of labels such as these is sickening. Socialism is a theory of society based on common ownership of the means of life, and entirely opposed to individualism, so-called ; Socialism is the science or living socially. It is therefore revolutionary in essence and being. It is useless ignoring that fact. What makes the different brands of Socialists is the divergence of ideas on the subject of tactics. The timid labour man, who wants " some " Socialism in his time (meaning thereby a State colliery or an old age pension) does not like the idea of revolution. He puts his trust, like the Hon John Barr, M.L.C., in "evolution." That blessed word "Evolution!" But Nature is not above Revolution. She knows when a revolution is required, and provides the dynamite. Is "the Hon John Barr wiser than Nature V I. doubt it. As the result of revolution we came into this Dismal Old World ; we continue to revolute for three score and ten years, and we get revolutionised out of it. Thereafter we may go through many revolutions—for further particulars of which see Dante's Inferno. My amiable friends ! We cannot get away from Revolution. It was not a few breechless Frenchmen who started the French Revolution. That was the work of Nature. This is a hard saying, except to the man who thinks. Therefore, I would recommend you to think. The more you think the more you realise that I am light, and that the common-sense of Socialism is a Fact, and not a Figure of Speech. And when the day arrives you will take your place in the ranks of the Revolutionary Socialists, and wear a red cockade. If you are too puny to shoulder a rifle we will get you to beat the big drum. No one can deny that you are good at that.