Online Store Directory
Spiritual Meditations and Exercises
Who We Are and What We Teach
Brotherhood of Light Lessons: Course Books on Astrology, Alchemy and Tarot
Calendar of Activities
Astrological Sunday Services
Church of Light TV
Serial Lesson 166
From Course XVII, Cosmic Alchemy, Chapter 3
Original Copyright 1946, Elbert Benjamine (a.k.a. C. C. Zain)
Copyright 2012, The Church of Light
Subheadings: Capable Leaders Needed Dictatorship and Aristocracy Socialism or Private Enterprise Every Nation, Every Group and Every Individual Should Get a Square Deal
Birth Charts: John Nance Garner Chart Shirley Temple Chart
BECAUSE all too often politics has been used by the unscrupulous to acquire advantages for special privilege at the expense of public welfare, it has gained for itself, in the minds of many, a noxious odor. Yet this is merely one more example of the principle—exemplified by aviation, and still more recently and forcefully by atomic fission—that anything which can be used for good can also be used or evil.
Cosmic alchemists must be realistic, willing to face facts without being influenced by popular prejudice. And the fact concerning important changes in the social structure, by which people can be benefited, is that the only way they can be brought to pass is through politics. Under a democracy, those elected to office are supposed to enact legislation that will carry out the desires of the people. If they pass laws disapproved by the people, it is likely they will not be returned to office at the next election. But even in a dictatorship, the dictator, to remain in power, must be able to sell his ideas to his immediate henchmen, and if he is to be successful in any really large enterprise he must have the willing support also of a large portion of the people.
It is the desire of the cosmic alchemist that all the people of the world shall make as great intellectual and spiritual progress as possible, and for reasons briefly stated in Chapter 1 (Serial Lesson 164) he believes this can be accomplished only by providing freedom from want, freedom from fear, freedom of expression and freedom of worship to all the people of the world.
These freedoms, or any one of them, can only be gained by the people of the world exerting sufficient political pressure upon their leaders to cause them to strive to devise means to attain them.
Already, in the two preceding chapters (Serial Lessons 164 and 165), it has been shown that only through proper organization can poverty and war be abolished. And such organization is possible only under governments which permit it. That is, they are dependent upon politics.
The fear of want and the fear of war are not the only fears harbored by man. There is the fear of death, the fear of disease, the fear of failure, and many other fears. Nor can there be freedom from fear among a people who are persecuted because they have different religious views than those advocated by the state. And the only manner in which man can be freed from these other fears is through adequate knowledge and freedom to govern his actions by this knowledge.
When he understands after-death conditions, he should no longer fear death. When he understands how to protect himself from disease, and gains the viewpoint of the spiritual alchemist relative to it and other disagreeable experiences, he will no longer fear them. But to gain the knowledge which will thus banish fear, he must have access to the facts. And this he can have only where there is freedom of expression and freedom of worship.
From the standpoint of the cosmic alchemist the best kind of government for a people is one that gives no undue advantage to any group or class, but which affords the greatest opportunity for every individual to develop his highest talents, and which affords him an incentive to use these talents in a manner that will benefit others as well as himself.
As any astrologer quickly can demonstrate, people are not born equal in the sense that they have equal natural aptitudes which can be developed into abilities. But all should be given the opportunity to develop into abilities such natural aptitudes as their charts of birth show they do have. Regardless of race, sex, creed or color, people should be given equal opportunity to work, equal pay for doing the same work, equal political opportunities, equal educational opportunities, equal social opportunities and equal recreational opportunities.
But they cannot have such equal opportunities if they permit the form of government under which they live to be selected for them by some hereditary strain, by some special privilege group, or in any other manner than through self-determination. And even when there is self-determination there are always individuals seeking special privileges and always groups striving to gain unfair advantage over other groups.
Here in democratic America, for instance, groups which largely submerge their selfish interests in time of war in the all-out struggle for national victory, in time of peace work almost exclusively for their own advantage with little regard for the effect upon other groups or upon the nation. Many of these groups subsidize press publicity and maintain political lobbies in the effort to gain the advantages they desire. Other groups work as energetically to thwart these efforts and instead gain advantages for themselves.
Agriculture works vigorously for high prices for agricultural products, and vigorously opposes high prices for the products of industry; while industry works for high prices for industrial products and low prices for the products of agriculture.
The labor unions struggle continually for full employment and to raise wages; while organized capital seeks a condition where enough people are unemployed that it can always hire help and force wages down.
Those on the public payroll work for higher taxes, so that money may be available to enable them to retain their jobs; while the general public works to have taxes, which they must pay, lowered. And states compete greedily for government appropriations which will benefit themselves at the expense of the tax payers of all the states; and cities and counties strive to grab as great a share as possible of the available tax money.
The movies organize to find means of drawing patronage that otherwise would spend their money on sports or other forms of entertainment; and other types of entertainment form groups to draw trade from the movies.
These groups too often ignore the public welfare and exert political pressure to get legislation passed that benefits themselves at the expense of the nation. In other words, they enter that class of individuals which we term special privilege. And special privilege means that others are deprived of the equal opportunities which are essential for the greatest intellectual and spiritual progress of the people of the world.
To correct or prevent the injustices of special privilege, people must have the opportunity to select their leaders and to bring pressure to bear to get just laws made. But this opportunity alone suffices little until a people are educated enough properly to reason correctly from facts, and have access to all the relevant facts.
It has often been pointed out that the backward peoples of the world are not yet ready for self-government. These peoples, it is urged, are so ignorant of what kind of government is good for them that they can readily be induced to place in power individuals who would rob and enslave them. And it is undoubtedly true that having had little access to facts, and no experience in self-government, they would make mistakes. But Germany was not considered a backward nation when it was robbed and enslaved by Hitler’s cunning propaganda, nor was Italy considered a backward nation when Mussolini was given power of life and death over its people.
The United States was not considered a backward nation when in 1943 it permitted two special privilege groups—the American Astronomical Society and the American Society of Magicians—to get astrological broadcasts ruled off the air. Nor when, as at present, the big newspapers and magazines are either owned, subsidized, or otherwise largely under the control of big corporations which are interested in suppressing or distorting facts which if widely known would prevent them making huge profits.
Yet if self-determination is to result in proper benefits to the people who exercise it, the people, whether of a backward nation or a progressive nation, must have access to as many facts as possible relative to what will give them the most opportunities, and, instead of being led into slavery or poverty by some demagogue or some self-seeking group, must have the intelligence to discern inversive propaganda and to recognize and work for conditions which will really benefit them.
Capable Leaders Needed
In the attainment of these benefits they should enlist the services of capable leaders. Government should be managed, not by individuals who muddle even their own small affairs, but by the best possible ability obtainable. For that matter, the fact may as well be faced that under any form of government that has existed in the past or is discernible in the future, the many are always governed by the few. So long as there are those with more energy, intelligence and ambition than their fellows, these will find some means by which to direct the destinies of other people. The ability of the cleverest to influence and manage the less clever cannot be abolished by law. But proper legislation can prevent the clever from gaining too great power and wealth at the expense of others.
When a person is taken to a hospital because of a serious accident, the relatives do not gather and take a vote on what shall be done for the patient. Instead, they select as good a surgeon as they can find, permit him to do what he thinks is best, and hold him responsible for results. Realizing that the surgeon is a specialist in his line, they make no attempt to dictate to him what to do. Such undue interference would jeopardize the life of the patient.
Nor is any successful business of size conducted by permitting numerous shareholders to vote on the many decisions that from time to time arise. Instead, a board of directors is elected, or a group of men of ability selected, to pass judgment on policies; and these commonly select some one individual to hold responsible for the administration of these policies.
In the San Joaquin Valley some years ago a farming colony was promoted in which every individual was to have an equal voice in every decision affecting the colony. They had a huge tract of land, part lying on one side of the road and part on the other side. It had been decided to use practically the whole tract for raising small grain. No difficulty arose until the plowing had been finished and the time for seeding was at hand.
An argument then started whether to seed the north-side piece first, or the south-side piece. As the result of the argument a meeting was called in the assembly building to put the matter to vote. A few more practical men implored the rest to get the seed in the ground with no delay as already it was time for the rains. But there were numerous long-winded speakers, and they did not finish on the first evening, so that the vote was postponed until the next formal meeting a week hence. Nor did the speakers finish on this occasion. It took three weeks, with a meeting but once a week, to get the matter settled. In the meantime the rains arrived and mostly passed. Adjoining farms had splendid crops that year; but the seed put in the ground three weeks too late failed to mature a crop. As a consequence the colony disbanded and the land was taken for its debts.
What every business concern needs, and what every government needs, was needed by this colony. It needed men of exceptional knowledge and ability in positions of responsibility, with sufficient authority to enable them to carry out their decisions. This much certainly should be clear: To have a good government, we must have the best possible brains to run it.
This brings up the question as to how the best possible brains may be secured for such tasks, and how they may be prevented from using their authority for the advancement of personal interests rather than for those for which they were selected. Large business concerns seem to have solved this difficulty rather well. For important positions they customarily pick men with training and experience along the line of the position they are expected to fill. These men are judged, not by their vote getting ability. but by their past performance in other positions of some responsibility.
A railway president may have started with pick and shovel on a section gang, and have worked up through the various departments. Through long experience and arduous training he is a specialist in railroading. So, likewise, the superintendent of a manufacturing plant often makes his start as a mechanic, then becomes foreman of a department, and finally achieves still higher. There is, no doubt, some favoritism shown in business advancement; but the competition of other concerns is so keen that favoritism is largely routed in the interest of self-preservation. Consequently, we find the men at the head of present-day large business and manufacturing concerns almost without exception, to be men of outstanding ability.
But can we say as much of those we select to run our government? Are the governors of our various states as thoroughly trained in the principles and practices of sound administration, as the presidents of railroads are trained in the principles and practices of railroading? Or take the men at the head of our national government and compare them in ability with the men at the head of nationwide merchandising concerns, at the head of nationwide banking systems, and at the head of manufacturing organizations with nationwide distribution.
Merchandising, banking, or manufacturing cannot be successfully carried out on a large scale by men who have spent most of their lives occupied with something entirely different. Yet the science and art of government is more difficult than any of these. An MD must pass four years at medical school, must pass examinations, and usually must serve a considerable period as intern at some hospital before he is permitted to practice. A lawyer also must have requisite schooling and pass certain tests before being admitted to the bar. But a jack-of-all-trades who turns his hand a few years to politics, if he is a convincing talker and a hail-fellow-well-met, need know nothing of governmental principles nor have had any experience in administration, to win enough votes to get him a post where he exercises much influence over the destinies of his fellow man.
This is common knowledge; but what can be done about it? It is to be hoped that legislation and political administration may be critically studied and formulated before long into definite sciences to be taught in colleges. Any individual, then, who becomes a candidate for a given office, should be required to show, by his college certificate, or by passing special examinations prepared for those who have studied at home, that he is thoroughly familiar with what already is definitely known about government. Instead of having to experiment on the public with every idea that enters his mind, to find out if it actually will work, he should be thoroughly familiar, through his studies, with ideas that already have been tried out, and to what extent, and why, they have or have not, succeeded. The starting point of every political career should be a thorough schooling in the science of government.
But because a man or woman has a diploma that entitles the holder to practice a given profession is no assurance of real ability. Ability is tested out and increased by the actual application of knowledge. No one would think of giving a newly graduated engineer charge of some great project. He would be tried out, and given opportunity to gain experience, in connection with smaller and less important ventures. As he demonstrated actual ability through doing, he would be advanced to more important positions. If past performance warranted, in time he might be placed at the top. Because he had proved himself the best man for the position, the position would be his.
Dictatorship and Aristocracy
Of all the forms of government, when an unusually talented man is at its head, a dictatorship or an absolute monarchy is the most efficient. In either case authority is so centralized that the manpower and the material resources of a country can be organized and directed in a manner that is quite impossible under other forms of government. There is one man at the top whose word is law. Making a survey of the country’s needs, he decides how much acreage shall be placed in this or that crop, and how many men shall be engaged in the production of each commodity. Without red tape or long delays the energies and the manpower of the country are thus completely mobilized and directed into channels of production that yield the most in the way of goods and public improvements for the nation.
Why, then, are not dictatorships more popular?
This we can perceive readily, not merely from theory but by reviewing the conditions in this and other countries during each of the World Wars. Because of the threat to the existence of the country, in war time there is necessity for the utmost efficiency; and to gain this efficiency the authority of those in high position is increased until there is virtually a dictatorship. Those who were not engaged directly as combatants were told what to do. Factories that had been built to manufacture peacetime articles were commanded to manufacture war products. There was conscription of men. People, regardless of wealth, were regulated in the amount of various foods they might procure, and in the amount of various products they might buy. Very little account was taken of the desires or inconveniences of individuals. The only thing considered of consequence was whether it helped or hindered the nation as a whole.
Thus it is under a dictatorship the freedom of the people to decide the kind of lives they will live is taken from them. They are slaves of the state. A man, or group of men, at the top decide what is good for people, and force them to live according to this decision. And under competent guidance such a dictatorship may make for the utmost in industrial advancement. But it tends to prevent the development of talent and individual initiative except such as has the approval of those in authority. The dictator may determine what religion alone is to be permitted in the country, may decide that all facts shall be suppressed except those favoring his regime, and may divert the wealth and resources of the nation to furthering his own ambitions.
The slave, in the olden days, was usually well taken care of; and when he exhibited promise often the opportunity was given him to develop his talents. But in spite of being parts of a more efficient industrial machine, men find both slavery and rigid dictatorship irksome. A dictator has the power, and it was thus used by both Hitler and Mussolini, to deprive people of the things they otherwise could have had, to encourage fear, to curtail expression and to prevent religious freedom. Either a dictator or an absolute monarch has it within his power to thwart all the things for which the cosmic alchemist works, including freedom from want, freedom from fear, freedom of expression and freedom of worship.
When a man, or a group of men, gain absolute authority over others, they are very apt to abuse their power to their own selfish advantage. As a matter of fact there have been only a few monarchs, such as Napoleon, Louis XIV, Ivan the Terrible, Peter and Frederick who have been real rulers. Most of the others, like Kaiser Wilhelm who merely voiced the thoughts and policies of the Junker crowd, and Hirohito who was but a front and took orders from the Japanese military caste, have been the tools of dazzle, display and seeming authority through which a powerful and secret group has been able to work its will upon the people. And this will, as revealed by the history of monarchies, with the gaining of complete authority by the few, has almost always been to practice oppression on those less fortunately situated.
The aristocracy of the past not only despoiled the people of their wealth, but it used them, as hunters now use dogs in the pursuit of dangerous game, in the sport and pastime of war. Nor do we find, with rare exceptions, that aristocracy has nursed and developed the highest in culture. The Greek drama was encouraged and supported by the businessmen of that day. The fortunes of Roman gentlemen also made possible the literary works of Horace, Lucretius and Virgil. The merchant guilds erected the Gothic cathedrals, and the treasures of the banking house of Medici were largely responsible for the renaissance. Very seldom has aristocracy contributed either influence or ability toward the development of those things that make for higher standards of living, or for an appreciation of art, music and literature among the people.
Socialism or Private Enterprise
The only safeguard the people have against exploitation and oppression is to retain in their own hands the power to select their leaders and to change their leaders and through these leaders to form and administer just laws. And even when such democratic processes prevail there are always present those who seek to have laws passed which will give them special privileges. The only safeguard against them is an enlightened and vigorously interested public opinion.
Thus while it is perfectly clear that the cosmic alchemist should work to establish democratic processes throughout the world, and for the enlightenment which prevents special privilege from using democratic processes to exploit the people, it is not yet clear to what extent government ownership and management of natural resources, industry, agriculture, business and all other economic activities should supplant private enterprise. But this is the great issue before the world today, and a struggle for supremacy between the two systems is inevitable. It is a struggle that relates not only to the manner in which the affairs of a particular nation are to be conducted but, unless each system is modified to embrace many features of the other and thus presents a modified form acceptable to all-important nations, it is a struggle that inevitably will pit nation against nation and system against system in a contest for world mastery.
Agricultural people are dependent upon their land for a livelihood. It is quite natural of them, therefore, to desire to own the land. Owning the land gives them a feeling of security, a feeling that they have control of the source of their living. For this reason a farming population resists socialism which would deprive them of the private ownership of their lands.
As a people turn from agriculture to industrialism they wish to retain the same feeling of security that they had in the past. Now, however, instead of being able to raise what they eat, and what they wear, they must purchase these with the returns from industrial work. Such employment, however, unlike the work they did upon the land they owned, must be furnished by some organization. Unless they can find an organization willing to employ them they cannot secure the necessities of life. In the past private enterprise even in normal times has not been able to furnish jobs for all willing to work, and under exceptional conditions the distress resulting from unemployment—some fourteen million being forced into idleness in the U. S. a few years after the commencement of the Pluto Period in 1930—has been intolerable and widespread.
The worker feels, and rightly, that he is entitled to security. A job is not to be owned in the same way that land is to be owned; but he feels that he should have quite as much control of it. The socialist solution is for the government to own the resources and control the organizations and the jobs. Instead of being initiated and conducted by privately owned organizations in competition with other privately owned organizations, all would be conducted through the avenue of politics.
As opposed to this political method of conducting affairs we have the development of corporations, trade associations, trade unions, syndicates, and chain groups. In competition these develop a high degree of efficiency, the most efficient often absorbing the others until, like J. P. Morgan and Co., which exercises a governing power over huge groups of railroads and industries through its banks, they are so powerful that they have little to fear from competition. At this stage, unless these great organizations take unusual care to function for the general welfare quite as much as for profits, it is necessary for the government to establish regulatory measures.
We have the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Trade Commission, all empowered to prevent unfair practices of huge organizations. Yet it certainly is an unfair practice for the great privately owned and managed enterprises to acquire either so much of the raw materials or the machinery of production that millions are made poverty stricken through inability to have access to these essentials for production. And in addition, this enforced idleness and unproductivity detracts from the wealth and prosperity of the nation and of the world.
While there is full employment it may be wise for the government to permit private enterprise to handle business and industry subject to certain government controls. But it certainly is not wise to depend entirely on private industry to furnish that full employment which alone can give freedom from want. Here government should step in. Instead of abolishing the private ownership of business, which is the method of socialism, the government could set up adequate reserves, to be used in the construction of roads, public buildings, canals, dams for flood control and generation of electrical power, irrigation systems, reforestation, erosion checks and other things beneficial to the whole population. Such a reserve set aside for the purpose of absorbing the unemployed in constructive government work would, through keeping money in circulation, be of advantage to everyone, and be an insurance against hard times.
But whether accomplished through this method or through a still wider application of the principles of socialism, full employment must be insured. Those who are dependent upon employment will then have that feeling of security that all people demand. Not only will it make for freedom from want, but people will not live in fear of being deprived of a means of getting a livelihood. And we may be quite confident that they will never cease struggle and agitation until, either through the wisdom of those engaged in private enterprise, through governmental regulation, or through the application of the principles of socialism, they have this security.
Whatever prosperity now exists in the world is largely due to organization by which leaders or managers have the control of large resources. Under either system of government, then, unless the benefits that so largely determine prosperity are relinquished, the managers must be given access to vast material means that they can induce labor to function, and that raw materials and machines may be had in quantities and handled in such ways as to afford economical production. Under any system, to free people from want sufficiently that they may develop higher standards of life and culture, there must be huge concentrations of wealth and vast groups of well-organized men. The problem that confronts each political system therefore is the same: how to secure the most efficient managers, how to insure that these managers will perform their functions in the most efficient manner, and how to insure that they will utilize the products of combined wealth and organization for the general welfare instead of for the selfish ambition of the few.
Because competition weeds out those with less ability the managers of big corporations in this country usually are efficient. But too often the corporations are managed to insure immense profits to their stockholders rather than for the benefit of a wider public. Large oil interests are accused of attempting to gain, through corrupt public officials, vast holdings that belong to the people. Power interests are believed to be engaged in grabbing natural resources and making the public pay usurious profits for their development. It is charged that there is a monopoly on the production of aluminum. To the extent private enterprise, whether through gigantic corporations or through smaller groups, shows the desire to benefit themselves unduly at the expense of the public, to that extent will the political method have to be invoked to restrain them.
In this country, up to the present time, the political method has been applied through politically appointed groups given legal authority to exercise a certain amount of control. That is, when people or groups do not exercise their functions in a manner conducive to public welfare, laws are passed and agents appointed to administer these laws. Thus as affecting the well-being of the consuming public we have the pure food act, the drug act, meat inspection laws, fire prevention regulations, building regulations, and laws of sanitation. In the interest of the employee we have laws regulating the hours of work, the conditions surrounding work, the amount of compensation, and safeguarding against dangerous machinery. Then there are laws governing the employer’s liability and determining how and when wages shall be paid. Other regulations are imposed on banks and institutions of trust. Those who enter certain professions and callings also must, in the interest of the public, prove their qualifications.
This political method of regulating affairs is on the increase. Wherever and whenever an industry or a group fails to control itself in the interest of the general public, the public, through the political method, is compelled to assume the responsibility of that control. Thus in this country it would seem that the amount of control exercised by the government, and the extent to which it takes over and manages business and industry in the future, will depend upon the deportment of private enterprise and the deportment of organized labor.
Telephone service throughout the nation can be completely paralyzed by the strike of the 263,000 members (1946) of the National Federation of Telephone Workers, lack of steel can cause a shutdown of the majority of the factories in the nation should the 800,000 CIO steelworkers (1946) go on strike, a strike of the Railway Brotherhoods can tie up transportation, a strike of the A.F.L. and CIO packing house workers can cut off the supply of meat from the nation, a strike of the 500,000 members (1946) of the United Mine Workers can deprive the nation of coal, and strikes of other unions can prevent the people of the nation from getting clothing, groceries, gas, light, local transportation and other things on which life directly depends or upon which the ability of people to continue productive activity depends.
It is not in the public interest, and should not be tolerated, that one group should starve all the other people of the nation, cause illness and hardship to many thousands through lack of heat, or prevent the other people of the nation from continuing the productive activities upon which their subsistence and the welfare of the nation depend. Therefore, when a strike or a lockout seriously threatens the welfare of the nation there seems to be no recourse but for the government, at least temporarily, to take over the industry under dispute.
The danger under the system of private enterprise is that big business will control the government to its own advantage and to the disadvantage of the people as a whole. Think, for instance, of the power to influence public sentiment of such an organization as the National Association of Manufacturers with a membership (1946) of 14,500 corporations employing ten million workers.
The danger under the system of politics (socialism) is that the government will be controlled by a few whose good fellowship, wire-pulling and political strategy are able to influence the greatest number of votes, and that productivity and distribution will be handled by cumbersome bureaus and politically appointed managers whose ability is chiefly confined to getting votes for the higher-ups.
Under any system of government the many will be ruled by the few. But the few who run things under socialism may be wirepullers and their friends who are unable efficiently to handle production and distribution, while the few who run things under private enterprise (capitalism) may be efficient but use their abilities for their own advantage instead of for the benefit of the public.
Socialism thus has its disadvantages, and private enterprise has other disadvantages. In each case the disadvantages chiefly relate to the personal equation of its managers. Not only does this personal equation change from year to year, and not only is it different in different countries, but just now it is difficult to determine the effect atomic fission and perhaps the utilization of the cosmic ray will have on industrial, political and international relations.
If we look back in history to the end of the Stone Age, we find that the use of iron changed not only methods of warfare, but also radically changed society. Then, at a much later date, gunpowder again changed methods of warfare, political boundaries, and the economic situation of many countries. Within our own time aircraft have once more changed the methods of warfare, narrowed the world to a space which makes of it, relative to the ease of reaching any part, merely a small country, and has revolutionized industry. And now comes atomic fission, a great new force to be used for good or evil.
In view of great changes which lie immediately ahead, and in view of the as yet unknown personal equation of the leaders in that near future, it seems wiser to place reliance on observation rather than on untried theory. Each system is now being tried out on a large scale in different parts of the world. It should be apparent, therefore, before too long, from the actual results attained in these areas, whether private enterprise or socialism will do most to insure all the people of the world freedom from want, freedom from fear, freedom of expression and freedom of worship.
Every Nation, Every Group and Every Individual Should Get a Square Deal
In a properly organized world, even as in a properly organized nation or in a properly organized industry, there must be division of labor, specialization of parts, and cooperation between those parts. Certain areas of the world are better fitted to grow or manufacture certain products, and other areas are more suited to producing other things. Each type of merchandise should be produced where conditions are best suited to its production. And it should be a function of the United Nations Organization to provide facilities for the equitable exchange of the products of one region for the products of other regions.
When world planning or national planning is supplemented by compulsory measures which regiment the people and force them into narrow grooves of activity, it interferes with freedom of expression. But lack of world planning and national planning is highly wasteful and interferes with freedom from want. It is not the planning which is distasteful, but the compulsion which forces people to follow activities they do not desire.
Through lack of national planning many of the natural resources of the U.S. have been squandered. Timber now sadly needed for paper pulp and for building homes was logged off in earlier days with no provision for reforestation. Oil was pumped from the underground reservoirs and used up with needless extravagance. Farm land was single-cropped to death until much is now worthless. In other areas the top soil was loosened with no provision to keep it from blowing away, or from being washed into the rivers. Ponds and swamps were tiled that crops might be raised on the land thus made available, and the water no longer retarded, but drained into the rivers almost as fast as it fell, caused the rivers to overflow, inundating and destroying not only vast areas of farming land, but villages also.
It certainly contributes to want when car loads of oranges are dumped into the Pacific Ocean, when peaches and apples are left to rot on the trees, and when wheat and corn are used as fuel in the regions where raised, because they cannot be exchanged for the products of other areas. And it certainly would not contribute to freedom from want were all manufacturing concerns to concentrate on producing washing machines, and neglect to produce other things.
Without compelling people to follow occupations distasteful to them, and without curtailing either initiative or independence so long as they work no injury on others, the government should make a survey of needs and make recommendations based on this survey. Its recommendations should follow the quota system. Certain areas should be called upon voluntarily to produce some crop in quantity such as indicated, with plantings large enough to leave a margin of safety in case of unseasonable weather. Different areas should be allocated other crops, and other regions called upon for manufactured products of a type for which the area has production facilities.
What would people think of an auto manufacturer who, with no demand for his engines except in his completed cars, built three or four times as many engines as he could build or procure car bodies or chassis? World planning and national planning, through the widespread dissemination of information, through tentative quotas whose fulfillment depends upon the voluntary activities of people having regional organization, and through inducements—including public opinion—to discourage quotas being exceeded, but to encourage their being met, can prevent such unwise use of time, materials and energies in world production as is illustrated by the inefficient auto manufacturer.
Whether in time the resources, productivity and business of the countries of the United Nations Organization are chiefly state owned and managed, or are chiefly owned and managed by private enterprise, there will be, as now, division of labor. Whenever there is division of labor there are groups which perform different tasks. Some of these tasks take much preparation and a skill acquired only by many years of application. Some require patient mental training and unusual intelligence, and some require little but brawn. The most obvious groups today are the capitalist, the merchant, the professional, the farmer, and the industrial worker. But within these broad categories are lesser classifications. And between such groups, as previously indicated, there is always a struggle for advantage.
Even should it come to pass that the members of all classes receive equal pay, some groups, because of the greater strain, would feel that they should work shorter hours than those under no such strain. There seems to be no prospect, therefore, under any kind of regime, of everyone being satisfied. One coterie, for instance, may be able to get more significance, or to exert greater political pressure than another group. Until everyone becomes wise enough to strive to contribute his utmost to universal welfare, and wise enough not to overestimate his own importance, there will be some who struggle to gain an advantage in some manner over others.
The common method of solving such problems is for the stronger to ignore the claims of the weaker. When there is a dictatorship, the less popular are shoved to one side with little ado. In the representative form of government, the minority are voted down by the majority. Right at the end of World War I a “dry” majority ignored the desires of a “wet” minority. As a result there was prohibition that failed to prohibit, because it was forced upon an unwilling group.
In any country there are always many groups, and these often pull in opposite directions. And in the United Nations Organization there are many nations, some of which will seek their own advantage at the expense of other nations. Yet when any person has a grievance, and feels unjustly treated, he is in a mood to stir up trouble. When any section of the human mind is repressed, it finds some outlet for its energies through a destructive, and often subtle, channel. A repressed proletariat, a repressed merchant class, a repressed professional group, a repressed religious sect, or a repressed nation, are always a potential source of disturbance and dissension.
But psychologists find when adequate recognition is made of a repressed emotion or thought, and some pains are taken, not necessarily to permit it to have its way, but to reconcile it to the rest of the mental structure, that its power for damage ceases; because it then works with, instead of against, the larger organization. They find, also, in settling labor disputes, and even in larger political issues, that a minority recognized, and such measures taken as will convince it that at least it has had a fair hearing, tends to remove the animosity, even though the minority is not given that for which it asks.
In any form of government, therefore, if it is to remain stable, it becomes fundamental that every group—in the United Nations Organization, every country, and in the U.S., every state—and insofar as possible every individual in it, must be given ample consideration and a square deal. In the modern world, disputes must be settled through all the relevant facts being discovered and made public, with conciliation and just arbitration based on these facts instead of violence or war.
As political measures arise, the cosmic alchemist will work for those that promise an increase in productivity, for those that give assurance that there will always be remunerative employment for every person who will work, for those that tend toward the widest practical distribution of wealth, for those that will give economic and cultural advantages to the greatest number of people, and for those that insure adequate consideration of, and a square deal for, everyone, including even the disfavored individual and the unpopular minority.
At all times he will work vigorously for these and other measures which, to the best of his knowledge, will advance all the people of the world toward freedom from want, freedom from fear, freedom of expression and freedom of worship.
John Nance Garner Chart
November 22, 1869, 3:00 a.m. 94:35W. 33:40N.
Data given by a member of his family.
1890, admitted to bar: Sun inconjunct Uranus p, ruler of house of honor (tenth).
1895, married: Sun conjunction Mars r, co-ruler of house of marriage (seventh).
1898, member Texas House of Representatives: Mars sextile Mercury r.
1903, member U. S. House of Representatives for thirty years: Mars opposition Uranus p, Mercury trine Jupiter p.
1931, Speaker House of Representatives: Mercury inconjunct Uranus p.
1932, November, elected vice-president of U. S.: M.C. sextile Uranus p, Venus sextile Jupiter p.
1936, reelected vice president: Mercury inconjunct Uranus p.
Shirley Temple Chart
April 23, 1929, 9:00 p.m. 118:15W. 34N.
Data from photograph of her birth certificate.
1932, dancing lessons: Mercury conjunction Jupiter r.
1933, lucky break gave her chance in movies: Mercury, ruler of profession (tenth), conjunction Jupiter p.
1934, made $1,250 per week as movie starlet: Asc. trine Uranus r, Sun semisextile Uranus r.
1936-37, box office champion, contract held at ten million dollars: Sun conjunction Mercury r.
1937, vacation to Honolulu, met at dock by 5,000 admirers: Sun, co-ruler of journeys (ninth), conjunction Mercury r.
1938, July 9, amid great publicity went East to visit President Roosevelt’s grandchildren: Mercury square Neptune r in house of advertising (ninth).
1945, married: Mercury sextile Uranus p.