SOCIALISM 



543 



the subject, and controversy still thickens chiefly 

 around these three names. To them, and above all 

 to Karl Marx, we are indebted for the prevailing 

 forms of contemporary socialism. While the French 

 socialism that preceded them may be regarded for 

 the most part as ingenious speculation very in- 

 adequately grounded in facts, Rodbertus, Lassalle, 

 and Marx seek to justify their theories by a vast 

 and elaborate learning, especially historical learn- 

 ing. They were men of philosophic training, and 

 had a knowledge of economic literature and of 

 the historic economic forces which has seldom been 

 equalled. 



The earliest writings both of Rodbertus and 

 Marx were prior to 1848. The manifesto of the 

 Communist party, perhaps the most violent revolu- 

 tionary document of the 19th century, was drawn 

 up by Marx and Fr. Engels in 1847-48. But their 

 work did not really become historic till a later 

 period. Lassalle, the youngest of the three, was 

 the first to run a very remarkable career as the 

 founder of the social-democracy of Germany. His 

 proposals for the founding of productive associa- 

 tions were substantially the same as those of Louis 

 Blanc, and were even to some degree enforced by 

 the same arguments. The two agitators also 

 resembled each other in the fiery and persuasive 

 eloquence with which they captivated the working- 

 men of their respective countries. But Lassalle as 

 far surpassed Louis Blanc in philosophic and histori- 

 cal enidition as he was inferior to him in simple 

 integrity and straightforwardness. 



While Lassalle therefore was greatly indebted to 

 Louis Blanc for his practical schemes, he derived his 

 theoretical principles to a large degree from Rod- 

 bertus and Karl Marx. It would be unjust, how- 

 ever, to regard him as an ordinary borrower. All 

 his activity both as thinker and agitator bore the 

 stamp of his own temperament, which was one of 

 remarkable originality ; and indeed the main burden 

 of bis teaching is not traceable to any theorist, but 

 had already lcorne the common possession of all 

 socialists who were tolerably well versed in the 

 literature of their subject. The same remark 

 applies to the controversy, whether to Rodbertus 

 or Marx belongs the priority of having established 

 what are considered the fundamental principles of 

 scientific socialism. These principles have already 

 been briefly sketched in the articles LASSALLE and 

 MARX, and need not l>e repeated here ; but we 

 may point out that, while Lassalle dwells chiefly 

 on the small share of the result of production 

 which goes to the labourer as a subsistence wage, 

 Marx finds the keynote of the evolution of capital- 

 ism in the large share which falls to the capitalist 

 under the mime of surplus value. Both start from 

 the open contradiction in the Ricardian economics, 

 according to which labour is the source of value, 

 but of this value the labourer only gets enough for 

 gtilmistenoe according to the usual standard of 

 living, surrendering the remainder to the possessors 

 of land and capital. These deductions from Ricardo 

 formed also the basis of the system of Rodbertus. 

 In other respects, however, he differed greatly 

 from Lassalle, and particularly from Marx. Rod- 

 bertus was a Prussian lawyer and landholder, and 

 from temperament and social standing was entirely 

 opposed to agitation and revolution. His general 

 position was social, monarchical, and national. He 

 accepted the monarchic institution in his own 

 country and hoped that the German emperor 

 might undertake the role of a social emperor. The 

 socialism which he advocated was a thorough- 

 going national socialism, but he did not expect 

 its full realisation, except as the goal of five 

 centuries of moral and political effort. He pro- 

 posed that the two classes of landholders and 

 capitalists hould continue to enjoy their present 



share of the national income, but that the results 

 of an increasing production should go entirely to 

 the workers. The state would establish a normal 

 working day, a normal day's work, and a normal 

 wage, which would be periodically revised, and 

 increased according to the increase of production. 

 In this way the practicability and superiority of a 

 national socialism would be shown, the character- 

 istic note of which would be that all income should 

 be dependent on service, as contrasted with the 

 ancient income derived from property in slaves, 

 and the incomes of the existing era, drawn from 

 private property in land and capital. 



The International was the outcome chiefly of 

 the activity of Karl Marx. The social-democratic 

 movement in Germany originated with Lassalle. 

 At his death in 1864 his union counted only 

 4610 members, and its history was for some time 

 chequered by petty jealousies and mean intrigues. 

 It succeeded better under the leadership of 

 Schweitzer (1867-71). In the meantime, Bebel, 

 a Saxon workman, and Liebknecht, a disciple of 

 Marx, who naturally were opposed to the Prussian 

 national socialism favoured for purposes of pro- 

 paganda by Lassalle, had led a strong combination 

 of workmen's societies over to the International. 

 The two parties quarrelled violently for some years, 

 till in 1875 their common interests, and especially 

 the severe treatment of both by the Prussian 

 police, drew them into a union, which was settled 

 at Gotha (1875). They called themselves the 

 Socialistic Working-men's Party of Germany, and 

 drew up a programme, which is still the creed of 

 the German social-democrats. The progress of 

 German social -democracy both before and since 

 the union at Gotha has been marvellous. Five 

 members were elected to the North German 

 Reichstag of 1867. At the elections to the first 

 Herman Reichstag in 1871 they only polled 120,000 

 votes ; but the number had increased to 339,000 

 in 1874, and to nearly half a million in 1877. The 

 rapid growth of the party, and the excitement 

 occasioned by two attempts on the emperor's life, 

 led to the passing of exceptional laws against 

 socialists in 1878 ; but in spite of such legislation 

 their voting strength continued to increase, till in 

 1887 they counted 763,000 votes, and in 1890 

 1,427,000, or about 20 per cent of the total poll. 

 It was also a notable feature of the election of 

 1890 that, whereas in rural and Catholic districts 

 the socialistic propaganda had hitherto shown 

 little or no symptoms of success, it had at that 

 date made very material progress. The discon- 

 tinuance of the severe anti-socialist laws, and the 

 more sympathetic attitude of the young emperor 

 on social questions, have also made an important 

 change in the tactics of the party. While their 

 methods and their language, in the press and on 

 the platform, had previously been bitter, violent, 

 and aggressive, there is now a marked tendency to 

 moderation among their leaders. They see the 

 hopelessness of overt opposition to the govern- 

 ment, and they are content to await the develop- 

 ment of the economic forces, which, following their 

 teacher Marx, they believe will inevitably estab- 

 lish socialism in the fullness of time. But this 

 change of tactics has not received the unanimous 

 approval of German socialists, and a small party 

 lias already seceded from the main l>ody. 



Next to the Marx socialism the most prominent 

 form of socialism is anarchism. As we nave seen, 

 the originator of anarchism was Proudhon ; and its 

 most notable expounder was the Russian Bakunin 

 (q.v. ). The characteristic feature of anarchism is 

 really a political theory, the denial of government, 

 and may be held with or without the economic prin- 

 ciples which constitute the essence of socialism. 

 The anarchic socialism of Bakunin was atheistic, 



