A famous debate?

“Socialism vs. `Individualism'” contains the transcript of a debate between Daniel De Leon of the Socialist Labor Party (SLP) and Thomas Carmody, Attorney General of New York State and a Democrat. The two men met in debate in Troy, N.Y. in 1912. The edition shown here was published by the SLP. Several unauthorized reprints also seem to exist, perhaps due to the pamphlet's complex publication history, which was marked by conflicts over copyright between SLP and the organizer of the debate in Troy (presumably an ex-member of De Leon's party).

The debate itself is quite uninteresting, with De Leon constantly arguing that Carmody strays from the agreed subject of the debate, despite the fact that De Leon's own opening speech doesn't simply deal with “individualism”, but is a stinging indictment of capitalism, to which Carmody then naturally reacts. Carmody strongly objects to the socialist demand for public ownership of railways, ports and other utilities, calling it “confiscation”. He doesn't deny that there are problems in America, but argues that they can be remedied through the ballot box. Socialism is really anarchy, and will hurt the workers most. Carmody also points to various progressive legislation enacted on state level in New York. De Leon responds by arguing that capitalism can't be reformed, that the SLP does use the ballot box and hence isn't anarchist, and that Thomas Jefferson “confiscated” the American colonies of king George, and that revolutions make their own laws anyway. De Leon also argues that “anarchy” is a better description of capitalism, with its competition, than of socialism.

On the ostensible issue under debate, De Leon conflates “individuality” with “individualism”, claim that socialism upholds both, while capitalism destroys them (at least for the majority). He then proceeds to defend what is really collectivism, arguing that the individual must give up part of his individuality for the greater good.

Both De Leon and Carmody are eloquent speakers, with Carmody perhaps sounding too dramatic and rhetorical, while De Leon is the more “intellectual” type. However, overall I didn't feel I learned much from this supposedly “famous” debate, if the SLP's introduction (written by Arnold Petersen) is to be believed.