Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 6.djvu/660

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

FRATERNAL BENEFICIARY SOCIETIES IN THE UNITED STATES. 1

WE are fond of saying that there is nothing new under the sun. Men less wise than Solomon, if they will but look and see, may discover that the world itself is new. The elements which compose land and water have remained unchanged, and the natural laws which they obey are eternal. But the relations which mankind bears to the animate and inanimate world sur- rounding it are continually changing. It is in these changed relations that one may discover the newness of the present world, and it is also in these changed relations that every significant political and social question of the present has taken its rise. Most of the earlier economic, political, and religious systems .were based upon the principles of authority and dependence. The banner of independence was carried high by the leaders of the revolutions which one by one broke up the old systems. The eras of revolutions religious, political, and industrial were transitional in their nature, and paved the way for a system of society having for its watchword neither dependence nor independence, but interdependence. Present society had its beginnings in dependence ; its intermediary was independence ; and the keynote of the future will probably always remain interdependence. Interdependence is the prime characteristic of the new world of which we are a part. Old institutions have been modified, the " cake of custom " has been broken, and new institutions have been created to bring about a proper readjust- ment among men in these changed relations. Among the insti- tutions which have performed and are performing services in this respect, the network of fraternal beneficiary societies in the United States deserves full recognition. The social history of the United States cannot be written without taking notice of a

1 The investigation of which this paper is a by-product was conducted under the auspices of the Ethical Subcommittee of the Committee of Fifty. This publication is by permission of that body.

646