The Red Conspiracy Part 42

THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST RELIGION IN AMERICA

Much more testimony than has already been given could easily be furnished for proving that the Socialist movement in foreign lands is atheistic and anti-religious, but as sufficient has been given, let us dwell more on the anti-religious activities of the Revolutionists in our own country.

In answer to a possible objection, namely, that the American Socialists should in no way be held responsible for the anti-religious and atheistic teachings of their comrades abroad, the attention of the reader is called to the fact that the Socialist movement is an international one, and that nearly all the Marxian leaders in Europe are considered by the American Socialists as first cla.s.s authorities on Socialism. Moreover the books and writings of these foreign protagonists form a very considerable part of the Socialistic literature of the United States and are considered as standard works on the subject.

But in addition to the fact that the American Socialists thus share the responsibility of their European comrades, the Revolutionists of our own country will now come forward with more than enough testimony to prove that they are just as guilty as their foreign comrades of propagating atheistic and anti-religious doctrines.

Rev. William T. Brown, formerly the pastor of Plymouth Church, Rochester, New York, after becoming a Socialist, wrote the following in the May, 1902, number of "Wilshire's Magazine":

"For myself, I do not recognize any existing church or state as complete in itself or founded by G.o.d. There is absolutely nothing in church or state that cannot be traced to a perfectly natural origin.... Instead of the religious idea that G.o.d breathed into clay the breath of life, and so man came into existence in the image of G.o.d, we know beyond question that man's ancestors were animals, and he is the image of his animal parentage.... Singing hymns, saying prayers, learning catechism, attending the services of a place miscalled a sanctuary will do nothing whatever to effect the ends for which men are striving.... The church will attract its own, and the Socialist cause will draw those who belong to it.

People who are interested in fossils and relics and curios will find a congenial place in the church as will also the ignorant and deluded ma.s.ses."

George D. Herron, who, like William T. Brown, had once been a minister, on becoming a Socialist expressed his atheistic sentiments by writing in the "International Socialist Review," Chicago, August, 1901:

"When the G.o.ds are dead to rise no more, man will begin to live.

After the end of the G.o.ds, when there is nothing else to which we may turn, nothing left outside of ourselves, we shall turn to one another for fellowship, and behold! the heart of all worship is exposed and we have omnipotence in our hands....

"There will be no more priests, no rulers, no judges, when fellowship comes and the G.o.ds are gone. And when there are neither priests, nor rulers, nor judges, there will be no evil on earth, nor none called good, to stand over against others called evil."

John Spargo, a former Socialist of considerable renown in the United States, and until recently very popular with the party, speaking of education in "Socialism, A Summary and Interpretation of Socialist Principles," touches upon the question of parochial schools in the Marxian commonwealth:

"Whether the Socialist regime could tolerate the existence of elementary schools other than its own, such as privately conducted kindergartens and schools, religious schools, and so on, is questionable. Probably not. It would probably not content itself with refusing to permit religious doctrines or ideas to be taught in its schools, but would go farther, and as the natural protector of the child, guard its independence of thought in later life as far as possible by forbidding religious teaching of any kind in schools for children up to a certain age....

"This restriction of religious education to the years of judgment and discretion implies no hostility to religion on the part of the state, but neutrality[16]." ["Socialism, A Summary and Interpretaion[17] of Socialist Principles," by John Spargo, page 238 of 1906 edition.]

"The Call" does not fail to publish among its many poems those that are violently anti-religious. In confirmation of this we shall transcribe several, all of which furnish excellent proofs of the existence of the conspiracy against religion. The first poem that will be quoted appeared in the November 19, 1911, edition, and reads as follows:

"When all the choric peal shall end; That through the fanes hath rung; When the long lauds no more ascend From man's adoring tongue; When overwhelmed are altar, priest and creed; When all the faiths have pa.s.sed; Perhaps from darkening incense freed, G.o.d may emerge at last."

The following poem, ent.i.tled, "To the Religionist," appeared on the same day:

"You bid us spare your vision; Put faith in a life after death, Strive on toward some realm Elysian And heed all that one Book saith.

"You will pray to a power celestial, To direct us in all our ways, Lest we fall to a region b.e.s.t.i.a.l And lose ourselves in its maze.

"You speak of the Crucifixion Of one on Calvary As if his benediction Was a rank monopoly.

"Shall we pray to a power not human For guidance miraculous When the nearest man or woman Will give help, and without that fuss?

"When the glorious future people Have realized our dream, Then the cross upon the steeple No longer shall blaspheme.

"The G.o.dhood of the lowly Their sacrifice unknown; Of the temple once held holy There shall not last one stone."

Only two stanzas of a poem which appeared in "The Call," March 17, 1912, are hereby given:

"The G.o.ds are dead; Dead lies their Heaven, their h.e.l.l.

The G.o.ds are dead, With all their terrors! Well!

"Man now unmakes them, Who made them in his youth; He boldly breakes them With shattering blows of truth."

Editorials and articles attacking religion are of very common occurrence in "The Call." Several ill.u.s.trations will suffice. In the May 1, 1912, edition we read:

"In our combat with the natural forces we have been taught by science to seek the cause and effect not in anything supernatural; we have gotten rid of superst.i.tion[18] and fear of revengeful G.o.ds."

The following short article appeared on November 19, 1911, in the same paper:

"Our exploiters might as well understand now that we have no use for the distorted and mystical figure that they present as Christ, a conservative member of the Property Defence League, a thing neither man nor woman, but a third s.e.x--not understood of us except as a rightful object of suspicion; we have no use for this rant, cant and fustian of his holiness and immaculate qualities. That presentation has always been repellent to us and always will be, no matter how much he may be proclaimed as the friend of the workingman.... Christ, the democrat, the agitator, the revolutionary, the rebel, the bearer of the red flag, yes we can understand that figure."

Under the caption, "The Old Year and The New," an editorial, part of which is here given, was published in "The Call," January 1, 1912:

"Interesting is it to see these clerical reactionists trying to kindle into flame the dying embers and ashes of the religious enthusiasm of past ages, now on the point of flickering out, and marshalling the remnants of fear and ignorance against the inexorable march of humanity and social progress.

"We have no verbal answer to expend upon them. They are not worth it. Well do we know that their show of attack is but a defensive movement. The only answer they need expect from us will be given in the steady continuance of our work. For we can put a thousand workers into the field for their one, and despite all they may do, we will take from them thousands and hundreds of thousands of those who now follow them, and in whose ignorance alone lies their defensive strength. Economic conditions fight on our side. Their capitalist Christ cannot feed the mult.i.tude. We can teach the mult.i.tude how to feed themselves."

"The Proletarian," the Socialist paper of Detroit, in its April, 1919, edition tells us that "Socialism is not a religion, it explains the causes and fallacies underlying all religions."

In the "International Socialist Review," August, 1908, a notable confession is made relative to religion:

"Religion spells death to Socialism, just as Socialism to religion.

The moment Socialism turns into a religion it loses all its progressiveness, it ossifies and turns into a superst.i.tion of fanatics, who never forget and never learn anything. Socialism is essentially, although not apparently, a free-thought movement. The thinking Socialists are all free-thinkers."

In the "International Socialist Review" not only are there many articles and editorials attacking religion, but also many advertis.e.m.e.nts of atheistical and anti-religious books. For instance, in the February, 1912, edition, among the many works advertised on page 512 the following are listed under the heading, "Free-Thought Pamphlets":

"Holy Smoke in Holy Land.

Myth of the Great Deluge.

Revelation Under the Microscope of Evolution.

Chas. Darwin, What He Accomplished.

Jehovah Interviewed.

Church and State--by Jefferson.

Mistakes of Moses--by Ingersoll.

Ingersolia: Gems from R. G. Ingersoll.

Age of Reason--by Thos. Paine.

Ingersoll--44 Lectures.

Ingersoll's Famous Speeches."

In the April, 1912, edition of the "International Socialist Review" the subsequent additions are made to the advertis.e.m.e.nts already mentioned:

"Voltaire.

Confessions of a Nun.

Merry Tales of the Monks.

Secrets of Black Nunnery."

Surely such books as these would not be extensively advertised in the "Review" and in the Socialist papers, nor would money be spent in this way by their publishers, unless the atheistic and anti-religious works found many purchasers among those who inserted a plank in their party platform stating that the Socialist movement was primarily an economic one and was not concerned with matters of religious belief.

The following is part of an editorial taken from the "Comrade," New York, January, 1904, on the death of Herbert Spencer: