larly as well as horizontally. The claim that interests unite the wage earners alone and apart from all others, leads to the most treacherous morass through which they stagger to their goal. Labor has depths of interests that are in common, but far greater depths of interest that are human and all-inclusive.
Socialism has half learned this lesson. Syndicalism apparently has it yet to learn. From the beginnings, Socialism has had its spasms of working-class exclusiveness, but its strength and progress can be definitely marked by its hospitable working fellowship with men of other and larger training or at least different training. Syndicalism if it lives can have no other history.[1]
This sharpening of antagonisms leads not only to warfare against "intellectuals but just as inevitably to warfare of the unskilled against the more skilled worker thus bringing on the conflict within the wage-earning group.
In ominous words with his italics Mr. Walling writes:[2]
- ↑ The following is a recent "field note."
"St. Louis Industrialists have organized branches 'prohibiting lawyers, preachers and professional parasites and grafters from membership.' We believe there are several such branches, but Branch 1 will not accept a member who is not industrially employed. Branch 2 is non-dues paying. Evidently these comrades want to make it as easy as possible for actual workers to join. The purpose of these Industrialist Branches is to teach Socialism and industrial organization at one and the same time. Branch 1 does not use dues stamps."
- ↑ New Review, Jan. 18, 1912.
