more wicked, even more destructive to national welfare, than sectional,
race, or religious animosity."

Class animosity in the political world, President Roosevelt maintains, is
wicked. But class animosity in the political world is the preachment of
the revolutionists. "Let the class wars in the industrial world
continue," they say, "but extend the class war to the political world."
As their leader, Eugene V. Debs says: "So far as this struggle is
concerned, there is no good capitalist and no bad working-man. Every
capitalist is your enemy and every working-man is your friend."

Here is class animosity in the political world with a vengeance. And
here is revolution. In 1888 there were only 2,000 revolutionists of this
type in the United States; in 1900 there were 127,000 revolutionists; in
1904, 435,000 revolutionists. Wickedness of the President Roosevelt
definition evidently flourishes and increases in the United States.
Quite so, for it is the revolution that flourishes and increases.

Here and there a member of the capitalist class catches a clear glimpse
of the revolution, and raises a warning cry. But his class does not
heed. President Eliot of Harvard raised such a cry:

"I am forced to believe there is a present danger of socialism never
before so imminent in America in so dangerous a form, because never
before imminent in so well organized a form. The danger lies in the
obtaining control of the trades-unions by the socialists." And the
capitalist employers, instead of giving heed to the warnings, are
perfecting their strike-breaking organization and combining more strongly
than ever for a general assault upon that dearest of all things to the
trades-unions--the closed shop. In so far as this assault succeeds, by
just that much will the capitalist class shorten its lease of life. It
is the old, old story, over again and over again. The drunken drones
still cluster greedily about the honey vats.

Possibly one of the most amusing spectacles of to-day is the attitude of
the American press toward the revolution. It is also a pathetic
spectacle. It compels the onlooker to be aware of a distinct loss of
pride in his species. Dogmatic utterance from the mouth of ignorance may
make gods laugh, but it should make men weep. And the American editors
(in the general instance) are so impressive about it! The old
"divide-up," "men-are-_not_-born-free-and-equal," propositions are
enunciated gravely and s