State Socialism.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVI, Issue 186, 11 August 1904, Page 4

State Socialism.

VIEWS OF MR G. H, REID, At the close of Mr Max Hirsch's recent lecture in Melbourne on Socialism, at which Mr G. H. Reid presided, the lecturer invitoti questions. Almost tihe first asked was, "Define the difference between State Socialism, social democracy, and communism." Like a flashl came th ® answer ' from Mr Reid' "It's the difference '. of the degree of insanity," and Uic I audience roared. | A little later Mr Rei<l took the opportunity of defining his own attitude in regard to Socialism. He explained that on some points in public matters he was just as violently opposed to the views expressed by Mr Hirsch as any man. He inad cv>ry sympathy with those who honestly believed that they had discovered some new method of promoting imman well-being. The most rabid Conservatives la the world must admit that there were a number of evils existing,: and that an enormous amount of wealth produced got into wrong pockets. (Applause,) Every man of any humanity must be itruck by the enormous fortunes made by monopolies and trusts out of the necessities of the masses of the people. (Applause,) He admitted that he had not read deeply on the subject, but would lika t 0 say that there were a considerable number of methods for putting, everything right. As to this socialistic method, there was mo doubt different authorities took different views. He admitted there were socialistic things which were amongst the best things lm Australia, such as the railways. (Applause.) His quarrel was not with the theory that it was wrong to do anything by means of the State. He was open to be convinced by this or that method of improving the condition of the people byj means of State initiative, 'but he still had a certain amount of caution, in his composition, and he wanted to be satisfied in each case that the'change proposed would be a B°od one. Before Tom Mann's idea that under his brand of Socialism the desire to assimilate wealth would ■disappear, and would be looked upon in the nature of a dseaso, could come about they would have to get a fresh creation, of man and woman (Laughter.) He could not subsoibe, to Tom Mann's doctrine that rewards for exertion should be all of the same pattern. Somehow or other we were not bom into the world with exactly the same potentialities : of effort, of physical exertion, of m- | tellectual capacity. There was ineqquality to start with. Take a racecourse, where great pains' were taken to 'get all the horses' level at the start, but they did not finish the same way. Socialism meant starting with Inequalities, and all finishing a dead heat. (Loud laughter.) That was a good thing for a horse that was no .good. (More laughter.) Socialists would agree with him on one great principle, and that was the law I of human progress. Each generation I throughout the world's history showed an advance to a higher mark of development and improvement in our conditions. Before an industrial community like this began the perilous experiment of universal Government stroke, he beseeehed them to Invite ail other nations to establish the same marvellous method of doing everything slowly. (Laughter and cheers.) In his plesent unforounate position he did not believe man and womankind could be reconstructed on a uniform pattern. Socialists were trying to do a thing that would ruin a racecourse. They were trying to make the slowest animal finish level with a Curbine. (Cheers.)