_OUR NATIONAL PROBLEMS_
STRAIGHT AMERICA
[Illustration]
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
NEW YORK · BOSTON · CHICAGO · DALLAS
ATLANTA· SAN FRANCISCO
MACMILLAN & CO., LIMITED
LONDON · BOMBAY · CALCUTTA
MELBOURNE
THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.
TORONTO
STRAIGHT AMERICA
A CALL TO NATIONAL
SERVICE
BY
FRANCES A. KELLOR
New York
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1916
_All rights reserved_
COPYRIGHT, 1916,
BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.
Set up and electrotyped. Published June, 1916.
Norwood Press
J. S. Cushing Co.--Berwick & Smith Co.
Norwood, Mass., U.S.A.
TO
THE PRESIDENT-ELECT OF 1916
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH AMERICA? 1
II. AMERICANISM 21
III. THE NATIVE AMERICAN 43
IV. AMERICA-MADE CITIZENS 91
V. THE POPULAR VOTE 127
VI. NATIONAL UNITY 153
STRAIGHT AMERICA
CHAPTER I
WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH AMERICA?
For the first time in its history, America, broadly speaking, is
consciously ashamed. However divided we may be upon preparedness,
neutrality in thought has not brought peace of mind. We find ourselves
making explanations and apologies. In the midst of unprecedented
prosperity, we are restless and dissatisfied. Smoldering in the hearts
of men is desire for change, fermenting in their minds is a demand
for national leadership. The situation defies accurate analysis. It
is not that we want war or that we favor militarism. Rather it is
that our powers are dormant, our aspirations unexpressed, our beliefs
unformulated, our attitude misrepresented, our motives misunderstood,
and our presence in the world’s conflict unnoted.
We sit supinely under insult, injury, and violation of rights and
laws, expressing such resentment and reaction as we have by sending
relief funds and relief ships abroad, by making loans and munitions,
by newspaper editorials, and by public speeches. We give vent to our
feelings in a campaign for preparedness that urges Congress to pass a
few feeble, disconnected defense bills, that organizes numerous defense
organizations that are frantically busy collecting members and fees and
holding meetings. We urge taking what we can get rather than insisting
upon what we need. The result is, a large part of our energy goes into
talk, which is not helping us greatly to really focus as a nation in
this great crisis in the world’s history.
What really hurts us most is the realization that we, who think of
America as the most prosperous, energetic, efficient, inventive,
and best organized nation in the world, have suddenly discovered
that we are nationally the most unprepared for united service in any
field--geographical, military, industrial, economic, social, or
educational. In vision, independent thinking, and citizenship we are
not more prepared. In fact we have hardly yet begun to think of these
in terms of national service.
We are still stunned by the realization that we are not in a position
to grapple intelligently, instantly, and decisively with situations in
our own country. Trinidad and Mexico have driven this lesson home. Our
national method of dealing with hyphenism and its activities indicates
little comprehension of its real roots. We now know also that we are
not in a position to participate disinterestedly and courageously in
the international adjustments that will take place at the close of the
war. We suspect that the “peace ship” illustrated American capacity.
Its founder’s victory in the presidential primary exposes our capacity
for caprice in a nation’s crisis. We talk about fighting humanity’s
battles when we have done none of the things that qualify us for such
championship. We but dimly realize that a united, not a divided,
nation must enter the lists. We talk about upholding the President’s
hands, but we now know that we did in truth elect a minority President
in 1912, and it is no great task to promise to uphold him. It is lip
service to which we have long been accustomed.
The war has revealed to us the biting truth that we have one body
of people on the coast line realizing the need of protection and
another in the interior feeling quite safe at this distance. We see
a conglomeration of colonies and ghettos and immigrant sections in
our large cities, and the country dotted with settlements quite as
un-American as anything to be found abroad. We face the fact that
America is not first in the hearts of every resident, that not every
man works for America, and that not every man trusts her present or
believes in her future. This is still the land of promise for the “bird
of passage” who exploits us, and whom we pluck in return.
Thanks to the war, we have been freed from the delusion that we are a
united nation marching steadily along an American highway of peace,
prosperity, common ideals, beliefs, language, and purpose. Security
and prosperity have blinded us to the fact that we do not all speak
the same language nor follow the same flag. We have marveled at the
revelation that our own native-born sons and daughters of foreign-born
parents could justify the _Lusitania_ and defend the invasion of
Belgium, and we have let it go at that, not realizing what the
acceptance of this portends for future America. America has neglected,
even forgotten, its task of making Americans of the people that have
come to its shores. Men may be workmen and voters and taxpayers and
bosses, but the final question for this nation to answer is--are they
loyal American citizens?
In our quest for nationalism, we stand aghast at the task before
us. About one seventh of our population is foreign born, and about
one third is of foreign-born or mixed parentage. It is no small
assimilative task to preserve the best in the traditions, beliefs,
standards, and points of view of these peoples for the strengthening
of America, and to give them enough of America’s ideals to make them
strong citizens of a democratic country. Mr. Carl Snyder is authority
for the statement that one half of all the aliens that have come to
America are still alive. Despite the volumes written on the subject,
we do not yet know whether this is a good or bad thing for America.
The test has not yet been applied. The war is giving us a breathing
spell to find out and to define a policy which will insure Americanism.
In the absence of any constructive policy or clear national purpose
we can predict little for the future. This we do know, that every
government but our own has a national purpose which it is carrying
out in America with its own subjects--naturalized or alien--through
its representatives and agents, its publications, institutions, and
business interests. America alone in its own territory has a negative
procedure and is without a policy. We are concerned chiefly with those
we can keep out or send back. Once an alien is admitted there is no
system of protection, distribution, and assimilation; no specific
inducements to citizenship; no encouragement to acquire a home stake
in America. Sectional and specific interests compete for what the
immigrant has to offer; the parent government keeps an eye on the new
arrival and helps him in distress. The Federal government alone remains
silent and indifferent.
It is true we have the beginning of such a system in several
departments. It is encouraging that the Bureau of Naturalization has
changed its attitude and is now being of some service to aliens who
have applied for citizenship. For the many years of its existence,
prior to 1915, this Bureau had not in any way encouraged or urged
educational assistance for the prospective citizen. There is in the
Bureau of Education a Division of Immigrant Education which for the
past two years has been carrying on important educational work among
immigrants. The educational work of these bureaus does not receive
adequate support or authority and has not so far been considered as an
essential part of real preparedness. The vision and faith and effort
of these officials is not part of any strong defined policy; it is not
coördinated with the government’s larger activities and could be wiped
out to-morrow by a single order. It is makeshift, not policy.
This country is alive to the inadequacy of its army and navy. It has
a glimmering that even the strengthening of these may not entirely
protect its interests. If we may judge from the record of Congress and
the press reports of the activities of our citizens to date, there
appears, however, to be but the smallest comprehension of the slack
that must be taken up throughout this nation; of the discipline,
self-sacrifice, and spirit of service that each one of us must acquire;
and of the need of organization along national lines that American
institutions will require to be prepared to even maintain peace.
After many months of the European war, official America still finds
its chief slogan to be “Safety first” and “Made in America.” Toward
nationalizing its transportation lines, toward bringing all ports
under Federal control, toward national citizenship training, toward
educational unification and industrial preparedness the nation has
made little progress. We are still dealing with ships and guns and
ammunition, taking little thought of the questions of unity which
will make a nation effective behind these defenses. We still quibble
over whether we are for universal training or uniform service. We
cannot federalize the militia or abandon useless army posts because it
will offend some sectional interest that controls votes in the next
election. This narrow conception of preparedness is the despair of
thinking America. It is the doom of national unity.
In considering the hyphenated American, it is not so much that we
question his ultimate loyalty. It is that we question his understanding
and ability to act in an intelligent, organized way on behalf of
America. It is that we do not know what influences may control his
action though his heart and interest may be with America. The question
for America to answer is whether we can create a united nation in both
spirit and efficiency in the short time remaining before we have to
deal with new questions arising after the war. We face the humiliating
truth that for any immediate conflict this cannot be done, that we
must take the risk and, if need be, weld our many peoples together on
the firing line. Will the American desert his forum for the training
camp; and the platform for inconspicuous field action? Will he erase
his name from committees and memorials and petitions and throw away
the press notices with his name in them for the toil and sweat of
industrial mobilizing? Will the American woman stop making bandages and
joining organizations and put the immigrant family on her calling list
and send the illiterate adult to school and help to make English the
common language of America? Can the Federal administration abandon its
involved correspondence and political fences long enough to consider
what the real preparedness of any nation comprises? A body of the best
railway men in the country was asked some months ago to assist the
government in railway preparedness and is still awaiting instructions.
The Naval Consulting Board, representing the best brains in the country
yet called together for industrial preparedness, pays its own bills,
largely because of our national lack of vision and the “Pork barrel”
methods of Congress.
In the growing demand for a more united America it is apparent that
America needs a national spirit which shall combine reverence and
service; a national consciousness which shall be willing to give as
well as to receive benefits and to put something into politics as well
as take something out; an ideal, which shall make every resident give
something of his interest, service, time, and money _voluntarily_ to
America without waiting for conscription and without quibbling over
“rights,” “emergencies,” “time of need,” or “obligations of business.”
The practical questions before America are how to become Americanized
and how to stay Americanized. The answer to the first question
comprehends all measures of preparedness adapted to our present needs.
The answer to the second question comprehends America’s policy after
the war.
In the measure in which we answer the first question so shall we answer
the second. Let no one suppose that anything short of a national
policy, purpose, and consciousness in which each one of us does his
full share, will meet the critical need of the hour. We are agreed in
the hope that America shall endure as a great nation; that we wish to
preserve our free institutions and constitutional guarantees. We are
also generally agreed that America shall rank in the world as a nation
of vision, courage, ideals, opportunity, and achievement; and that,
last of all, out of this democracy we hope to get the greatest amount
of aspiration, happiness, and achievement _per man_ that it is possible
for a strong nation to have.
These are not to be achieved by inaction or by misdirected action. We
are at the point where every act counts for or against the future of
America. I believe our capacity for nationalism is in exact proportion
to the measures we take for its achievement. The war has taught us that
it cannot be left to the complacency of the native American or to the
voluntary efforts of the immigrant. A general melting pot tended by
no one in particular does not necessarily brew a nation. This is even
more true when we find so many other self-interested nations and people
stirring this pot. The war has also taught us that the demand for
cheap labor cannot continue to be the chief determining factor in the
admission of immigrants--because of America’s new interest in aliens as
prospective citizens.
We not only have a present nation-size job of assimilation, but we need
to prepare ourselves for the problems that will accompany negotiations
for peace. We shall have at least three questions of great and
far-reaching importance--incoming immigration, outgoing emigration, and
citizenship status in America and abroad.
If the pending immigration bill represents the sum total of the
wisdom we can summon on the first subject, we shall fail miserably to
improve this opportunity by substituting a constructive policy for
our prevailing negative policy. Such arbitrary tests as the literacy
clause based on race and class theories and antagonisms bear no real
or lasting relation to the fundamental national needs of the country.
This country needs a statesmanlike policy in its international
relations based not upon theoretical makeshifts, but upon _a knowledge
of existing conditions_, upon capacity for assimilating the
immigrant, and upon our power to develop the machinery which will make
assimilation possible.
Admission of aliens to this country should be based upon their capacity
for Americanization. Any exclusion laws should look to the raising
of the physical standard, owing to the results of the privations and
hardships of war, with greater emphasis on deportation for crime. I
believe that every incoming immigrant should declare upon arrival his
or her intention to remain here and become a citizen. Every immigrant
should be required to become literate in the English language (the
minimum standard to be definitely set) within five years after arrival,
provided facilities are offered him. Deportation should be the penalty
for failure to do so. With the probable increase in the immigration
of women and children, every safeguard should be thrown about their
admission, arrival, and distribution.
A policy of distribution should be worked out. This again requires
three fundamental lines of activity--agricultural organization
which will enable the land to compete with industry for the laborer
and settler; the development of a rural credit system which will
enable people to go to the land; and a national system of government
employment agencies and the regulation of all private agencies doing
an interstate business. All of the civic and stimulated “back to the
land” schemes are doomed to failure until these three questions are
solved. Industry will get the great mass of the immigrants as long as
it offers higher wages, steadier employment, decent conditions and
opportunities for advancement; and so long as, unlike agriculture, it
has the organization to reach the aliens on or before arrival.
A policy of national education is required for a statesmanlike
consideration of nationalism. Local communities cannot carry the burden
of educating large numbers of incoming residents concerning whom they
have not been forewarned and who have not grown up in an American
community. The relation of education to seasonal labor is important.
The great forces in Americanization are the home, the school, and the
neighborhood. These cannot influence the itinerant resident, in one
town to-day and gone to-morrow; in a factory this month and in a wheat
field next month; in a city with its rule of civilization one year,
and in a labor camp with only the most primitive rule another year; in
a well-ordered home one week and in a derailed freight car the next.
We must contrive that educational and cultural forces shall follow
the man from place to place if we are to achieve nationalism through
assimilation.
America has never had any method of protecting newly arrived aliens.
This has been left to states, cities, philanthropies, racial societies,
or to foreign governments. The alien is not only an international
figure until he becomes a citizen, with all of the entanglements of
dual citizenship and obligations abroad, but he is an inter-state and
inter-city figure. Our industrial system and living conditions make
him so. The average immigrant travels more in the few months after
arrival in America than during his whole lifetime abroad. In the face
of this, two cities and three states have recognized his disability
and handicaps and have tried specifically to protect him. When the
Federal government substituted Ellis Island for Castle Garden, all the
safeguards that were thrown about the immigrant by law in the early
fifties were abolished because there was no longer anybody to enforce
them. We shall never attain a united America so long as we permit the
first educational and social contacts of the immigrant to be controlled
by his self-interested countrymen, and our equally self-interested
Americans, and the exploiter, acting independently, or as the tool of
both.
I am unable to find in government or in industrial organization, or
in a combination of the two, any such marshaling of facts, any such
attention to vital details, any such breadth of view as to make one
sanguine of results. The industrial inventory now being made by the
Committee on Industrial Preparedness of the Naval Consulting Board
is indeed an indication of the possibilities. It is too early to say
whether the government will use it or bury the results along with other
naval reports.
This is the kind of service in which all good Americans can join, for
the guns have been taken out of industrial preparedness. It is not the
kind of task prosperous Americans looking for appreciation will like.
It is singularly devoid of the pleasures of the footlight and applause;
it cannot be done by a committee meeting or sending a check; it is not
to be accomplished by “interest” or spasmodic work. It means a full
day’s work in the regular task at which each man earns a living, to
which is added the overhead charge of Americanism and nationalism. I
am convinced that no other service or method will make America again
unashamed.
We may fairly conclude that the real matter with America is that
as a nation it has not achieved within itself a permanent national
consciousness. It has no clear conception of its national power or
its responsibility, having conformed too largely to the wishes of
local governments and their representatives. The Congressman still
represents, not America, but his district. This is illustrated by the
retention of useless army posts and state militia doing police duty.
The prevailing conditions in our political world have failed to make
the Federal government master of its own resources and forces and the
director of its own destinies. We are still propagandists occupying
the field of debate on matters of preparedness. We are relying on the
presidential campaign--the heat of battle, as usual--to tell us where
“we are at,” after nearly two years of world conflict.
America’s selfish preoccupation, its own growth and prosperity, have
commercialized national sensibility. Our war-order prices show this.
Citizenship has come to be the cheapest of its privileges and the
football of politics. The country has been living unto itself while
taking into its heart the outpouring of other nations. The American
dollar has been the goal of success, and “Safety first” the national
motto.
Whether, in the absence of a great dramatic crisis, we shall attain
that heroic spirit by which a nation is finally welded together remains
to be seen. America needs nationalized vision and action. America
needs universal service from each and every citizen. America needs
to get together, to study itself, to have records of its needs and
action, to organize, to plan, to standardize its efforts. America needs
national incentives and national rewards outside of politics. America
needs leaders who see its future in terms of international duties,
Americanism, and efficiency--a synonym for preparedness.
Will America achieve these things? I believe the next few years will
indicate whether America shall endure as a great nation or become a
colony of states and sectional interests. The responsibility rests
squarely upon the shoulders of each and every one of us. We cannot
delegate it to Congress or legislatures, to benevolence or charity,
to managers or superintendents, to the “man who has time” or to the
agitator. The call is to national service for every one of us, and the
only answer should be, where can we serve best and how soon shall we
begin?