|
Presented are transcripts of radio broadcasts by R.L.D.S. President Frederick M. Smith in 1938 on pertinent topics that continue to be of considerable interest in this 21st century.
XI. Motivations for a Better World The True Equality of Opportunity Such an order as I have suggested means equality. But in saying this I do not mean level equality, the equality so often in the minds of those who advocate communism. I mean equality of opportunity for expression and contribution according to capacity. Equality of opportunity is quite loudly and boldly claimed for the present order by its apologists and defenders, especially in the United States. And it is readily admitted that there is some justification for the claim, but in many ways it has worked out that the equality of opportunity for all, purposed by the founders of the United States and its economic and industrial activities, has been subverted by the forces developed from the selfishness which is fundamentally a large factor in individualism. Large fortunes and luxury possessed by a small class, generous fortunes possessed by many, the strenuous legal efforts to safeguard private property rather than general weal have so completely upset equality of opportunity that it is a bit farcical to claim its existence for all. It may be a remote possibility, but it is our duty to make it even more than a probability. For the highest possible contribution from each person to be assured means not only recognition of innate chief talents or capacity, but development thereof—and that means education. And who will claim that in this there is equal opportunity for all even in the United States, where education at public expense has reached its highest development? Far too many examples of its failure lie close at hand. There is no one of us who cannot within his won experience and observations count many examples where the “equality of opportunity” claim has proved a myth. Let me repeat, in a social order based on stewardships, on the religion of Jesus Christ, socially interpreted, each person will seek that occupation which will permit the largest expression of innate ability, not measured in profits alone, but in service. In fact, one must find that occupation. The doctrine of stewardships can be applied to social reform only on a religious basis, for it is contingent upon attitude, and the attitude necessarily springs from a consciousness that service to God spells service to neighbor. The attitude required is that each will give his maximum contribution to the group measured by his equipment, turning all surplus into the common treasury. It may require activity in that which is not accompanied by a return in wealth, yet is required by social advancement. Private Initiative Today much of this is left either to personal sacrifice or to “foundations,” which are usually private surplus so employed as to perpetuate the founders’ name and memory, though public appropriations care for other lines, when public sentiment is strong enough to demand it. But under a form of society in which stewardships constitute the industrial plan, unremunerative labor which is necessary for social progress, weal, or security will, and should be, supplied from accumulated community surplus which is the aggregate of contributed individual surpluses. In other words, this flowing of all individual surpluses into the common treasury will make it possible to accomplish as legitimate and regular public activities many things which are now left to so-called charity and private philanthropy, or by what may be termed commercialized social obligations only partially discharged. By the things left to charity and private philanthropy I refer to the care of the sick and aged, the debilitated, the victims of unemployment, accident, etc. By the commercialized social obligations only partially discharged is meant such as insurance companies providing for life, accident, industrial, and sick insurance, etc., for these companies insure comparatively few, and these the best risks, while those most needing insurance benefits for the security of their dependents are denied it or heavily penalized according to the degree of probable early death and the likelihood of the family becoming dependent. In saying this I am not disparaging insurance as a business investment, but pointing out a form of social security which should be more adequately supplied by society itself, the able helping to care for those dependent, and the burden widely enough distributed to lighten it and make it socially just as well as easy. Motivation Once a society has been established on a basis wherein service becomes the criterion of success, each person will seek the activity best adapted to his natural and developed endowments, whether common laborer, farmer, mechanic, lawyer, researcher, or banker (if bankers there be in such an order), for social standing will not be determined by income or bank account (accumulated money or wealth), but by the amount of common weal conserved and social interests advanced. Unrequited labor, or that for which the returns in pay or profits are below our existence scale, or only slightly above it, under our present system, is avoided, even if socially much needed. We saw an aspect of this some time ago in the movement of laborers (and even farmers) away from the farm. The laborers were moving to industrial centers where employment or better remuneration was received, with less number of hours, than on the farm. This went on till there were developed various schemes to entice laborers back to the farm. Most of these “back to the farm” movements failed, and were bound to do so, until conditions so changed that the laborer would find conditions more to his liking on the farm than in the factory. It seems clear to me that under the stewardship plan the farm problem will solve itself, for, service being the measure of success, those with innate inclination to till the soil will naturally seek that outlet for their social expression. The freedom and wholesomeness of farm outdoor life is what holds many today in that service, even if the returns to self are not so great as in some other vocations and callings. Within most if not all men is the inbred instinct for agriculture. They love to make garden—to plant and see things grow—and only commercialism and the extreme individualism of our present industrial customs and organization, with the less arduous road to a competency, have deflected those with agricultural inclinations away from the land. What I have just presented touching the solution of the problem of scarcity of labor on the farm will apply in other ways. It is not expected that this change of attitude will come instantly; but “getting religion” in this sense may as suddenly change one’s attitude in occupational activities as in some of the ways with which we are familiar in emotional revivals. I grant that a highly and pervasive social consciousness is essential to develop the idea that the prime duty is to serve the group, the benefits of improvements and accumulated goods coming to the individual only through the common uplift, and individual success being measured by the amount one has contributed to the public good, his talents considered. Social Consciousness It is the duty of the church and all church men to develop and promote this social consciousness and agitate such social reform. To discharge this responsibility the church must be something more than a Sunday entertainment society, something more than a performer of ceremonials, or a funeral home. The pulpit must stand for social reform, denounce selfishness in all forms and in all places, in persons highly placed as well as among the lowly, and free itself from the charge of being subservient to the interests entrenched behind the bulwarks of individualism. It is not enough for the church, in its efforts to promote Christianity, to call on persons to come to Christ, but the call must be to come with the tools of service in hand ready to devote time, energy, and talents to the common welfare. “Get thy spindle and thy distaff ready and God will give thee flax.” But the promise of flax follows preparation. It is not enough to preach the entrance of a mystic kingdom of God into the heart, but a kingdom of God to come in the form of a regenerated and ideal society where righteousness prevails and justice walks unhampered. “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and all these things will be added unto you.” The church must foster social reform, and its stalwarts may even have to enter politics to accomplish it. It must stand for social freedom, and this necessitates a break with present conditions, for the church must stand for wealth becoming pervasive and not the heritage of a privileged class. Prove to yourselves that it will be necessary to exercise will power to carry into active operation an order of society in which the economic and industrial activities are motivated and arranged by religious impulsion, by asking yourself and answering candidly at the altar of your heart, this question. “Am I willing to exercise my talents to their highest limit in making contribution to social weal, and be willing to take as compensation my needs and the needs of my dependents, and consecrate all over and above that to the church and the group?” May divine inspiration show you the need for just this attitude among Christian people. |
