But they are numerous enough to demand serious attention, for the literature popular among the unionists is a literature, not merely of discontent, but sometimes of revolt.
Whether this aggressive unionism will ever become popular enough to endanger the foundations of the American political and social order, I shall not pretend to predict.

The practical dangers resulting from it at any one time are largely neutralized by the mere size of the country and its extremely complicated social and industrial economy.

The menace it contains to the nation as a whole can hardly become very critical as long as so large a proportion of the American voters are land-owning farmers.

But while the general national well-being seems sufficiently protected for the present against the aggressive assertion of the class interests of the unionists, the legal public interest of particular states and cities cannot be considered as anywhere near so secure; and in any event the existence of aggressive discontent on that part of the unionists must constitute a serious problem for the American legislator and statesman.

Is there any ground for such aggressive discontent?
How has it come to pass that the American political system, which was designed to guarantee the welfare and prosperity of the people, is the subject of such violent popular suspicion?
Can these suspicions be allayed merely by curbing the somewhat excessive opportunities of the rich man and by the diminution of his influence upon the government?
Or does the discontent indicate the existence of more radical economic evils or the necessity of more radical economic reforms?
However the foregoing questions ought to be answered, there can be no doubt as to the nature of the answers, proposed by the unionists themselves.