Newspapers / The State’s Voice (Dunn, … / March 1, 1934, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The State’s Voice (Dunn, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
“Tlie Curse Causeless Shall Not Come” -S.-i ‘ : (After writing the following article, I noticed 3ohn W. Davis’s injunction to find the natural law and fol low that and all would come ' Well. -That I -had al ready done, and .was convinced ofter the completion of the article that the Roosevelt New Deal is in the direction of the natural law.) Let’s intake Solomon’s assertion. more general by changing tliephense ,t0 the present, thus: ‘‘The curse causeless does not come,” and' apply iit to the state of affairs existing in our country and in the world as a whole. It will be readily agreed, I suppose, that the pursuit )of any course Contrary to neural law, whether physical, moral, or (spiritual. }s a suffi cient cause to produce any evil condition, or “curse” if you please. And the corollary that no ‘'Curse” comes otherwise, as Solomon states, will be ac cepted without argument. Unfortunately, however the effect of the violation of law, eternal law, is< not limited to the violator of that law. It may be observed in the beginnihg that man made lawis in opposition to the eternal schemeof things have frequently been the cause of infinite woes. Again, it should Ibe noted, that ibuman in stincts developed before the origin_of society may often be, and -are, ^utterly antagonistic to.the eter nal principles that apply to a sane social order.' In fact, those instincts, developed, under the primeval order, are often the basis for the destructive man made laws. In other-words, we find the social world undertaking to legislate for itself tiptop the-basis of iiistn^^^vivingthe-Wra^f^OjUlt^l^^i^nal-^ istic regime, ' t--,' “ . ;-. ... . Primordial Instincts Antagonize Social Law Tlie coiiseqiuenee is, the (primeval practices, recog- , nized as legitimate by a social world though for ages hurtful to the social order,, hdve, as the Social order becomes increasingly cotmplex. become often a boom erang to the individualistic ^ promoter of his own selfish ends. Since the o r S a-n i z a t i o n of .government—that is, any government intended to si ek and to perpetuate the good of its citizens as a whole—there has been a constant warfare between the individualistic primeval law and the social law— rmr necessarily the law or laws inaugurated, by so-., (iety, hut the eternal or necessary law of a social order. That war Is still waging. In fact, it is at i*s height. Incomplete comjprehension of what a so cial order implies has' for ages disarmed society it self and given easy victory in many areas to the j rimeval law of the individual. k* Thus, as Paul found a war waging within himself between the “old man” and the ,‘ne\v man”, and himself doing “what be wotuld not do”, every govern ment in! the world impliedly confessing that it is erected for the benefit of all, has seen the social or der overridden, time and again, by the individualist tic order, and whole groups, unable or unwilling to resort to the primeval law of hoof and claw, become more the victims of individualists operating under a quasi .social order than they might have become in a state of anarchy—where group could have open ly fought antagonistic individuals or groups. In abort, the so&al order arrayed, nominally at least, for the common good has been the victim of individ ualistic snipers not only embodied in the social army itself but often dominating that army. TNfoole regi ments have been mowed down by “rugged individu als" who have happened to come upon convenient eco nomic machine guns. And the body as a whole has consented, by hypnotized by the individualistic in stinct surviving the day before a social order was conceived. The Evolution of Government Early governments were of three types- Two of them probably had the- common interest at heart The first was the .patriarchal or tribal. The- secon was the government due id. the rise of the strong man, the “can” man -(koenigO^he-Kihg, whose op portunity arose with the arrival of a menace to . is group. Jn this case, it depended largely upon ® character of the .king himself as to what degree ° consideration wars given-tbe man* or citizen in^l^i oral, but certainly generally more than in the t>pe of monarchy, where a; course of eelf-agsran ize taent gradually Seenred for one man jde an ra ic lower. As autocrat -he naturally continued his fo»* ' . *. ■ t • • -- •> v v'i;lWv1'• ■'-'irZ-'.J*''- * ’ * suer course of self aggrandizement, regardless of the consequences to his people as a whole or as individu als. The shepherd became a greater, menace than a . hundred packs of wolyes. ^ It was this type of government that become domi nant. The only men the monarch favored were those who could compel his favor. King John,' in his mem orable “magna charts”, concede privileges to the barons. But It took many years of slow evolution for the common man of England to gain any recog nition, from noble or king, for his economic and so6 dal rights. For centuries Europe was at the mercy of the strong—if not now. The laws made applica ble to the eoimmon run .of men • were made -not so (much for the betterment of the common interest as for the protection of the masters' interests. Gov ernment, king or lord, gave not a hoot for the wel fare of his peasants or feudal tenants as such, but chiefly because a certain degree-^ of welfare was essential t« their usefulness in his behalf. The history ef the struggles of the common folk to attain a degree of economic and social protection would make volumes. xThe establishment of the American republic ^as hailed throughout the world as a victory for the people. But; as in'tbe days of King John, when the nobles assumed for thetmselves the rights of the “people”, in the American Repub lic, the aristocratic idea, the peculiar conceptions of the rights of class, so dominated, that practices as contrary to the democratic idea as that of linmting the franchise to free-holders or that of the enslave "ment of a race prevailed. In; time the class idea . was*eliminated from the 'law books. Yet it remained ,44 the instincts of the 'people, both of-highamklow 'ilegree, preparingthe former to luiuzewny •»»«««» that might-come to hand to enrich or glorify them selves at the expense of the masses, and the latter to be submissive to such exploitation. But the tool for self-aggrandizement was often seized by oiie of the submerged, who used it as re lentlessly as the tyrant! to the manner born. And with the increasing complexity of the! social and economic regimes, lethal weapons multiplied in num J>er and deadliness as rapidly as did the modern means of production and transportation. The noble man of old had first only his own strong arm to raise him above his peers, and then the bows of his un derlings. To-day he might resort to poison gas. -And in this complex economic age, the ‘‘rugged in dividualist” has at hand every kind of modern wea pon which he unhesitatingly utilizes to augment his wealth or station. The gangster-still adheres to actual physical weapons. That the government recognizes as a crime, vigorously running down and penalizing yeggs, kidnapers, and mere strong-arm men. But the wiser “ruggedi individualist ’ resorts to those intangible weapons which he finds ten-fold more deadly than the gangster; does liis bomb or “gat.” The pbople are (killed economically* by 'secret or hidden, sprayings of ‘ poison gas;” And this the government has conceived as legitimate in a land where individual initiative is glorified, or perhaps has connived at the crime, or even con sorted with the criminals in concocting the deadly miasma, ' . . .. ' Fortunately, as suggested in the beginning, the practice, in many ease®, has resulted in a boomer ang effect, destroying criminal and intended victims alike. Happily, the distress became so intense* an so general that a benevolent administration coal launch a “new deal.” either with the consent of the fobbe'r barons or by brow-beating them. The Economic Armageddon at Hand. Democracy has largely won its political fight—in legal forms at least. Effectual disfranchisement un der the law or regardless of the law is still to be eliminated. Similarly, under the euphonious phrase of “equal opportunity,” the people have assumed that they have won their economic rights. But as election frauds, some of which have (been wrought under legally -framed .methods of procedure, .have often proved greater injustices to the people than, any legal restrictions .upon the right of franchise have wrought, so under the specious platitude of “equal opportunity” the economic ruin of hosts has been wrought. Grant that the victim -of the high wayman Bfcd the equal opportunity to turn bandit himself—it is too late when, he finds himself .dying,, at the hands of him who decided to play the trick first. Yet the intended victim of. the 4k%hwaymen does have a chance, say, in a hundred. But be haa not that one chance ■when'die finds himself 8uff6cttt; r ing in an economic atmosphere that has been de liberately poisoned by the barons of wealth. . - > >• Alone he is helpless. Yet the whole host .of the W < oppressed can do nothing, or will do nothing, so long as they have failed to see that, under the hypnotiz ing phrases "e<|ual oppofitmnitly,?* “initiative,” ‘‘rugged individualism,”1 etc., they have been victim, v ized by practices that, if not criminal, at least have ' no rightful place under a “government of the peo ple, by the people, and for the people.” \ _ The government has "been alert to punlshfhe \hatt ~ _ * who steals from your corn crib or smokehouse,, hut* has uttetty connived at the filching of millions and . I millions from the people as- a- whole by manipula- - tions that vouchsafed no adequate quid-pro-quo r to v them in return . j, - . " At last, a champion of the people has entered the lists. An economic Armageddon seems at hand. Upon Chamtpion Roosevelt’s banner one, may read; Plenty for -the Manses First.” Yonder, o^, the op- , posing banner, you may read: “We Reap Where We Sow Not.” Alas that we see yonder even the bold, and formerly Invincible white knight Lindbergh, accoutred with a quarter of a million dollars stuck: certificate from which he has contemplated extract ing from the, common wealth of his country from $10,000 to $50,000 a year in dividends without one whit of quid-pro-quo! Indeed, the opposing host . is - one of great individual respectability, all morally, jfefc*'' ‘‘--•'iVrLC'•*iilttr -t'i ■’•i1 8».v}$ to rob the people, .provided.fit is aone uuuer coyer of legal forms. ' ' While the array Is on the field of Armageddon, - . I cannot'yet conceive that .this struggle is more than v-\ a preliminary bne. Neither the leader nor the masses. y he champions has conceived the'full iniquities of the party championing the rights of ‘ rugged individual ism.” The leader and those whom he would save _• from the clultehes of ruthless# greed are, themselves. - > still partially hypnotized Ibythe primordial instincts surviving the pre-social age. Not yet are the P?o-; ; ponents of a new deal awarei of all ithe misconcep tions derived from another age, an age when they were logical, and surviving into an age when they cannot direct individual action wLth safety to either the individual or society as a whole. Individualistic Instincts Contradictory >> ■ To Wise Social Practice,s. In a itrue or effective social scheme, the individual ./•: instincts and practices must he subordinated to the social. The slogan of the “Three Mhisketeers, .. . “One for all and all for one,” must be the prevailing ^ slogan in a successful government having as its pro fessed aim equal opportunities. The striking effec- ' tiveness of the social compact among the “Three r Musketeers” would have vanished If there had been any qualifications as to the application of the rio* v> , gan. That compact did not permit helpful co-opernyg|;f| tion on some tasks or amidst one danger 4o.b|||||| counterbalanced or n/Utlified by indiyidual action other times Injurious to^ or destructive of, the other .-A member# of the compact. A social compact; which > > every WbrtWwhile government must be in this en- ^ lightened age, must not permit individualistic prac- ' tices which nullify the terms or purposes of compact itself. .' V ■: '• ■' ’• - •< / Primordial Instincts Most Be Suppressed , >? Or Controlled. • • Insecurity, the. mother of greed, covetousness a;jd the hoarding instinct,' must he replaced by security.; This cannot be done; so long as those instincts are given free rein. One man in ten choosing to lire by the rules of hoof and claw dud unhinderedr. in that mode of life can thwdrfc the efforts of a nation - to secure economic justice, for the masses or an eco nomic equality-based, upon jtenegts rendered the sq*. dal body-or ready to be, rendered it opportunity be . . provided.. - f ' * * s - The provision of this opportunity and the a/wur-: ance of benefit^ proportionate to the . service-ren dened become the business of the govemment--i^ ternalistic though such a government may be called and actually be. In an age when a few peculiarly (Continued On Page 5)
The State’s Voice (Dunn, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
March 1, 1934, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75