Preface

There are a hundred clues all beckoning us to begin. The word itself offers the best clue. Social is an adjective derived from the Latin socius, which means an associate or ally. The French have changed it to socialis and the ~nglish language has borrowed from the French.

The addition of the suffix, ism, has converted the adjec tive into a noun which connotes a distinctive doctrine, ideal, system or practice. In combination the word socialism is used to express belief in a societal system in which the essential means of production and distribution shall be collectively or govern mentally owned and managed. The word conveys both an economic and a political'syllogism. Socialism tends to create an ethic framework in which it is presumed that all values, rights and duties abide in the masses and that the masses must be served. The proper antonym of socialism is individualism. Individu alism presumes that individual initiative, action and interests should be independent of governmental or social control. In ethics, the conception of individualism is that all values, rights and duties originate in individuals, and not in the social whole. Socialism and individualism are, therefore, permanently opposed doctrines.

It is the purpose of these pages to explore the relative merits of these two opposing and conflicting theories.