The progressive politico-economic movement in this country has reached a stage where it would seem to be a tactical error if Georgists stand aloof. The Socialists, under the leadership of such scholars as Thomas and Laidler, are becoming increasingly less doctrinaire. They are now meeting us Single Taxers half way by incorporating our ideas into a modified socialism. Henry George had no objections to socialistic reforms, but merely insisted that other reforms, by making the earth a more desirable habitation, enabled landlords to charge us correspondingly more for the privilege of enjoying the then more desirable habitation. Economic rents, lost to landlords, will be higher in a state where there are such things as the construction of public works to relieve business depression, public ownership of natural bounties and of public service industries, free trade, cooperatives, old age pensions, unemployment insurance, and freedom from the danger of indistrial strife and of foreign war.

The adoption of these reforms, first, might perhaps place in relief, and show up the more plainly, the then exaggerated evil of landlordism, thus being educational, although needlessly expensive. But these reforms do not need to precede ours, because we may be able to have the cooperation of large groups which are willing, right now, to go along with us on the economic rent question if we will go along with them on their pet questions. "Labor" would appreciate more general support and would probably reciprocate. It would probably be more willing and able to change its brutal tactics when, and if, it saw that, by so doing, it would gain such additional support in its disheartening fight for a normal wage and even for the mere right to produce the necessities of life. Many reform movements would take heart and exert greater efforts, if there was a political party they could call their own, and if they had reasonable assurance that their votes would become effective in the not too remote future.

The League for Independent Political Action, now forming, advocates among other reforms, public ownership of coal mines and of the electric power industry, taxation of land values and free trade. A spokesman for the League says that there should be skimmed off through taxes on large incomes, inheritances and economic rent, those socially appropriable surpluses which are not necessary to carry on production, but which are, instead, merely tolls levied because of a monopolistic position. These words are as much Georgist as they are Socialist. If we Georgists have overestimated and other groups have underestimated the importance of our theory, they and we now have a chance to learn as we go along together adopting one or another reform.

The Socialists will undoubtedly cooperate with the League but may retain their own identity and organization. In a national election, and in elections in smaller political subdivisions where there is little chance for a Socialist candidate, they will vote for the candidate of the new party. Likewise, the Farmer-Labor Party of Minnesota might vote the new party ticket in a national election only, or it might identify itself with the new party. The new party would not try to duplicate the Farmer-Labor Party in Minnesota nor would it try to duplicate the Socialist Party in Milwaukee or Reading. Georgists, may retain their identity and organizations and carry on as always, but in addition would have the satisfaction of voting for a party pledged to free trade and taxation of land values.

Last, but not least, here is a chance for Single Taxers, and Socialists as well, to undo the public's suspicion of, and prejudice against, the single track mind. As Norman Thomas says, let us take the attitude of path-finders and not that of a Messiah.

The leadership of John Dewey should induce Georgists to join the League and do it now.