WHY SOCIALISM ?
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—Please allow me to thank Mr. Millen Adam for the sympathy and generosity of his criticism in your issue of July 17th. I wish I could say that it had converted me to Conservatism. Surely obedience, reverence, responsibility are as natural foundations for Socialism as for the Conserva- tism which has not observed them. Obedience must exist under Socialism while the education that must go hand in hand with Socialism, should increase reverence while it destroys superstition. Responsibility is not a foundation of Con- servatism, for so many are relieved of it by the possession of private wealth and unearned income. It will be more evenly distributed and aided by knowledge and the spirit of emula- tion under Socialism.
Mr. Adam accuses me of bald materialism but sins himself. Surely " trial and error," if Nature's methods, are not time of an omniscient God. Moreover, where a life exists of Glory to God, of service to man and complete moral satisfaction to its liver, Socialism has no motive in robbing it of any of these. Lastly, I am not the first prophet of Socialism to advocate Compensation. Mr. BraiLsford and many others have done this.—I am, Sir, &c., JOHN C. L. Smesox. The Grey House, Grange, West Kirby, Birkenhead.
[Private wealth cannot relieve anyone of responsibility, but rather increases it.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
