“Too Much Power”

AT A PRESS conference late in January, President Truman, in answering questions concerning the strike situation in America, observed that in his opinion both the industrialists and the labor unions had “too much power.” He then stated that the interests of the public come ahead of the interests of any group, and that it was the business of government to protect the interests of the public. In a few words this means that in the opinion of the President of the United States the government may consider it to be in the public interest to take over industry. A practical application of this point of view is the seizure of the meat packing plants by the government in order that the people may have meat.

This represents a very interesting development of viewpoint since the days of the French Revolution. At that time the Queen of France, the representative head of what constitutional government remained, when told that her subjects were demanding bread, gave out word that if they didn’t have bread they could eat cake. The operation of the same principle in connection with the growing meat shortage due to the meat packers’ strike would have meant an indifferent statement by the President advising the nation that if no meat were available the people should eat chicken, or turkey. Instead of that, he took over the packing plants and gave the people meat.

True, the seizure of industry by the government does not guarantee the protection of public interests. This has been made evident in the case of the strike of tugboat operators in New York harbor. These men refused to work even for the government until their demands were satisfied. Consequently, New York City was to suffer by serious shortages of fuel and food. But at least the government is not oblivious to the needs of the people, even though the best remedies are not always—perhaps seldom—used.

Yes, times have changed—at least in some parts of the world—and in America the executive branch of the government seems desirous of protecting the interests of the public in so far as it is possible to do so. Obviously, however, the government may not always use the wisest methods, nor be able to control the baffling problems arising out of the contests between the “giants” of “big business” on the one hand and “big labor” on the other. The President’s observation that both sides have “too much power” might indicate that the time will come when the government will be powerless to act on behalf of the public as it should.

What a colossal war it is that is now being waged between capital and labor! The nature of most governments prior to the first World War was such that they would have been unequivocally on the side of capital in this great struggle. But the slow-working, yet irresistible social and industrial revolution that has been going on behind the scenes of two global wars, and at the same time augmented by them, has changed governmental policy in most countries. It is rare now for any government, no matter in what part of the world it may be located, openly to take a stand against labor!

Russia is Communist; England is Socialist; the strongest single party in France is Communist, the next in strength is Socialist, the weakest of the three major parties being the only one that could be construed as capitalist; and the “New Deal” government of the United States is “left of center.” These four powers are at the present time controlling almost all the rest of the world. With the exception of South American countries (if these are exceptions), the “big four” governments just mentioned are about the only stabilized independent ones in the world. The other countries are either occupied by the military forces of the “big four” or else quite directly within the orbit of their influence.

So the result is that virtually nowhere is labor openly opposed by government to the advantage of capital. The situation might well have been quite different. Labor, in making its demands on capital, might have been ignored by governments, or the governments might have sided with capital. In such an event a violent uprising of labor could, have occurred, overthrowing governments. This too would have been revolution. But as it is, in most cases government has either professedly sided with labor, or has endeavored to take a middle-of-the-road course.

But regardless of the exact form these class struggles are taking, we are faced with the inescapable fact that the social and industrial scheme of things is undergoing revolutionary changes. All the various measures for the protection of labor, such as unemployment insurance, old age pensions, minimum wage laws, the forty-hour week, etc., are representative of this change. And the end is not yet!

The flurry of strikes in the United States and Canada in recent months is probably prompted in some measure by the knowledge that during the war years many new labor-saving inventions were perfected, and that their use now will tend to make the industrialists more independent of man power. This means that in the long run there will be less work for fewer people, hence the need of higher wages for the fewer hours worked. This, of course, is only one of the factors involved less, it isn’t difficult to see that if selfish interests of those in control of industry were not interfered with at all, there could come a time when the use of machinery would bring tragedy to the laboring classes.

At the same time, though, there is an equalizing factor in all this. Invention has reached the point now where the vested interests of the industrialists are also at stake. For example, atomic energy, it is claimed, could even now be employed to displace much of the mining interests of the country. “Furnaces” for the use of uranium can now be constructed which would supply power for ships, industrial plants, public service utilities, and central heating plants for groups of buildings. The minimum weight of material that could now be used in. one of these installations is fifty tons. This means that they cannot yet be used to power automobiles or private homes; but would only be suitable for use as noted above.

Uranium is now available, it is claimed, at three dollars a pound, and one pound will produce as much heat as a thousand tons of coal. Yes, there are changes coming—changes that will affect still more drastically than ever the entire fabric of society. And these changes will touch the lives of the rich and poor alike. They will undoubtedly lead to a tighter governmental control of economy, a taking away from both capital and labor some of their present power.

But even this will not be a genuine solution. At the best, any measure which may be adopted to cope with the growing problems of human relationships posed by science and invention will not be adequate to deal with the situations to the satisfaction of all, nor even of the majority. In the over-all picture we may expect increasing dissatisfaction, leading eventually to complete chaos. Out of this dilemma divine intervention will rescue the people through the establishment of the kingdom of Christ. This will be the “desire of all nations.”—Haggai 2:7

Religious Liberty Extended

WHETHER opposed to the teachings of the sect calling themselves “Jehovah’s witnesses” or in favor of their teachings, those who appreciate the liberty granted in this country to all religions will be glad that through the aggressiveness of this group, this liberty has recently been made officially even more comprehensive than heretofore. Two cases have been brought before the Supreme Court, in each of which the court decided by a 5-to-3 vote that property rights are subordinate to freedom of religion. In one case the court decided that a company-owned town in the state of Alabama could not legally prevent one of the “witnesses” from distributing religious literature. The other case involved the right to distribute religious literature on the property of a federal housing project in Texas.

The minority of the court claimed that it was a “novel constitutional doctrine” that “the privilege of religious exercise” could “extend by law … beyond public places or to private places without the assent of the owner.” But the majority opinion, written by Justice Black and concurred in by Justices Murphy, Rutledge, Douglas, and Frankfurter, declared that “when we balance the constitutional rights of owners of property against those of the people to enjoy the freedom of religion, as we must here, we remain mindful of the fact that the latter occupy a preferred position.”

The Christian Century, commenting on this decision, declares that it is “a verdict which provides the broadest legal safeguards for the activities of a minority religious body ever laid down in this or any other country.” This is doubtless true, and it is refreshing to note the satisfaction expressed by The Christian Century over the triumph of a group of religionists with which they have little, if anything, in common.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of “Jehovah’s witnesses” is even more gratifying when we realize that it goes far beyond the conception of liberty practiced by some groups which it protects. Powerful religious groups, and sometimes minority groups, advocate a religious “liberty” which, when analyzed, or seen in practice, means the right of their own group to practice and promote their religious beliefs, while denying a similar right to others. This sort of religious liberty has existed in Italy, Spain, and South America for a long time. It existed all over Europe during the Dark Ages. But the Founding Fathers of America were not, satisfied with such a conception of religious liberty, and’ out of this dissatisfaction grew the religious liberty guarantee which is written into the Constitution of the United States.

Under the guidance of majority rulings of the Supreme Court the American version of religious liberty is now granting a minority group the right to preach that all “religion is a racket,” and is “of the devil”; that the United States Government itself, including the Constitution, is a part of “Satan’s Organization”; that “God’s Theocratic Government,” outside of which there is no divine favor and no hope of life, is represented on earth exclusively by “Jehovah’s witnesses” to whom has been given the Creator’s sanction to condemn all and sundry who do not accept their teachings and work for their organization.

There is no question, therefore, but that the Supreme Court really believes in religious liberty; and it would seem that unless there are radical changes in the governmental setup of this country there is no danger of that liberty being curtailed. It is very easy, however, to get a distorted view of what religious liberty demands. The governing body of a Methodist church, for example, is under no obligation to allow a minister of some other denomination to preach in the Methodist pulpit.

The privately owned National Broadcasting Company is under no obligation to permit any particular religious group to use its broadcasting stations, hence it is not against the principle of Christian liberty to refuse the use of its stations to any group desiring to utilize them. A religious magazine cannot properly be accused of being opposed to Christian liberty for not publishing articles which are out of harmony with its own teachings.

Those who have definite religious beliefs should uphold those beliefs. It is this that the Constitution of the United States gives them the right to do, and they should not be accused of intolerance for refusing to assist in the promotion of that which they do not believe. These are all points which we should keep in mind in our appraisal and practice of Christian liberty.

Religious liberty is a blessed boon in this world of religious confusion, but in God’s new world of tomorrow this is one “freedom” which will not be allowed. Christ will not permit the people to be deceived by false religions of any kind. At that time there will be but one religion; world-wide. In Zephaniah 3:9 it is referred to as a “pure language,” and we are told that under the enlightening and soul-stirring influence of this message of pure truth, the people will “all call upon the name of the Lord to serve him with one consent.”

But in this case there will be no doubt as to what constitutes the truth, the true religion. Freedom of religion is necessary now because of the babel of conflicting theories abroad in the earth. But that will be changed once Christ’s kingdom is in operation. Satan, the great deceiver, will then be bound. The knowledge of God’s glory will fill the earth. God’s blessings will be manifested everywhere. The way will be made so plain that none will need to err. Because of these changes the people with one accord will say, “Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, … we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation.” (Isa. 25:9) They will not want liberty to worship any other god because then their blinded eyes will be opened to see the one and only “TRUE GOD” in all his glory.

World Famine

THE shortage of material for making $10,000 wardrobes for newly appointed cardinals of the Catholic Church didn’t seem to be so tragically serious when President Truman announced the necessity for conserving food supplies in the United States in order to send larger quantities to help feed the starving millions in Europe and Asia. Famine conditions in the war-stricken countries are truly serious; and as many observers view the situation, these conditions are effectively hindering genuine progress toward a permanent peace.

We get some idea of the seriousness of the world’s food problem by noting the small number of food calories available for the people in occupied countries. In the American section of Germany the average consumer’s ration is 1,350 calories. In. Berlin the people are reported to be getting about 900 calories, and in Vienna, 850. In the French occupation zone the ration to Germans is 900 to 1,000 calories a day. In Poland, Finland and France the food supply is also far below normal. The same is true in Japan and China. And even in England food rationing has again been tightened.

These calorie figures are meaningful when we realize that they are even below what is considered a semi-starvation diet. For scientific purposes a group of conscientious objectors were recently subjected to such a diet. This was at the University of Minnesota’s laboratory of physiological hygiene. The daily average diet allowed in the test was never above 1,750 calories and sometimes went down to 1,650.

These figures, it will be noted, are well above those available for the populations of Europe and Asia, yet these scientific tests demonstrated that human beings cannot continue to live even on this number of calories. Moreover, after six months of such feeding the number of calories was raised to 2,250 a day, but the “subjects” failed to gain weight. This indicates the amount of gain that will have to be made in world food supplies before the teeming millions of Europe and Asia will even begin to return to normal health of mind and body.

Scientific tests, as well as general observation, reveal that people whose bodies are starving for food take little or no interest in other subjects. They are not concerned about bickering of the United Nations. Establishing war guilt at Nuremberg holds no interest for them. Dictatorship and democracy are alike to such, as long as they are hungry and their bodies are wasting away for need of food. A starvation society is being produced, with a starvation mentality and starvation values.

As an illustration of the attitude of the starving, we have reports of American soldiers who suffered in German prison camps. It is said that magazines furnished by the Red Cross went unread in spite of the fact that time often weighed heavily on the prisoners’ hands. But, say the reports, food advertisements in these magazines were worn, studied over, and dog-eared, as though the men vainly tried to fill their stomachs by reading about food.

To suffer from starvation is in itself serious enough, but in addition to this, millions of the starving are without homes and do not have sufficient clothing to keep them warm. Conditions of this sort have previously been experienced locally in smaller areas, but never before has anything like the present suffering of the people prevailed at one time in such a large part of the earth. Truly, from this standpoint as well as from others, it is a “time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation.”—Dan. 12:1

And the only solution to this, as well as to the other problems of the world, is the establishment of God’s kingdom. A beautiful and reassuring promise of that kingdom is given us in Isaiah 25:6-9. In this scripture the kingdom is promised under the symbol of a “mountain,” and the Lord declares that “in this mountain” he “will make unto all people a feast of fat things.” This feast will include the material needs of the people, as well as their instruction in righteousness. What a glorious hope! Let us continue to pray for that kingdom!

| Home Page | Table of Contents |