into black and white, sheep and goats, God and Devil, Heaven and Hell than in this philosophy.
We are offered here a conception of economic relations which necessarily raises impossible questions and still more impossible "solutions."
The disciplined and soberest element in the socialist movement, as well as in the older trade unions, already sets problems and presses them for solution, which will tax to the limit all the strength and intelligence at our command. Trade unions, for example, are generally thought to be ridiculous in assuming some sort of "right to the job" that has been deliberately abandoned in a strike. The absurdity of this "right" is so clear in the case of the individual who leaves his employer, that we think it safe to apply the principle to collective action. Yet recent years have shown in several countries that mass-action in strikes may assume proportions and at the same time get strategic control over the sources of social safety, that raise problems on which the individual instance throws no ray of light.
This illustration shows by comparison, the intrepid lengths to which I. W. W. claims are pressed. "Of course the job is ours! Whose is it if not ours?" says one of them. "It is ours as much when we are out as when we are in."
But this is simplicity itself compared to the next step. Not only does the job belong to them, but the tools, machinery, mill and industry itself. "All these are ours because we laborers made them." Scores of times I have heard this preached with placid innocence, the depths of which no doubting appeal to the speaker could in the least disturb.
