In 1933 in The Industrial Discipline Tugwell made this distinction:
"The essential contrast between the liberal and the radical view of the
tasks which lie before us is that liberalism requires this experimenting
and that radicalism rejects it for immediate entry on the revolutionary
tactic. Liberals would like to rebuild the station while the trains are
running; radicals prefer to blow up the station and forego service until
the new structure is bulk."¹ A critic contended that Tugwell, in making
this distinction, failed to put himself in either camp.² This contention did
not take into account other passages in The Industrial Discipline, and
in other works, in which Tugwell definitely placed himself in the camp
of the evolutionary liberals.

The two foundation stones of Tugwell's evolutionary position were
his rejection of force and his elevation of reason. He accepted a rule from
his teacher Simon Nelson Patten, who said to him during World War I,
"Force, my boy, force never settles anything."³ In The Industrial Dis-
cipline Tugwell wrote, "I have never found myself greatly in sympathy
with the revolutionary tactic. 'Force never settles anything' has always
seemed to me a sufficient axiom. It is my reading of history that re-
construction is about as difficult after a revolutionary debacle as it
would have been in a process of gradual substitution."⁴ In 1935 Tug-
well stated that the Civil War "should have taught us . . . that force is,
of itself, incapable of altering the basic habits and institutions of man-
kind and that unless they are assessed realistically no corrective policy
can be formed. Changes of this sort come slowly in spite of heat or strife.
They never yield to unreason or violent action. The use of force would
have no better results today if it is really reconstruction we want rather
than a bloody overturn and the replacement of one government by an-
other."⁵

Preceding the title page of The Industrial Discipline appeared this
quotation from Francis Amasa Walker: "Happy is that people, and
proud may they be, who can enlarge their franchises and perfect their
political forms without bloodshed or threat of violence, the long debate
of reason resulting in the glad consent of all." The last sentence of the
book read: "There is a kind of duty among civilized beings now not to
desert reason but to press its claims insistently." During his career in the
capital Tugwell reiterated this enshrinement of reason. In 1934 he re-

-370-