Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: July 14, 2025
Much of the horror of socialism comes from a belief that by increasing the functions of government its regulating power over our daily lives will grow into a tyranny. I share this horror when certain socialists begin to propound their schemes. There is a dreadful amount of forcible scrubbing and arranging and pocketing implied in some socialisms.
His nephew, William Henry Channing, alluding to this in a letter to Rev. J. H.. Noyes, author of the "History of American Socialisms," contradicts the statement as follows:
Fabian socialism was the first systematic attempt to meet the fatal absence of administrative schemes in the earlier socialisms. It can scarcely be regarded now as anything but an interesting failure, but a failure that has all the educational value of a first reconnaissance into unexplored territory.
But now they were all coming from their retirement the most active minds, whether the best or not to shout their nostrums and make confusion worse confounded. All sorts of socialisms were in the air, raucously bellowed by would-be reformers. One Yang Chu was yelling universal egoism: "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die."
There are limited socialisms whose repudiation of property affects only the common interests of the community, the land it occupies, the services in which all are interested, the necessary minimum of education, and the sanitary and economic interaction of one person or family group upon another; socialisms which, in fact, come into touch with an intelligent individualism, and which are based on the attempt to ensure equality of opportunity and freedom for complete individual development to every citizen.
"If the present civilization succeeds, it will do so by adopting the methods of some, if not all, of our big corporations of to-day, and thus make of nations, huge Trust socialisms where the individual will hunger no more for freedom because of his having never tasted it.
Nor was ever a better presentation made of the essential program of socialism. It is worth while then, as was said in the preceding chapter, to consider Mr. Bellamy's commonwealth as the most typical and the most carefully constructed of all the ready-made socialisms that have been put forward. The mere machinery of the story can be lightly passed over.
The horrors of the present conflict will be as nothing compared with a struggle between two highly-organised State socialisms, each of which knows that it must either colonise the territory of the other or starve. It is idle to pretend that such a necessity will never arise. Another century of increase in Europe like that of the nineteenth century would bring it very near.
With these Socialisms I have nothing in common. There are a large number of such questions concerning the constitution of the family upon which I retain an open and inquiring mind, and to which I find the answers of the established order, if not always absolutely incorrect, at any rate glaringly incomplete and totally inadequate; but I do not find the answers of these Socialistic Communities in any degree more satisfactory.
"I'd let him and all like him go out into the bush to see how they could get on alone. They'd soon get tired. Men must co-operate to live civilised." "Then Socialism is co-operation?" remarked Ned. "Co-operation as against competition is the main industrial idea of Socialism. But there are two Socialisms.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking