4. Oblivion to the Right

CHAPTER 4 OBLIVION TO THE RIGHT The length and breadth of the socialist concept is im pressive. It is safe to say that a majority of the works in the English language which have appeared during the past several decades, contain traces of or references to socialism. It is difficult to find a 'work, either factual or fictional, which is entirely lacking in the doctrine of share-the-wealth; divide the property; control the people for .their own good.

64 - THIS BREAD IS MINE Thus far we have examined the philosophy of socialism. It remains for us to examine the implementation of socialism. What Christianity overlooks; what Plato evades by an edu cational approach; what More and Bellamy both despair of discovering, is a practical means of establishing socialism. The dream of socialism, if it is ever ~o be more than a dream, must be translated into reality. A bridge must be built from the never-never land of fantasy to the firm granite of fact. Curiously, no practical program for the promotion of socialism was devised from the days of Plato until the 19th century. True, we have the evidence of the Inca civilization, but the genesis of it is lost. The Inca .experiment sprang from seeds that are unknown and went down under the scythes of time and the swords of the Spanish conquistadores. While some would insist that it was the swords of the Spaniards rather than the erosion of father time that proved the nemesis of the Incans, the fact is ably illustrated by this and other incidents in history (e.g., Egyptian down fall after Joseph socialized the agriculture of that nation) OBLIVION TO THE RIGHT - 65 that total socialist control as it is extended thru time, tends to sap the vigor of defensive preparations. Prescott suggests that the total control exercised over the populace by their rulers deprived the people of the will to resist. It is known that the Spaniards, though superior in arms, were an incredi bly tiny force. Sheer weight of numbers could have driven them off, if a will to fight had existed in the populace.

The Inca civilization presents a composite picture in it self, without known relationship to the mainstream of socialist thought. It is possible that there are other instances, too. Myth fonns have a way of recurring without notable con tinuity. It is possible, of course, that the Inca settlements de veloped as a natural result of socialism, since all primitive societies are socialist in character at their beginnings. This is gravely doubted, however. Some freedom of intellect must have existed at some period to explain the advance out of the stone and bronze ages by these people. They had dis covered superior methods of agricultural cultivation. They 66 - THIS BREAD IS MINE understood the manufacture of intricate ornaments. Their art forms were far advanced over stone and bronze age cultures. What is more likely is that the Incan people arrived at a high plateau of development and were then re-enslaved, with personal property being taken from them for the "good"

of their society, by some political process combined with religious fanaticism. But we do not know what inspired. the Inca rulers to deprive their people of freedom; what political forms they employed; what ruses and strate gems they conceived to en... slave their populace. And it is with this process that we are concerned. For if the dreams of the socialists are to be ful filled in the United States and in our own time, the means to accomplish this are of interest. Mainstream of' Thought Let us revert. to .the mainstream. of this thought 'as. it washes against our own embankments. One of the mighty currents is contained-·in the Christian ethic. of charity which was frequently misinterpreted with compulsive overtones.

OBLIVION TO THE RIGHT - 67 Alas, church and state have not always been separate. And if we consider the socialist doctrine to be found in the early practice of Christianity, and the working relationship that existed between the church and the various kings, lords and emperors of Christendom, we can envisage the rudimentary growth of the tentacles of compulsion weaving through both church and state. Perhaps this is what caused Edward Gibbon, in his "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," to declare: "The influence of the clergy, in an age of superstition, might be usefully employed to assert the rights of mankind; but so intimate is the connection between the throne and the altar, that the banner of the church has very seldom been seen on the side of the. people." So shocking was this bit of keen observation that Oliphant " .. ~. ".' .. Smeaton, who reprinted all of Gibbon's notes and added observations of his 'own, provided' a footnote for' this coninlent: "Gibbon's remark here is wholly incorrect."

But customarily, socialism was unorganized, and, except at intervals, .voluntary. Of course, in the 18th century there 68 - THIS BREAD IS MINE was Adam Weishaupt, who formulated a· kind of do~trine in which he combined the symbols of the Masonic order with a sort of nihilistic creed. But the Illuminati were more a black magic cult than a realistic device for sharing the wealth. There were writers and dreamers by the score who argued that something should be done. Three World Movements Then, within a period of 50 years beginning in 1840, the three principal methods of attaining to a socialist super state were drafted, executed and became world movements. If 20th century antisocialists rue their generation as being prone to collectivism, they might be grateful that they escaped the hazards of the 19th. It is Pierre Joseph Proudhon of Bexaneon, France, to whom goes the credit for the first concrete plan which embodied a method of attaining the socialist goal. Proudhon has been classed as a philosophical anarchist. He was not original, but he was orderly and logical. He was a student of Plato; OBLIVION TO THE RIGHT - 69 and he had among his precursors, William Godwin of England who wrote a famous socialist novel called "Caleb Williams"

and who is himseH frequently credited with being the father of anarchistic communism. It was Godwin who wrote and published in 1793, "Inquiry Concerning Political Justice," which was one of the first efforts after Sir Thomas More to criticize government for its eternal bickering and war-making, while people went hungry. Godwin wished to do away with governments entirely, not only because they made war, but because they were instruments for protection of a wealthy class and thus assisted in the impoverishment of others. Godwin deplored violence, either by government or by per sons outside of government, thus giving the lie to those who insist on linking him with the violent Marxists. But he .con sidered accumulation of property an act of violence. The worst form of tyranny, he explained, was marriage. It was from this spring that Proudhon drank deeply. He emerged with "Qu'est-ce que la Propriete?" ("What Is Prop erty?") dripping from his pen. This was a point that Plato 70-THIS BREAD IS MINE had not thoroughly developed. And this omission was now.

exploited by Proudhon, who answered his own question. by proclaiming: "Property is robbery." The publication hit the streets in 1840. This was followed by a pair of pamphlets in similar strain a year later. He was arrested and brought to trial for expressing revolutionary opinions but was acquitted. From then to the end of his life (1865), Proudhon was a proud exponent of socialist share-the-wealth philosophy. The Encyclopedia Americana has this to say: "He was the first to formulate the doctrines of philo sophical anarchism; he maintained that property was un justifiable, that labor only should give just claim to share in the product of labor, and that consequently rent and interest should not exist. He thus far agreed with the socialist doctrine of value, but he was neither a socialist nor a communist; because the state depended upon and protected property he claimed that the state must be destroyed; and that the proper basis of society was a voluntary contract between individuals."

Let us quarrel with the editors of "Americana" for. their flat .assertion that Proudhon was not a socialist. His views OBLIVION TO THE RIGHT - 71 on property proclaim him to be one. His views on government announce his individualism. The combination of the socialist economic, but individualist-political view is called anarchy. Proudhon is the father of anarchy. His ideas took hold, suffered certain modifications and were then multiplied. The Russian Prince Kropotkin fanned the flames of revolution inherent in any idea of property reallocation. He suggested a world order which would bring universal peace after "the present system of class privilege and unjust distribution of the wealth produced by labor that creates and fosters crime" had been abolished. But what Proudhon planted in the way. of peaceful seed, became a violent whirlwind in the mind of the most vigorous anarchist of them all, Michael Bakunin.

It was Bakunin who saw one major point which Proudhon had merely hinted at. To eliminate government, the inveterate protector of private property, one must use more than subtle propaganda. The answer to the force of government, said Bakunin, was the force of non-goverq,ment. Anarchists would 72 - THIS BREAD IS MINE do well to face the facts. Propaganda for education's sake was not enough. He introduced the "propaganda of action," by means of which terror could be employed as an education weapon and the fear of death sowed in the ranks of the politicians. Bakunin, through planned violence, advanced the cause of anarchy with precipitate haste, ,and wrecked it, almost totally. Only in recent years, some pitiful remnants of the ancient order have crept from their dark hiding places, once more to proclaim weakly the Proudhon thesis, '''Property is robbery." "Governments, in supporting property, are sustaining robbery." "To eliminate private ownership, the government must first be removed."

Let us hope that the modern anarchists, who dreadfully abuse the name and meaning of both individualism and liberty, do not fall victim to the lure of Bakunin's propaganda. Propaganda by Action A record of anarchistic excesses might be in order .• OBLIVION TO THE RIGHT - 73 In 1878 there was an attempted assassination of Ger many's Emperor William. There was an attempt upon the lives of the German princes in 1883. In 1886, in Chicago, the attention of the world was riveted to Bakunin's propaganda by action. A bomb explosion in the Haymarket killed a number of persons. Seven arrests were made, all of persons known to be teaching anarchy. Four were sent to the gallows, two drew life sentences and one was imprisoned for 15 years. The evidence in this case was uncertain and after the emotional uproar had subsided, petitions were circulated to free the imprisoned three. It was never established beyond a point of doubt who threw the bomb.

But, bomb throwing continued, and such events were frequently traced to anarchist motivation. In 1893 a bomb exploded in the French chamber of deputies in Paris and the thrower, Vaillant, was a well-known anarchist leader. In 1894, President Camot of France was assassinated.

74 - THIS BREAD IS MINE In 1898, the Empress Elizabeth of Austria was assassi nated. King Humbert of Italy was assassinated in 1900. President McKinley was killed by the anarchist Czolgosz, in an autumn shooting in the year 1901. And King George of Greece was sent to his death by an anarchist plot on March 18, 1913. There have been unconfirmed reports occasionally ever since. By the time World War I swept over the troubled hu man race, anarchists were depicted by cartoonists as black bearded, bomb-carrying radicals with a universal hatred of mankind. This was a blind alley, an unsuccessful epoch in the effort to enact Plato's "Republic." It was a tragedy of error heightened by the fact that there is much good in some of the anarchist doctrine. Economically, the anarchists perpet ually come unglued. But the anarchists' writings in support of individualism are profound and beautiful. In Godwin and .

Proudhon, without the mutations provided by Kropotkin and OBLIVION TO THE RIGHT - 75 Bakunin, we find a strange and peace-loving sophistry. But whether we ascribe to the anarchist the calm and gentle philosophy of individuallsm, or the violent and destructive purpose of the overthrow of rule, by the use of force, we come up against a solid obstacle. The anarchist is a socialist with an individualist twist respecting government. His central purpose is to eliminate private ownership. His means to that end is to eliminate the one agency. he views as the perpetual friend of private ownership, the government. Because of its basic individualism, anarchism can be classed as the right flank of the socialist political front. It has never been successful. Nowhere is there evidence that some politician, in fear of anarchist bombs, disbanded his govern ment and fled to the hills. The left flank of the socialist movement is by far the most publicized and the best known.