Jesus was an anarchist savior. That's what the Gospels tell us.
Just before He started out on His public life, Jesus went to the
desert. He fasted, and after 40 days he was hungry. At this point the
diabolos, appeared to tempt Him. First he asked Him to turn stone into
bread, then to prove himself in a magic flight, and finally the devil,
diabolos, "divider," offered Him power. Listen carefully to
the words of this last of the three temptations: (Luke 4,6:) "I give
you all power and glory, because I have received them and I give them to
those whom I choose. Adore me and the power will be yours." It is
astonishing what the devil says: I have all power, it has been given to
me, and I am the one to hand it on — submit, and it is yours. Jesus of
course does not submit, and sends the devilcumpower to Hell. Not for a
moment, however, does Jesus contradict the devil. He does not question
that the devil holds all power, nor that this power has been given to
him, nor that he, the devil, gives it to whom he pleases. This is a
point which is easily overlooked. By his silence Jesus recognizes power
that is established as "devil" and defines Himself as The Powerless. He
who cannot accept this view on power cannot look at establishments
through the spectacle of the Gospel. This is what clergy and churches
often have difficulty doing. They are so strongly motivated by the image
of church as a "helping institution" that they are constantly motivated
to hold power, share in it or, at least, influence it.
Ivan Illich
THE PLEA FOR EIGHT HOURS
by Terence V. Powderly, 1890
ONE of the principles of organized labor is to "reduce the hours of
labor to eight per day," and at the present time there is an agitation
going on throughout the United States and England which has for its object the accomplishment of this looked-for result.
All employers of labor claim to be workers; they assert that they have
to toil as wearily as do the men whom they employ. They will tell the
advocate of the short-hour work-day that there is no necessity for a
shortening of the hours of labor, and that a man should be allowed to
work as long as he pleases. That all employers are workers is true, but
there is this difference between them and their employees: the employer
may work one hour or ten as he pleases; the workman must work whether it
pleases him or not. The employer enjoys a profit on each hour of labor
performed by the employee, while the latter has no share in the profit
whatever; he simply receives all that be can wrest from his employer.
Competition obliges the humane employer to adopt the same methods as the
skinflint, or go out of business, and, as a consequence, the lowest
rate of compensation for which men will work is all that he will pay.
Justice seldom enters into the adjustment of wages: necessity is the
standard by which they are regulated.
Previous to 1825 men
worked from sun-up to sun-down, and they saw but little of their homes
on what was then rigidly observed as "the Sabbath." The adornment of the
home gave the head of the family no concern, for he spent but a short
time in the house. He knew but little of the wants of the household
except those that pertained to food; and to the fact that he went forth
for the purpose of supplying the family with food we owe [465] the term
"bread-winner" as applied to the laborer. To be a bread-winner was all
that the workman of the last century aspired to; and yet he grew tired
of the contest, for it brought him but a scanty portion of what be
struggled for. In 1825, the agitation for the establishment of the
ten-hour system began, and it continued until it was officially
recognized by the President of the United States in 1840. Strikes,
contentions, disputes, and, very often, bloodshed, at length brought the
ten-hour system into operation, and with its final adoption the workman
became ambitious of being more than a bread-winner.
The steam
railroad was then courting commercial acquaintance, and in rapid
sequence came the telegraph, the lightning-express train, and the daily
paper, with its record of yesterday's proceedings. Invention took new
life in every department of trade and industry, and we now find
ourselves able to do in a minute what it formerly required hours to
perform. Since 1840 the agencies of production have gained a power and
force that were not deemed possible during the years which rolled
between the dawn of the Christian era and that date. Previous to that
time brain work was not supposed to be entitled to any more
consideration than hand labor, so far as the hours of service were
concerned. Until recent years it was not supposed that the clerk or the
employee of the counting-house should remain at his post a shorter
number of hours than the mechanic or the laborer. What was wanted in
order to allow all men to labor was light, and the light came.
Fewer hours of toil mean more time to read, and after the adoption of
the ten-hour system the workman took more of interest in the press of
the land; he had more time to read; and, that fact once established, it
became a paying investment to advertise in "the papers." The number of
papers began to increase, for the masses had more time to read; having
more time to read, they learned what was going on throughout the world,
and they naturally acquired new tastes and desires. The adornment of the
home became an object with the man who could see his home by daylight,
and the demand for articles of home consumption and adornment increased
very rapidly. The "oldest inhabitant" has only to travel back some fifty
years in memory to see a house with bare floors from cellar to garret,
sawed-off stumps serving as chairs, stone dishes on the table, and
sheepskins for blankets. He will [466] remember that the workman of that
day lived in a log hut, and that he had to stuff the cracks with fresh
mud every fall; that a coat of whitewash was a luxury, and that corned
beef and cabbage were regarded as delicacies. It was very easy to supply
these wants, and had men continued to work on for as many hours as they
were able, they would never have dreamed of improving their condition.
That the condition of the workman has improved wonderfully is true, but
to no one can the credit of this be given save the workman himself. He
alone sought for the means of improvement, and his every step has been
contested by those for whom he toiled, and by others who never gave a
thought to his surroundings. It is true that philosophers and
philanthropists have spoken in favor of the "man who worked," but their
pleadings and writings had no more effect on the minds of the
wealth-getters than has a zephyr on the Eiffel Tower. To look back at
the sanitary condition of the workman's home and surroundings is to
learn that, if he had had to work on the inside of factory walls at that
period, he would have lived but half as long as at the present time. If
the man who lived in a log hut, where "the wind whistled through the
chinks," was obliged to work in the stifling atmosphere of the
present-day factory, he would die of lung trouble in a very short time.
Workshop, means of transportation, dwellings, and every surrounding have
changed, and for the better.
Too many advocates of the
eight-hour day are in ignorance of the vital principle which underlies
the agitation. They argue in this fashion: If the hours of labor are cut
down to eight, the idle men who have flocked to this country will be
employed, and we shall be correspondingly happy. Following that course
of reasoning to its logical conclusion, we should have to cut down the
hours of labor still further in a few years to accommodate the idle
thousands imported to this country by steam and railway companies; and
after the number of the unemployed increased again, we should have to
reduce the hours of labor again and again until the unemployed of Europe
and of Asia had landed, when we should have nothing to do.
On
higher ground does the sincere advocate of the short-hour work-day base
his agitation. The final solution of the work-day problem will come when
the workman becomes a sharer in what he creates. To-day the laborer is
considered by his employer to [467] be no more a factor in the field of
production than the spade which be handles. The laborer has no other
interest in the work he performs than to draw pay for the work done at
the end of the week or month. Workman and employer find their interests
to be identical in that one particular--to get the most out of each
other.
Take an employer who gives work to one hundred men. The
value of their labor we will rate at $2 a day. He pays them an average
of $1 a day each. His profits will equal the total wages paid, and in
twenty years he may retire a wealthy man. How fares it with his workmen?
They remain poor and retire only to the poor-house or the cemetery.
What do the riches of the one represent? Unpaid labor. To labor, then,
belong the vast sums that rich men leave after them to erect poor-houses
and charitable institutions, which would not be necessary if the
workmen were paid what they earned.
We have the Moses Taylor
Hospital in Scranton, to which the miners of this valley will be
admitted upon receiving injuries in the mines. That hospital represents
$300,000 of their own earnings, which by right belongs to them; and yet
they must enter its door as objects of charity because an unjust system
enabled one man to rob them of that sum. Had the miners of this valley
been sharers from the beginning in the earnings of the mines, had they
received a just share of the profits which their labor created, they
would to-day be in a position of independence, and when misfortune
overtook them they would not have to seek admittance, for sweet
charity's sake, within walls every brick of which is cemented in their
own sweat and blood. Had they been sharers in the profits, every hour of
toil performed by them would be an hour of profit also, and they would
find pleasure in working as many hours as they desired. They would work
as they pleased, and would not be driven to it. The incentive to labor
for something more than a master would be there, and each one would be a
part of that which he created. Until such a day as that comes we must
agitate for shorter hours of toil, so that men may have the time to
prepare for the system of the future.
No one now thinks of
requiring the bank clerk to work ten hours, or even eight. His mind
would not stand the strain, and the physical part would also decay. The
work of the future will be scientific in its nature, and will call for
more exercise of the brain than of the hand. Witness the rapidity with
which [468] women are being crowded into the places made vacant by men,
and we realize that it is no longer strength, but skill, that is
required. No man or woman can work as long at an occupation which
requires skill as at one which calls for no exercise of the mental
powers. Turn to statistics, and it will be seen that the mechanic dies
many years in advance of the day-laborer. One exercises the muscles
alone; the other exercises brain and muscle. The double wear ends
existence more quickly. Brain work will soon be required in all
callings, and if for no other than a sanitary reason, the hours of labor
should be reduced to the eight-hour standard.
Men who work
short hours are better educated than those who do not; they have more
time in which to study. A thinking, studious man will learn that
overexertion shortens life, and he will guard against it. Thousands go
to early graves through overwork every year, and until the struggle for
existence is shortened by cutting down the hours of toil, this condition
of affairs will continue.
We see the miners and operators of
the West combining to curtail the production of coal, and we see the
farmers of the West burning corn and grain as fuel. We notice factories
shutting down every now and then, and when we ask questions, we are
told, "These periodical depressions must come every few years." These
periodical depressions need not come every few years, and they would not
come if we had an eight-hour work-day in existance [sic.] and workmen
were educated in the science of government. Capitalism cares but little
how long men work; its rule is grasping, and it drives whom it controls
with pitiless spur. Must we look to Wall Street for reforms of any kind?
Even Wall Street itself will answer "No." Must we look to men whose
every instinct is in the direction of acquiring extra millions for a
relief from "periods of depression"? Must we look to those who control
the currency of the country for a proper system of finance? If we do,
things will grow worse, and in the end we must turn to the intelligence
of the masses for a reform of the evils that are now growing upon us.
How can the masses be educated if they are obliged to work long hours
when they get a chance, and fret because they are idle during "periods
of depression" which give the Anarchist the best of arguments and
increase the number of his converts? [469]
The manufacturer
complains that he must keep his factory running long hours in order to
pay his taxes. He should study the question of taxing land for full
value for use, and know that his improvements should not be taxed out of
his hands. The manufacturer complains that he cannot pay the interest
on borrowed capital unless he works his factory long hours. He should
study the question of finance, and learn that his government, and not
its enemies, should regulate and control the volume of currency, that it
may become a circulating medium, instead of an interest-gathering
machine. He complains of excessive freight charges, and declares that he
must work long hours in order to meet his obligations. Let him unite
with the Knights of Labor and the Farmers' Alliance in demanding that
his government control the avenues of transportation and distribution.
To study how to solve these problems, men must work fewer hours each
day.
Should this much-desired reform be inaugurated by strikes?
is asked. Not necessarily. In a given occupation or trade the employers
and workmen throughout the country should agree on the establishment of
the eight-hour work-day. To institute it by means of a strike in one
part of the country would but place the short-hour employer at the mercy
of his long-hour competitors. To demand the same rate of compensation
for short hours as is now paid would be unjust. To rush the system
through would unsettle affairs; and for that reason Knights of Labor ask
for a gradual reduction of the hours of labor. We believe that, unless
workmen are educated to understand the full and true reasons why their
hours of labor should be reduced, they will not retain what they get;
and for this reason we appeal to their reasoning powers rather than to
their powers of endurance in case of a strike. Employers as well as
workmen will soon realize that the short work-day will be the most
beneficial. In any event its introduction will soon be announced.
__________________________________________________________
Terence
Powderly ( January 22, 1849 - June 24, 1924) was an Irish-American
politician and labor union leader, best-known as head of the Knights of
Labor in the late 1880s. A lawyer, he was elected mayor of Scranton,
Pennsylvania for six years. A Republican, he served as the United States
Commissioner General of immigration in 1897. The Knights of Labor was
the largest American labor organization of the 19th century, but
Powderly was a poor administrator and could barely keep it under
control. His small central office could not supervise or coordinate the
many strikes and other activities sponsored by union locals. Powderly
saw the Knights as an educational tool to uplift the workingman, and he
downplayed strikes.
His influence reportedly led to laws
abolishing alien contract labor in 1895, and establishing labor bureaus
and arbitration boards in many states. The Knights failed to maintain
its large membership after getting the blame for the violence of the
Haymarket Riot of 1886. It was increasingly upstaged by the American
Federation of Labor under Samuel Gompers, which coordinated numerous
specialized unions that appealed to skilled workers instead of the mix
of unskilled semiskilled and skilled workers in the Knights.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_V._Powderly
(He petitioned
for membership in Osiris Lodge No. 26 (now Osiris–Pentalpha Lodge No.
23) in Washington, D.C. He was initiated as an Entered Apprentice on
October 2, 1901; passed to the Degree of Fellowcraft on November 20,
1901; and raised to the Sublime Degree of Master Mason on December 18,
1901. He continued his Masonic involvement in the Washington Scottish
Rite Bodies, where he became a member of Mithras Lodge of Perfection,
Evangelist Chapter of Rose Croix, Robert de Bruce Council of Kadosh, and
Albert Pike Consistory. He received the 32nd Degree on March 30, 1907.
He remained an active Mason until his death in Washington on June 24,
1924.)
http://204.3.136.66/council/journal/aug99/Uzzel.html
I have often been asked how I came to write. The best answer is that I
needed the money. When I started I was 35 and had failed in every
enterprise I had ever attempted.
Edgar Rice Burroughs (September 1, 1875 – March 19, 1950)
(Portrait by Reed Crandall)
All the reasons which made the initiation of physical force evil, make the retaliatory use of physical force a moral imperative.
Ayn Rand
(Art: Batman and The Question by Gabriel Hardman)
THE LEVEL AND THE SQUARE (circa August 1854)
Dr. Rob Morris, LLD, Masonic Poet Laureate 1818-1888
WE MEET UPON THE LEVEL, AND WE PART UPON THE SQUARE,—
What words of precious meaning those words Masonic are!
Come, let us contemplate them; they are worthy of a thought,—
With the highest and the lowest and the rarest they are fraught.
We meet upon the Level, though from every station come —
The King from out his palace and the poor man from his home;
For the one must leave his diadem without the Mason's door,
And the other finds his true respect upon the checkered floor.
We part upon the square, for the world must have its due;
We mingle with its multitude, a cold, unfriendly crew;
But the influence of our gatherings in memory is green,
And we long, upon the level, to renew the happy scene.
There's a World where all are equal,—we are hurrying towards it fast,—
We shall meet upon the level there when the gates of death are past;
We shall stand before the Orient, and our Master will be there,
To try the blocks we offer by His own unerring Square.
We shall meet upon the level there, but never thence depart;
There's a Mansion,— 'tis all ready for each zealous, faithful heart;
There's a Mansion, and a welcome, and a multitude is there,
Who have met upon the level and been tried upon the square.
Let us meet upon the level, then, while laboring patient here,—
Let us meet and let us labor, tho' the labor seem severe;
Already in the western sky the signs bid us prepare
To gather up our working tools and part upon the square.
Hands round, ye faithful Ghibilimites, the bright, fraternal chain;
We part upon the square below, to meet in Heaven again!
O what words of precious meaning those words Masonic are,
WE MEET UPON THE LEVEL, AND WE PART UPON THE SQUARE.
Rob Morris (August 31, 1818, Boston, MA
Died: July 31, 1888) was a prominent American poet and the Poet
Laureate of Freemasonry after Robert Burns. He also created the first
ritual for what was to become the Order of the Eastern Star.
http://www.phoenixmasonry.org/robert_morris_founder_of_oes.htm
(Made a Mason on March 5, 1846, at Oxford Lodge in Mississippi)
Our
work for peace must begin within the private world of each one of us.
To build for man a world without fear, we must be without fear. To build
a world of justice, we must be just. And how can we fight for liberty
if we are not free in our own minds? How can we ask others to sacrifice
if we are not ready to do so?... Only in true surrender to the interest
of all can we reach that strength and independence, that unity of
purpose, that equity of judgment which are necessary if we are to
measure up to our duty to the future, as men of a generation to whom the
chance was given to build in time a world of peace.
Dag Hammarskjöld, in UN Press Release SG/360 (22 December 1953).
(Art by Alé Garza)
