OCR Text |
Show !; else Diversities of Socialism, j (Chicago Tribune.) There are several principles for the adaption of which practically all the socialists in the world contend. They all want absolute democracy. democ-racy. They all stand for a thorough and comprehensive com-prehensive system of public education. They all demand public ownership and management of all the instruments of production and distribution. They denounce as wholly unjust the division of' the aggregate income of capital and labor which is made under the existing industrial system, and demand de-mand unanimously the adoption of a more equitable equita-ble basis of distribution. But, despite the general harmony of view re-' re-' garding these leading- principles, ihere is much discord dis-cord within the socialist camp. Most of.it arises over minor points, but much of it is due to difference? differ-ence? over matters of fundamental importance. The German social democracy is menaced with a bad split., England and her "Social Democratic federation,"' federa-tion,"' her "Socialist league.' her "Fabian society," her "Christian Social society." her "Guild of St. Matthews," and any number of lesser socialist organizations. or-ganizations. In France there are ''collect ivists." "Blanquists." Broussist "possibilits," Allomanist "possibilists." "independents'": and one of these parties can hardly meet without being rent asunder. The socialists of the United States are fairly harmonious har-monious now. but their past history is largely a history of splils. Each of the numerous factions in ihe various countries represent? a different shade of doctrine. It would take a book to cb.cidiHe ail the diversities of socialism. Running through the socialist ranks everywhere, however, is one line of cleavage which stands out most distinctly. This is the b'ne which in every country divides the' '"opportunist.' or "reformist." from the "scientific,"' or "revolutionary,'" socialists. The revolutionary socialists are led in Germany by Rebel- and Liebknectif. in France by Guesde and Laf argue, in Italy by Ferri. in England by JTynd-inan. JTynd-inan. The opportunists are led in Germany by Bernstein and Volhnaar. in France by Jaures and Milleraud. in Italy by'Turnti. in Eneland by Kier ITardie. The socialist party in the United States is dominated by revolutionary sentiment and by revolutionary leaders, such as Eugene V. Debs and . M. Simons of Chicago, the able editor of the International Socialist Review. j The revolutionists, who are usually devout believers be-lievers in the entire gospel according to Marx, maintain main-tain that the socialist propaganda 'is a. war of the J laboring class, or proletariat, against all other j classes of society. They would, therefore, organ-j organ-j ize the proletarians into a party from which all other persons were barred, so that when in the I course of industrial evolution, the capitalistic sys-I sys-I tern breaks down the proletarians will be ready to seize the instruments of production and distribution and begin managing them in the interest of the j whole people. Meantime, they would have socialists j accept no favors from or offices, -except for pur-j pur-j poses of agitation under governments which thev i regard as capitalistic', hut would have them stand I aloof and wage unrelenting war against established institutions. Opportunists believe, on the eontri'ry. lhat the interests of all classes are pretty much the same. They deprecate class war. and-would debar nobodv from socialist ranks. The revolutionists would accomplish the change to socialism, without, violence, if possible, but quite suddenly. The opportunists, op-portunists, as their name implies, would welcome every gain, however slight, for socialism, mid would brine the new regime to pass by slow, almost imperceptible, degrees., ' As would naturally be expected. England, the classic land of --liberty; practical 'philosophy, and opportunism, op-portunism, is the happy- hunting ground of the reformists. re-formists. There is less socialism in theory and more in practice in that country than in any other in thejvorld. The English national and municipal governments do everything, from delivering the mails and operating street railways to running pawnshops and cow meadows and furnishing- mid-wives. mid-wives. The revolutionary socialists, as would also he anticipated, are strongest in Germany, whose philosophy has always been theoretical and ideal- ' I istic, and whose government has always been des- j j potic. " : j The revolutionists believe, with Marx and En: I gels, that government will be practically abolished undersoeialism. ''The state's seizure of the means-of means-of production in the name of society," says Engels. ' "'is . . . its last independent, act a a state." j There will be no cabinets, parliaments, standing armies, police, courts, attorneys, or taxation under socialism, according to Rebel, the German leader. Their place will be taken by administrative, boards. j This view seems largely n reaction against the tyranny of European nd especially of the German Ger-man governments. It seldom appears in the talk or books of the English Fabians and other reformist reform-ist socialists. The question which causes the most severe dis- i sension among socialists on the continent of Europe, is as to what position they shall take in reference to the land problem. Land is one of the chief instruments in-struments of production, and the. strict. Marxian ! doctrine is that it. like every other form of private capital, must be aonronriated and mannc-ed bv n,1 for the public or 'collectively." The peasant farmers farm-ers of Germany, France, and Italy, who own the little lit-tle patches of land they cultivate, love them as they do their wives and babes; and fear of loss of their small properties has caused them almost, to a man to oppose socialism.. The peasant proprietors are numerous, and socialism can hardly ' win against their opposition. The opportunists would meet the difficulty by telling the peasants that private property prop-erty in land will not be disturbed under a socialist regime until the tendency of capital to centralize I shall have vested ownership of it in a few hands. The revolutionists oppose giving any such assurances. assur-ances. They would have land seized along with stores, manufactures, and other instruments of production. pro-duction. The socialists' of England are not troubled by this agrarian question. Ownership of the land 'of England, like ownership of its manufactures, is already al-ready centralized in a few hands. There are no peasant farmers to "expropriate." Immediate public pub-lic ownership or ''naturalization." of land is consequently conse-quently as fundamental a tenet in the creed of the English opportunist, as it is in that of the German cr French revolutionist. On most points the socialists of the United States are in harmony with ihe revolutionary socialists so-cialists of Germany. ' Whether they will follow them and the English socialists on the land question is a matter for in- . cresting conjecture. American socialist leaders plainly sec that for their party to declare flatly for immediate public ownership of arable land would le to gain the hostility of all'the millions of American Amer-ican farmers who own their farms. How to be consistent in their principles and yet not array the farmers against them is a problem which, cs one of them admitted' the other day. is ''keeping American Amer-ican socialist leaders awake nights." The. chief aim of socialists is a more equitable system of distribution of 'the produce of society, but there is no agreement amone them as to what system sys-tem shall be adopted. Saint Simon favored rc-wardinc rc-wardinc each person according io his capacity; Louis Blanc advocated giving to each according to his needs. Many socialists believe all should receive re-ceive the same income. The more orthodox Marx- its5o not tackle the problem of distribution bur" ' XH Tent-themselves with the fatalistic position jbat the some process of evolution which i.s lending' to vest the ownership and management of the iastru-: incuts of production in the collectivity will also work out an equitable scheme for - dividing the j products. S. O. D. |