Must it not, then, also be known that at a certain point the government will intervene on the other side and compel payment of adequate wages?
"Mr.Churchill carries his puzzle only that far.

On our own account we add, How far will that leave us from regulation of wages as well as of rates by the government, and how far will that leave us from government ownership ?"[76] In a word, Mr.Churchill's remedy for the evils of "State Socialism" is more "State Socialism"-- and undoubtedly there is an inevitable trend in that direction.

But the government railway strikes of France, Austria, Italy, Hungary, and other countries ought to show him that his remedy, advantageous as it may be from many standpoints, is scarcely to be considered even as a first step towards the solution of the labor problem.

As long as capitalists continue to control government, "State Socialism," on the contrary, makes the strike more necessary, more decisive, and invaluable, not only to employees, but to every class that suffers from the government or the economic system it supports.
The most representative of American Socialists, Eugene V.Debs, has given us an excellent characterization of this movement as it appears to most Socialists.
"Successful leaders are wise enough to follow the people.

For instance, the following paragraph is to the point:-- "'Ultimately I believe that this control of corporations should undoubtedly, directly or indirectly, extend to dealing with all questions connected with their treatment of their employees, including the wages, the hours of labor, and the like.' "And what Socialist made himself ridiculous by such a foolish utterance?
No Socialist at all; only a paragraph from his latest article on the trusts by Theodore Roosevelt.