CHAPTER XX.

The Social Revolution.

1.--The Transformation of Society.

The tide rises and undermines the foundation of state and society.

Every one feels that the pillars are swaying and that only powerful

props can support them. But to erect such props means great sacrifices

on the part of the ruling classes, and there the difficulty lies.

Every proposition, the realization of which would seriously damage

the material interests of the ruling classes and would threaten to

question their privileged position, is bitterly opposed by them and

roundly condemned as a measure destined to overturn the present

order of state and society. But, without questioning and ultimately

removing the privileges of the ruling classes, the diseased world

cannot be cured.

“The struggle for the liberation of the working class is not a struggle

for privileges, but one for equal rights and equal duties and for

the removal of all privileges.” This declaration of principles is

contained in the Socialist platform. It follows that nothing can be

attained by half measures and small concessions.

But the ruling classes regard their privileged position as natural

and self-understood; they will admit of no doubt in its permanence

and justification. So it is quite natural that they oppose and combat

every attempt to shatter their privileges. Even proposed measures and

laws that do not change their privileged position and the present

order of society in the least, cause the greatest excitement among

them, if their purse-strings are loosened thereby or likely to be

loosened. In the parliaments mountains of paper are printed with

speeches until the laboring mountains bring forth a ridiculous mouse.

The most self-understood demands of workingmen’s protection are met

with as much opposition as if the existence of society depended upon

it. When, after endless struggles, some concessions are won from the

ruling classes, they act as if they had sacrificed a part of their

fortune. They show the same stubborn opposition when called upon to

recognize the oppressed classes on a basis of formal equality; for

instance, to discuss questions of labor agreements with them as with

their equals.

This opposition to the simplest things and the most self-understood

demands confirms the old experience that no ruling class can ever

be convinced by ~reason~, unless the force of circumstances compels

discretion and compliance. But the force of circumstances may be found

in the growing measure of understanding created in the oppressed by

the development of our conditions. The class extremes are constantly

becoming more severe, more noticeable and more evident. The oppressed

and exploited classes begin to recognize that existing conditions are

untenable; their indignation increases, and with it the imperious

demand to transform and humanize conditions. As this perception

grows and reaches ever widening circles, it finally conquers the

vast majority of society, which is most directly interested in this

transformation. But to the same extent in which this perception

of the untenableness of existing conditions and the need of their

transformation grows among the masses, ~the power of resistance of

the ruling classes declines, since their power is founded upon the

ignorance and the lack of understanding of the oppressed and exploited

classes~. This reciprocal action is evident, and therefore everything

that advances it must be welcomed. The progress of capitalism on the

one hand is balanced on the other by the growing perception that the

existing social order is adverse to the wellfare of the vast majority

of the people. Although the solution and removal of social extremes

will require great sacrifices and many exertions, a solution will

be found as soon as the extremes have attained the height of their

development, toward which they are rapidly advancing.

What measures are to be resorted to at the various stages of

development, depends upon circumstances. It is impossible to predict

what measures will be necessitated by circumstances in particular

instances. No government, no prime-minister, be he the most powerful

person, can predict what circumstances will compel him to do a year

hence. It is all the more impossible to predict measures that will

be dictated by circumstances unknown to us at present. The question

of measures is a question of tactics to be observed in a struggle.

The tactics are influenced by the opponent and also by the resources

at the command of both parties. Means that are splendid to-day may

be harmful to-morrow, because the circumstances that justified

their employment may have changed. It is but necessary always to

keep our aim before us; the means for attaining same depend upon

time and circumstances. ~But the most effective means that time and

circumstances permit of should be resorted to.~ In depicting future

developments we must therefore resort to hypothetical methods; we

must surmise certain conditions.

~Proceeding from this point of view, we surmise that, at a given

time, all the depicted evils will have developed to such extremes

and will have become so evident and tangible to the great majority

of the population, that they come to be regarded as unbearable; that

a general, irresistible demand for a thoroughgoing transformation

will manifest itself, and that, accordingly, the quickest help will

be considered the most appropriate.~

All social evils, without exception, spring from the present social

order, which, as has been shown, is founded on capitalism, on the

capitalistic method of production. This method of production enables

the capitalist class--the owners of all the means of production,

the ground, mines, raw materials, tools, machines, means of

transportation--to exploit and oppress the masses, which leads to

insecurity of existence and to the degradation of the exploited

classes. Accordingly the most rapid and direct way would be to

transform capitalistic property into common, or social property by

a general expropriation. ~The production of commodities will be

socialized; it will become a production for and by society. Manufacture

on a large scale and the increasing productivity of social labor,

until now a source of misery and oppression for the exploited classes,

will then become a source of well-being and harmonious development

for all.~

2.--Expropriation of the Expropriators.

The transformation of all means of production into common property

forms the new basis of society. The conditions of life and work for

both sexes in industry, agriculture, traffic, education, marriage,

science, art and social intercourse become radically different.

Human life is given a new purpose. Gradually the organization of

the state also loses ground; ~the state disappears~; it, so to say,

abolishes itself.

In the first part of this book we have shown why the state had to

arise. It is the product of development from primitive society,

founded on communism, that becomes dissolved as ~private property~

develops. With the rise of private property antagonistic interests

are formed within society. Differences of class and caste arise

that necessarily lead to class struggles among the different groups

and threaten the maintenance of the new order. To keep down the

opponents of the new order and to protect the threatened proprietors,

an organization is required that opposes such attacks and declares

property to be “righteous” and “sacred.” ~This organization, which

protects and maintains private property, becomes the state.~ By laws

the state secures the proprietor’s right to his property, and upon

those who would attack the order laid down by law it turns as judge

and avenger. By their innermost nature, then, the interests of the

ruling, possessing class, and of the powers of the state, always are

conservative. The organization of the state only changes when the

interest of property demands it. Thus the state is the ~indispensable~

organization of a society founded on class rule. As soon as class

extremes have been removed by the abolition of private property, it

becomes ~unnecessary~ and ~impossible~. The state gradually ceases

to exist with the passing away of class rule, as surely as religion

ceases to exist when belief in superior beings and occult powers is

no longer met with. Words must have a purport; when they lose same

they cease to convey a meaning.

Here a reader who is capitalistically minded may object and may ask

on what legal ground can society justify these overthrowing changes?

The legal ground will be the same that always was found, when similar

changes and transformations were needful: ~The common wellfare~.

Society, not the state, is the source of law. The state is only clerk

to the society, whose duty it is to measure and dispense the law.

Until now, ruling society was always but a small minority, but this

small minority acted in behalf of the entire nation and represented

itself as being society, just as Louis XIV. represented himself as

being the state: “L’état c’est moi.” (I am the state.) When our

newspapers report: “The season has begun, society is returning to

town;” or: “The season is over, society is hastening to the country,”

they do not mean the people, but the upper ten thousand who constitute

society as they constitute the state. The masses are the “plebs,”

the vile multitude. In the same way, everything undertaken by the

state for society in behalf of “the common welfare,” has, first

and foremost, served the interests of the ruling classes. “~Salus

reipublicae suprema lex esto~” (the welfare of the republic shall

be the supreme law), is the well-known legal principle laid down by

the ancient Romans. But who formed the Roman republic? The subjected

peoples, the millions of slaves? No! The comparatively small number

of Roman citizens, above all the Roman nobility, who permitted the

slaves to support them.

When, during the middle ages, nobility and princes robbed the communal

property, they did so on the legal ground of “the common welfare,”

and in what manner they disposed of the communal property and the

property of the helpless peasants, the history of the middle ages,

down to recent times, has amply shown. The agrarian history of the

past thousand years is a history of uninterrupted robbery of communal

and peasant property, practiced by the nobility and the Church in

all civilized states of Europe. When the great French Revolution

then proceeded to expropriate the property of the nobility and the

Church, it did so “in behalf of the common welfare,” and the greater

part of the eight million of property holders who form the chief

stay of Bourgeois France, owe their existence to this expropriation.

In behalf of the “common welfare,” Spain took possession of much

Church property, and Italy confiscated it entirely, applauded by the

most ardent defenders of “sacred property.” The English nobility for

centuries robbed the Irish and English nations of their property, and

from 1804 to 1832 legally presented itself--“in behalf of the common

welfare”--with no less than 3,511,710 acres of communal property.

When, after the great North American civil war, millions of slaves

were emancipated, who had been the lawfully acquired property of

their masters, without reimbursing the latter, this was done “in

behalf of the common welfare.” Our entire bourgeois development is

an uninterrupted process of expropriation and confiscation. In this

process the mechanic is expropriated by the manufacturer, the peasant

by the great landowner, the small dealer by the large merchant, and,

finally, one capitalist by another. To judge by the declamations of

our bourgeoisie, all this is being done to serve “the common welfare,”

in the “interest of society.” On the 18 Brumaire and December 2, the

followers of Napoleon “saved” “society” and “society” congratulated

them. When society will save itself by taking back the property it

has created, it will perform the most noteworthy deed. ~For then

its actions will not purpose to suppress one to the advantage of

another, but to obtain equality of opportunity for all and to enable

each and every one to lead an existence worthy of a human being.~

It will be the grandest measure, morally, ever enacted by society.

In what forms this great process of social expropriation will be

consummated and under what conditions, is of course quite impossible

to predict.

In his fourth social letter to v. Kirchmann, entitled “Capital,”[211]

Rodbertus says: “A confiscation of all private property in land, is

not a chimera, but quite possible from the standpoint of political

economy. It would also be the most radical help for society. For

society suffers from the increase of rent in land and capital. With

the abolition of private property in land, traffic and the progress

of national wealth would not be interrupted for one moment.” What do

the Agrarians say to this opinion of one who was formerly a member

of their party?

The further course of events, after such a measure has been resorted

to, cannot be definitely laid down. No human being is able to foresee

how coming generations will shape the details of their social

organizations, and in what manner they will best succeed in satisfying

their requirements. In society, as in nature, there is constant

change. One thing appears while another disappears; what is old and

wasted is replaced by what is new and full of vitality. Inventions

and discoveries along varied lines are made whose significance cannot

be foreseen, and when applied, such inventions and discoveries may

revolutionize human life and the entire social organization.

In the following, therefore, we can only discuss the development of

general principles. They may be laid down as a logical outcome of the

prior explanations, and to some extent it is possible to overlook

in what manner they will be carried out. Even heretofore society

could not be guided and directed by single individuals, although

it sometimes appeared so. But appearances are deceiving; presuming

to direct, we are being directed. Even heretofore society has been

an organism that developed in accordance with definite, inherent

laws. In the future the guidance and direction, according to the

will of individuals, will be entirely out of the question. Society

will then be a democracy that will have unravelled the secrets of

its nature. It will have discovered the laws of its development and

will consciously apply them to its further growth.

[211] Berlin, 1884.

Woman and Socialism · 第 20 / 30 章