AApril 14 1912
The Boston Globe, Boston, Massachusetts, Sunday, April 14, 1912
GRANDSON OF LONGFELLOW
Edmund T. Dana, Whose Other Grandfather Wrote “Two Years Before the Mast,” Is a Keen Socialist.
HIS ENGAGING IDEAS OF SOCIALISM.
SEVERAL of the professors at Wellesley College are Socialists, and at Harvard University the grandson of Charles W. Eliot, president emeritus, and Edmund T. Dana, grandson of the poet Longfellow and of Richard H. Dana, the author of “Two Years Before the Mast,” are among the more prominent of the converts to that party.
Edmund T. Dana is widely known as a former Harvard athlete and in the recent election in Cambridge, as a candidate for assessor, he received the largest vote cast for any Socialist candidate, and the largest probably ever cast in that city for a man of the Socialist party.
He is the son of Richard H. Dana, prominent in reform movements and especially in civil service reform affairs. He was graduated from Harvard University with the class of 1909 with the degree of AB and the following year secured the degree of AM. This year it is expected he will receive his degree of doctor of philosophy.
During his career at Harvard University he played outfield in the Varsity baseball team for three seasons, he played on the Varsity tennis team for one year, in his class football team for three seasons, and for the same period was a member of his class basketball team. He captained his class relay team for three years and also captained his class chess team for one year.
He is a member of the Institute of 1770, the D. K. E.. Digamma Club, Hasty Pudding Club, and the Round Table. He was president of the Boston Chapter of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society this year, but was compelled to resign that office because of his college work. He is engaged and is to wed Miss Jessie Holliday, an English artist, this coming June.
When a Globe reporter called upon Mr. Dana at his home, 113 Brattle st. Cambridge, and asked him to tell Globe readers why he became a Socialist, the young scholar smiled gleefully and answered. “Why, I could write a whole book, several of them, on that subject! It would take time to tell you all my reasons.”
When asked to give at least a few of his reasons, he settled back comfortably in a chair and said: “The reason why I became a Socialist is very simple. I became a Socialist because I learned from unprejudiced study what Socialism really meant. There are thousands and thousands in America today who would likewise be Socialists if they understood.
“But the mass of the people are ‘dead ones’ and accept the popular notions based on antiquated misunderstandings as sufficient knowledge of Socialism. There are a surprising number who still think that Socialism means ‘dividing up,’ ‘free love,’ ‘breaking up the home,’ and a lot of other nonsense. Those who are not ‘up’ on Socialism are ‘down’ on it.
“In the first place I studied Socialism because I thought that every one ought to understand the movements of their own time. Even such a conservative as President Taft says that Socialism is the next great issue before the American people.
“Only the few wide-awake people really understand what Socialism means. The mass of the people have never understood the big movement of their own times. The Romans had just as crude misconceptions of the teachings of the early Christians as the people of today have of the Socialists. Before the French Revolution the educated Frenchmen were utterly asleep as to what was happening. Wanting to be awake as to what is actually going on in the world of our age, I went to Socialist lectures, read such books, and discussed with Socialists.
Studied With Open Mind.
“Having studied physiology, I realized the enormous extent to which our thoughts are determined by the accident of birth and environment and the assumptions of those around us. Having studied history I saw that every new idea in the world had been scoffed at as ridiculous at its first appearance. I could see no reason why the same thing was not in all probability going on today!
“It occurred to me that the same type of man who condemned Socialism today might he the same type who condemned Christianity in the first century, who scoffed at the notion that the earth, moved around the sun in the 16th century, and was ridiculed, the antislavery movement in the first half of the 19th century. In short, when I started to study Socialism, I did so with an open mind.
“I was always one of those who believe that the world is not yet finished! Why, civilization—real civilization has not yet begun! The conservatives of every age have thought that their age was final. To the cannibal, cannibalism seems the natural thing. To the feudal baron it was evident that feudalism would last forever. The slave owners thought slavery was the final form of civilization. Today capitalists of the conservative class, believe that capitalism is the ultimate form of society. Every great step forward in civilization or science has been called impossible.
“I became a radical because I saw that the conservatives failed to learn from the past experience of the race failed to understand that the present is of evolution. Many of the men whom I today we regard as heroes and to whom we build statues, were ridiculed and scoffed at by the majority of their time as wild radicals and Utopian dreamers.
“In my studies I learned that the begetting and upbringing of future citizens of the world, and the production and distribution of wealth are the two chief aspects of social life, and of the utmost importance to humanity. The Socialist says that these two things should therefore be controlled by humanity for the welfare of the race, instead of being left in a planless, wasteful way to individual caprice, as at present. This sounded to me like plain common sense.
“It seemed utterly absurd to me that millions of children should be brought up under frightful unhygienic and immoral conditions when, we have enough scientific knowledge to prevent enormous quantities of the resulting diseases and immoralities, if we would only apply it.
“In regard to the production and distribution of wealth. I found the Socialists believed that these should be controlled by the people for public service, instead of by conflicting individuals for private gain. This would mean the public ownership of land and the chief means of production. The heart of the question is, are the trusts and business interests going to control the people through the Government, or are the people going to control the trusts and business interests through the Government? The latter is what the Socialists desire.
“I became a Socialist because I became convinced that the enormous amount of ignorance, suffering, vice, injustice and squalor, that exists at present, is not an unavoidable curse; but is largely due to the defects of the social system built up by man.
Organized Team Play.
“I have played enough football.” said Mr. Dana with his engaging smile, “to understand the incomparable superiority of organized team-play over haphazard individual effort. I realized that the success of society as of a football team depends on team-play or organized cooperation! There is wanting in society today a sufficiency of constructive design. We have as a social system today the most aimless and wasteful plutocracy that ever encumbered the destinies of mankind.
“We have a state in which the mass of the population is growing up under conditions physically, mentally and morally deteriorating; a state in which not one-half of the potential human beings reach the mature age of 5 years; a state in which almost three-quarters of the National income is given up to expenses connected with that wholesale murder, called war. Such a state the Socialist hardly looks upon as a social system at all, but regards as a mere preliminary. higgledy-piggledy aggregation of human beings, out of which a really civilized society must be developed! The Socialist finds the world now planless and drifting and earnestly propounds a scheme of better order, more constructive design, more organized cooperation.
“I became a Socialist when 1 understood how the present system of capitalism works. By capitalism I mean the economic system in which land and the other chief means of production are owned by individuals and not by the people as a whole.
“Men who had profited by capitalism told me that Socialism worked well in theory, but wouldn't work in practice. Even at that I thought it 'had it over' capitalism, for I saw that capitalism worked well neither in theory nor practice.
“Society is divided into two classes, those who own land and capital (the means of production, and those who work for land and capital to produce wealth. The chief income of the first class is rent and interest, which they take from the wealth produced by the workers in return for letting them use their land and capital. The workers produce all the wealth and their chief income is wages, which is that part of the wealth they have produced which is given back to them, so as to induce them to go on working.
“The result of this is that competition, both among the workers and among the capitalists, forces wages down as far as possible. I disapproved of this system, because I disapprove of slavery. What essential difference does it make whether you give a man enough money to buy himself food and clothing and shelter for producing wealth for you, or whether you give him food, clothing and shelter for doing the same thing? In the first place you have capitalism or wage slavery;in the second chattel slavery. The former is better in many ways, but it does not mean real freedom.
“Whether the force of chains and whips makes men produce wealth which is taken by those who own the bodies with which they work; or whether the force of hunger and cold makes them produce wealth which is taken by those who own the tools with which they work, makes no essential difference. The first is a cruder, the second a more subtle form of slavery.
“Interest is earned, I grant that. But this in no way proves that capitalism is better system than Socialism. I fail to see that it would not be better to have the people collectively own the means of production so that they can work for themselves and not for a group of capitalists.
For Private Profit.
“Is it not utterly absurd to have masses of people looking for work, in dire need of coal, and quantities of coal waiting to be mined: and yet the unemployed can't be put to work mining coal for the needy! Why? Because the coal mines are owned by private individuals and run for private profit and not for public service! The owners of coal mines can make more profit by selling a less quantity of coal at a higher price than by selling a greater quantity at a lower price.
“Another thing which turned me to Socialism was the desire to get rid of the class war between labor and capital. It can't be good for humanity to be split up into these two antagonistic classes: it makes a real democracy, a real brotherhood of man impossible. In this struggle, I must say that I sympathize with the working class because they are suffering from enormous injustice.
“I became a Socialist because when I had learned what it was the objections brought against it seemed to me to be absolutely childish and futile. I remember reading an article by Roosevelt against Socialism two or three years ago. This was the finishing touch in my conversion. For of all the complete failures to grasp the meaning of a movement, and of all the absurd misunderstandings and petty misrepresentations, by a man of experience and intelligence, that article takes the biscuit. From beginning to end he did not quote a single recognized Socialist leader.
“Present social conditions are the result of two factors, namely, the present social system and human nature. To better conditions you must change one of these two factors. If you can't change human nature you must evidently change the social system, which is precisely what the Socialists advocate. It seems to me that every other proposed remedy, except Socialism, relies entirely on a change in human nature.
“I became a Socialist because the chief argument against Socialism struck me as utter rot. It is that under Socialism there would be no incentive for productive labor. I could not see why paying people in proportion to the amount of useful work they did would destroy the incentive to do useful work. Why should there be less incentive where no one would get paid who did not work?
“I became a Socialist when I saw the great danger of the so-called 'conservative' policy. It is the conservatives in all ages who are the cause of bloody revolutions and violent upheavals, by not being awake to the conditions of their times, and so allowing the discontent to increase beyond all human endurance. The best remedy for discontent is justice. The frightful French Revolution was brought about by the conservatives and half-hearted reforms of the statesmen of the aristocracy.
“That Socialism must come step by step. I realize, but I hope we can make those steps come as quickly as possible, so as to avoid violence which threatens if they come too slowly.
“ is claimed that under Socialism it would be very hard to get anyone to do the dirty work. That shows up capitalist philosophy so splendidly that it is delicious. Of course it would be difficult under Socialism to get anyone to do the dirty work. It would have to be highly paid. Instead of being an objection against Socialism, however, this is one of the best arguments in its favor, to all right-thinking persons.
“I became a Socialist because I understood that Socialism is more than a mere economic theory or political program that it is a great moral and intellectual movement. It presents an opportunity for society to arise and achieve; to find itself, and develop an organized cooperation, which shall enable mankind to really fulfill itself.
“Only to the solid-ivory heads of those that think the world is finished does Socialism seem ridiculous. That Socialism is coming there is no doubt. The only question is how soon, how successfully, and in what manner.
“After studying the movement I became convinced that Socialism is without exception the most significant and hopeful movement the world has ever known. It has developed from its crude Utopian beginnings to a scientific and practical form. It is an inspiring movement, but it is not infallible. Many Socialists are fools and none—can you believe it—make no mistakes. This simply means that it is a practical human movement and not merely a Utopian dream.”
June 18 1912
The Democratic Banner, Mount Vernon, Ohio, Tuesday, June 18, 1912
WEDDING ON SOCIALIST LINES
Cambridge, Mass., June 15—A simple ceremony befitting the Socialist views of the contracting parties today united Edmund T. Dana, a grandson of the poet Longfellow, and Miss Jessie Holliday, a well known English portrait painter. A Justice of the peace officiated at the wedding, which took place at the home of the bridegroom's parents, Mr. and Mrs. Richard Henry Dana.
