I am a proletarian. That is a landless, toolless worker who works four-fifths of his time for a boss in order that I may have the opportunity to work one-fifth of the time for myself. I do not do so for the fun of it, but because I have to. I'd much rather keep the whole product of my labor. But the things with which I produce wealth are the private property of my boss. Without their use I cannot live at all. Even a poor living is better than no living. Hence I turn over to my master four-fifths of the wealth I produce. I do this with joy in my heart, because I must or starve to death.
Now comes Socialism. It promises me the whole cheese through the common ownership of the cheese factory. The whole cheese looks good to my hungry eyes. Therefore, I say, "Socialism is right."
The present owner of the cheese factory begs to differ. The ownership of the cheese factory gives him the whole cheese, minus the one-fifth which is set aside for my maintenance while I make the cheese. The major portion of the cheese looks as good to my beloved boss as it does to me. Socialism endangers this strangle hold. Therefore, he says, "Socialism is wrong."
Any person of ordinary horse sense can see from the above that Socialism is both right and wrong. This may look contradictory to some folks, but it isn't. A thing may be right today and wrong tomorrow. Or it may be right and wrong at the same tome. Or it may look right to some people and wrong to others. So you see there is something wrong about wrong, and right don't seem to be altogether right, or not quite right, or not right at all times or in the eyes of certain people. All this is as clear as mud.
For instance, it is right for a chicken to eat grasshoppers. But the grasshoppers entertain an entirely contrary notion on this subject. It is also right for the early bird to catch the worm. But it is safe to presume that the worm is bitterly opposed to the concept of right harbored by the early bird.
A coyote may also eat chickens without losing caste among his brethren. But judging from the amount of indignant noise arising from the chickencoop this action is bitterly condemned by the fowls.
It is even so among other animals called humans. There was a time when the best people, the pillars of the church and state owned slaves or traded in slaves. Nowadays we say slavery is a wrong. But it was not wrong prior to 1863. And the undesirable citizen who raised his voice against the institution of slavery in those days had a good chance to be hanged by a committee of the leading citizens.
Yes, the world does change, and our own conception of right and wrong changes it. "But," you say, "is there no right or wrong in this sinful world?" Oh, yes, oodles and oodles of it. Whatever is against the strongest class in society is wrong. In other words, "might makes right."
At the present writing my boss belongs to the strongest class. Hence the cheese belongs to him by right — by right of might. It is the only right that has any standing in court — because the courts also belong to the strongest class. The cheese I made is not my cheese. Should I take that cheese, notwithstanding, I would be condemned by law. Morality, the interpretation of religion and law, follows the strongest class in society even as the tail follows the dog. The tail don't wag the dog. It expresses the sentiment of the dog.
Some day the working class will become the strongest class in society. When that day comes my boss will lose the cheese I made. For I will belong to the strongest class.
I am right because I am right.This is the economic interpretation of the actions of men. This is the scientific view of life. It is the true conception of life because it is borne out by the recorded facts of life and by the 6,000 years of known history. Therefore the Socialist who tries to prove the justice of Socialism by a religion or a morality arising out of the institution of a semi-barbarous people is a muddlehead of the first order. The beneficiary of the present system which he seeks to convert with such arguments will laugh at him. Because whenever religion interferes with business we cut out religion. On the other side the victim of the system needs no moral arguments to convince him that four-fifths of the cheese is preferable to one-fifth. What he wants to know is how to get it. Show him, and he's your man! — Exchange.