FINDS SUBJECT UNSATISFACTORY

"Socialism makes a most unsatisfactory subject for a debate, in college or elsewhere", Professor O. M. W. Sprague 94, Edmund Cogswell Converse Professor of Banking and Finance in the University, told a CRIMSON reporter yesterday. The reporter had just asked him to comment on the Debating Union's plans for tomorrow night when "Socialism" will he the subject under discussion.

"It is altogether too large and too vague to be covered adequately in a debate. There is such a wide divergence of opinion, among scholars or even among socialists themselves, as to the meaning of 'Socialism' that the evening, interesting as it may be, is likely to be wasted as far as results are concerned.

Admits I1nteresting Possibilities

"In spite of its futility," Professor Sprague continued, "the debate should be interesting. Although I am not at all willing to take a definite stand for or against 'Socialism', nevertheless I am forced to look rather at its difficulties than at its theoretical advantages. Although the ideals of Socialists are usually of the highest type, they seem to have been formulated with little attention to their practical application. Socialists are sometimes too much impressed by the defects in the social order and, in their efforts to bring about a greater degree of equality and a fairer distribution of wealth, they run the danger in their theories of losing sight of variety in opportunity and accomplishment".

The recent experience of Russia", Professor Sprague pointed out, "has seemed to prove conclusively that a socialist regime cannot be introduced quickly, by revolutionary methods, with any degree of success. It is inconceivable that we in America should turn to Socialism until generations have passed. There is a more general recognition of this now even among socialists, than ever before, and the only possible hope for socialism lies in a gradual modification of the social order.

"That is why I think the Debating Union is misguided in its choice of a subject, Professor Sprague concluded. "It seems to me evident that if socialism comes, it will come not by revolution but by evolution, and in that case, it belongs in the realm of sheer speculation. Methods of production, the organization of industry, our whole social fabric, will inevitably be affected by new discoveries and inventions, and by the time we have developed to the point where we will be willing to live in a socialist state, socialism may find itself outworn and useless.