July 25, 1936 - Editorial - Gradual Socialism, by George Lorimer
The Socialist Party has loudly and officially spurned the New Deal, but in the amazing hodgepodge which makes up the latter there are out-and-out Socialist performances which need to be recognized as such. The public is inclined to look very lightly upon the progress of Socialism in this country. At each presidential election there is a Socialist candidate, but he receives very few votes, and this coming November is expected to be no exception to the invariable rule.
It is natural, therefore, for practical-minded Socialists to plan on winning by piecemeal. They believe in entering wedges, in "encroaching control," in "gradual socialization," and in boring from within, rather than in any kind of all-at-once revolution. The large majority of people are relatively complacent, indifferent and unorganized. Certainly the experience of other countries gives encouragement to the attempts of small but active minorities to force their wills upon the majority.
If gradual Socialism is the kind of medicine the people want, why don't they take it straight and vote the Socialist ticket? (pg. 22)
Comments: Remember Upton Sinclair back in 1934 praising the New Deal as Socialism in action? Recall FDR having a meeting with Sinclair and then Sinclair stopped this exposure of the New Deal as Socialism in action? Now we see that the Socialist Party is loudly and officially spurning the New Deal which it was praising two years ago. Could this have been a smoke screen to muddy the waters of truth? I wonder what Sinclair and Roosevelt discussed back in 1934. Could FDR have told Sinclair something like: "In order to get what your party wants you need to play ball with me" and then they planned this smoke screen before the 1936 elections to make it appear as if the New Deal was opposed to Socialism? When someone with great power has deceit as one of their main virtues, anything is possible.