SOCIALISM
63
SOCIALISM
manifesto issued by him and his fellow-conspirators,
"Lea Egaux", is to be found a clear vision of the col-
lective organization of society, such as would be
largely accepted by most modern Socialists. Babeuf
was guillotined by the Directory, and his party sup-
pressed. Meanwhile, in 1793, Godwin in England
had publi-shed his Enquiry Concerning Political Jus-
tice", a work which, though inculcating Anarchist-
Communism (see Anarchy) rather than Collectivism,
had much influence on Robert Owen and the school of
Determinist Socialists who succeeded him. But a
small group of English writers in the early years of the
nineteenth century had really more to do with the
(ievelopment of Socialist thought than had either
Owen's attempts to found ideal communities, at
New Lanark and elsewhere, or the contemporary
theories and practice of Saint-Simon and Fourier in
France.
These English writers, the earliest of whom. Dr. Charles Hall, first put forward that idea of a dominant industrial and social "system ", which is the pervading conception of modern Sociahsm, worked out the vari- ous basic principles of Socialism, which Marx after- wards appropriated and combined. Robert Thomp- son, Ogilvie, Hodgkin, Gray, above all William Carpenter, elaborated the theories of "surplus value", of "production for profit", of "class-war", of the ever- increasing exploitation of the poor by the rich, which are the stuff of Marx's "Das Kapital", that "old clothes-shop of ideas culled from Berlin, Paris, and London". For indeed, this famous work is really nothing more than a dexterous combination of Hege- lian Evolutionism, of French Revolutionism, and of the economic theories elaborated by Ricardo, on the one hand, and this group of English theorists on the other. Yet the services of Karl Marx and of his friend and brother-Hebrew, Friedrich Engels, to the cause of Socialism must not be underrated. These two writers came upon the scene just when the So- cialist movement was at its lowest ebb. In England the work of Robert Owen had been overlaid by the Chartist movement and its apparent failure, while the writings of the economists mentioned above had had but little immediate influence. In France the Saint- Simoniahs and the Fourierists had disgusted everyone by the moral collapse of their systems. In Germany Lassalle had so far devoted his brilliant energies merely to Re|)ublicanism and philosophy. But in 1S4S Marx and Engels published the "Communist Manifesto", and, mere rhetoric as it was, this docu- ment was the beginning of modern "scientific So- cialism". The influence of Proudhon and of the Revolutionary spirit of the times pervades the whole manifesto: the economic analysis of society was to be gi'afted on later. But already there appear the ideas of "the materialistic conception of history", of "the bourgeoisie " and "the proletariat ", and of " class-war".
After 1848, in his exile in London, Marx studied, and wrote, and organized with two results: first, the foundation of "The International VVorkingmen's As- sociation", in 1864; second, the pubhcation of the fir.st volume of "Das Kapital", in 1867. It is not easy to judge which has had the more lasting effect upon the Socialist movement. "The International" gave to the movement its world-wide character; "Das Kapital" elaborated and systematized the philosophic and economic doctrine which is still the creed of the immense majority of Socialists. "Pro- letarians of all lands, unite!" the sentence with which the Communist Manifesto of 1848 concludes, became a reality with the foundation of the International. For the fir.st time since the di.sruption of Christendom an organization took shape which h.ad for its object the union of the major portion of all nations upon a common basis. It wa.s not so widely supported as both its upholders believed and the frightened mon- eyed interests imagined. Nor had this first organiza-
tion any promise of stability. From the outset the
influence of Marx steadily grew, but it was confronted
by the opposition of Bakunin and the Anarchist school.
By 1876 the International was even formally at an
end. But it had done its work: the organized work-
ing classes of all Europe had realized the international
nature both of their own grievances and of capitalism,
and when, in 1889, the first International Congi'ess of
Socialist and Trade-Union delegates met at Paris, a
"New International" came into being which exists
with unimpaired or, rather, with enhanced energy to
the present day. Since that first meeting seven
others have been held at intervals of three or four
years, at which there has been a steady growth in the
number of delegates i>resent, the variety of nationali-
ties represented, and the extent of the Socialistic in-
fluence over its deliberations.
In 1900, an Internatiiinal Socialist Bureau was es- tablishi'd at Brussels, with the puqjose of solidifying and strengthening the mternational character of the movement. Since 1904, an Inter-Parliamentary So- cialist Committee has given further support to the work of the bureau. To-day the international nature of the Socialistic movement is an axiom both within and without its ranks; an axiom tluit must n:>t be for- gotten in the estimation botli of the strengtii and of the trend of the movement. To the International, then, modern Sociahsm owes much of its present power. To "Das Kapital" it owes such intellectual coherence as it still possesses. The success of this book was immediate and considerable. It has been translated into many languages, epitomized by many hands, criticized, discussed, and eulogized. Thou- sands who would style themselves Marxians and would refer to "Das Kapital" as "the Bible of So- cialism", and the irrefragable basis of their creed, have very probably never seen the original work, nor have even read it in translation. Marx himself pub- lished only the first volume; the second was published under Engels' editorsliiji ii\ 1SS.5, two years after the death of Marx; a third was elaborated by Engels from Marx's notes in 189.5; a foiirth was projected but never accomplished. But the influence of this torso has been immense. With consummate skill Marx gath- ered together and worked up the ideas and evidence that had originated with others, or were the floating notions of the movement; with the result that the new international organization had ready to hand a body of doctrine to promulgate, the various national So- cialist parties a common theory and programme for which to work. And promulgated it was, with a de- votion and at times a childlike faith that had no slight resemblance to religious propaganda. It has been severely and destructively criticized by econo- mists of many schools, many of its leading doctrines have been ex^)licitly abandoned by the Socialist lead- ers in different countries, some are now hardly de- fended even by those leaders who label themselves "Marxian". Yettheinfluence ofthebookpersists. The main doctrines of Marxism are still thestuff of i)opular Socialist belief in all countries, are still put forward in scarcely modified form in the copious literature produced for popular consumption, are still enun- ciated or implied in popular addresses even by some of the very leaders who have abandoned them in serious controversy. In spite of the growth of Revisioni.sm in Germany, of Sjmdicalism in France, and of Fabian Expertism in England, it is still accur.ate to maintain that the va-st majority of Socialists, the rank .and file of the movement in all countries, are adherents of the Marxian doctrine, with all its materialistic philosophy, its evolutionary immorality, its disruptive political and social analysis, its cla.ss-conscious economics.
In Socialism, to-day, as in most departments of human thought, the leading writers dispKay a marked shyness of fundament.al analysis: "The domain of Socialist thought", says Lagardelle, has become "an
