The organisation of a capitalistic workshop fimiishes a first approximation, and piece-work plays an essential part in the formation of the class idea; in fact, it throws into reUef the very clear opposition of interests about the price of commodities; ^ the workers feel themselves under the thumb of the employers in the same way that peasants feel themselves in the power of the merchants and the money-lenders of the towns; history shows that no economic opposition has been more clearly felt than the latter; since civilisation has existed, country and town have formed two hostile camps.* Piece-work also shows that in the wage-earning world there is a group of men somewhat analogous to the retail shopkeepers, possessing the confidence of the employer, and not belong- ing to the proletariat class.
The strike throws a new light on all this; it separates the interests and the different ways of thinking of the two groups of wage-earners — the foremen clerks, engineers, etc., as contrasted with the workmen who alone go on strike — much better than the daily circumstances of life do; it then becomes clear that the administrative group has a natural tendency to become a Httle aristocracy; * I do not know whether the learned (economists and other people who make inquiries on social conditions) have always quite understood the function of piece-work. It is evident that the well-known formula, " the producer should be able to buy back his product," arose from reflections on the subject of piece-work.
* " It may be said that the economic history of society turns on this antithesis," — of town and country {Capital, vol. i. p. 152, col. I).
144 REFLECTIONS ON VIOLENCE for these people. State Socialism would be advantageous, because they would go up one in the social hierarchy.
But all oppositions become extraordinarily clear when conflicts are supposed to be enlarged to the size of the general strike; then all parts of the economico-judicial structure, in so far as the latter is looked upon from the point of view of the class war, reach the smnmit of their perfection; society is plainly divided into two camps, and only into two, on a field of battle. No philosophical explanation of the facts observed in practical affairs could throw such vivid light on the situation as the extremely simple picture called up by the conception of the general strike.
(2) It would be impossible to conceive the disappearance of capitalistic dominance if we did not suppose an ardent sentiment of revolt, always present in the soul of the worker; but experience shows that very often the revolts of a day are far from possessing a really specifically socialistic character; more than once the most violent out- bursts have depended on passions which could be satisfied inside the middle-class world; many revolutionaries have been seen to abandon their old irreconcilability when they found themselves on the road to fortune.^ It is not only satisfactions of a material kind " which produce these frequent and scandalous conversions; vanity, much more than money, is the great motive force in transformation of the revolutionary into a bourgeois. All that would be negUgible if it were only a question of a few exceptional people, but it has often been maintained that the psycho- logy of the working classes would so easily adapt itself to the capitalistic order of things that social peace would be 1 It may be remembered that in the eruption at Martinique a governor perished who, in 1879, had been one of the protagonists of the Socialist congress held at Marseilles. The Commune itself was not fatal to all its partisans; several have had fairly distinguished careers; the ambassador of France at Rome was among the most importunate of those who, in 1871, demanded the death of the hostages.
THE PROLETARIAN STRIKE 145 rapidly obtained if employers on their part would make a few sacrifices of money and amour propre.
G. Le Bon says that the belief in the revolutionary instincts of crowds is a very great mistake, that their tendencies are conservative, that the whole power of Socialism lies in the rather muddled state of mind of the middle class; he is convinced that the masses will always flock to a Caesar.^ There is a good deal of truth in these judgments, which are founded on a very wide knowledge of history, but G. Le Bon's theories must be corrected in one respect: they are only valid for societies which lack the conception of the class war.
Observation shows that this last conception is main- tained with an indestructible vitality in every circle which has been touched by the idea of the general strike: the day when the slightest incidents of daily life become symptoms of the state of war between the classes, when every conflict is an incident in the social war, when every strike begets the perspective of a total catastrophe, on that day there is no longer any possibihty of social peace, of resignation to routine, or of enthusiasm for philan- thropic or successful employers. The idea of the general strike has such power behind it that it drags into the revolutionary track everything it touches. In virtue of this idea. Socialism remains ever young; all attempts made to bring about social peace seem childish; desertions of comrades into the ranks of the middle class, far from discouraging the masses, only excite them still more to rebellion; in a word, the line of cleavage is never in danger of disappearing.
(3) The successes obtained by politicians in their attempts to make what they call the proletarian influence 1 G. Le Bon, Psychologie du socialisme, 3rd ed. p. in and pp. 457-459. The author, who a few years ago was treated as an imbecile by the little bullies of university Socialism, is one of the most original physicists of our time.
J46 REFLECTIONS ON VIOLENCE felt in middle-class institutions, constitute a very great obstacle to the maintenance of the notion of class war. The world has always been carried on by compromises between opposing parties, and order has always been provisional. No change, however considerable, can be looked upon as impossible in a time Hke ours, which has seen so many novelties introduced in an imexpected manner. Modem progress has been brought about by successive compromises; why not pursue the aims of SociaUsm by methods which have succeeded so well? Many means of satisfying the more pressing desires of the imfortunate classes can be thought of. For a long time these proposals for improvement were inspired by a con- servative, feudal, or Catholic spirit. We wish, said the inventors, to rescue the masses from the influence of the Radicals. The latter, seeing their pohtical influence assailed, not so much by their old enemies as by Socialist poHticians, invent nowadays all kinds of projects of a progressive, democratic, free-thinking colour. We are beginning at last to be threatened with socialistic com- promises!
Enough attention has not always been paid to the fact that many kinds of political, administrative, and financial systems engender and support the domination of a middle class.^ We must not always attach too much importance to violent attacks on the middle class; they may have behind them the desire to reform and perfect capitalism.* There are, it seems, quite a number of people about now- adays who, though not in the least desiring the disappear- * The Socialists are mistaken in believing that the existence of a middle class is bound up with the existence of the capitalist industrial system. Any country submitted to a bureaucracy, directing production — either directly or through corporations — would have a middle class.
» I know, for instance, a very enlightened CathoUc, who gives vent with singular acrimony to his contempt for the French middle class; but his ideal is Americanism, i.e. a very young and very active capital' istic society.
THE PROLETARIAN STRIKE 147 ance of the capitalistic regime, would willingly abolish inheritance like the followers of Saint Simon.* The idea of the general strike destroys all the theoretical consequences of every possible social policy; its partisans look upon even the most' popular reforms as having a middle-class character; so far as they are concerned, nothing can weaken the fundamental opposition of the class war. The more the policy of social reforms becomes preponderant, the more will Sociahsts feel the need of placing against the picture of the progress which it is the aim of this policy to bring about, this other picture of complete catastrophe furnished so perfectly by the general strike.
B. Let us now examine, with the aid of the conception of the general strike, certain very essential aspects of the Marxian Revolution.
(i) Marx says that on the day of the Revolution the proletariat will be discipUned, imited, and organised by the very mechanism of production. This exceedingly concentrated formula would not be very intelligible if we did not read it in connection with its context; according to Marx, the working class is bowed beneath a system in which '* abject poverty, oppression, slavery, degrada- tion, and exploitation increase," and against which it is organising an ever-increasing resistance until the day when the whole social structure breaks up.^ The accuracy of this description has been many times disputed; it seems indeed to be more suited to the Manifesto period (1847) than to the time when Capital was published (1867); but this objection must not stop us, and it may be thrust on * p. de Rousiers was very much struck by the way rich fathers in the United States forced their sons to earn their own living; he often met " Frenchmen who were profoundly shocked by what they called the egoism of American fathers. It seemed revolting to them that a rich man should leave his son to earn his own living, that he did nothing to set him up in life" {La Vie am^ricaine, V Education et la sociiti, p. 9).
148 REFLECTIONS ON VIOLENCE one side by means of the theory of m5rths. The different terms which Marx uses to describe the preparation for the decisive combat are not to be taken Hterally as statements of fact about a determined future; it is the description in its entirety which should engage our attention, and taken in this way it is perfectly clear: Marx wishes us to understand that the whole preparation of the proletariat depends solely on the organisation of a stubborn, increas- ing, and passionate resistance to the present order of things.
This argument is of supreme importance if we are to have a sound conception of Marxism; but it is often contested, if not in theory, at least in practice; the proletariat, it has been held, sh9uld prepare for the part it is to play in the future by other ways than those of revolutionary Syndicalism. Thus the exponents of co- operation hold that a prominent place in the work of enfranchisement must be given to their own particular remedy; the democrats say that it is essential to aboUsh all the prejudices arising from the old CathoUc influence, etc. Many revolutionaries believe that, however useful S5mdicaUsm may be, it is not, in itself, sufficient to organise a society which needs a new philosophy, a new code of laws, etc.; as the division of labour is a fimdamental law of the world, SociaUsts should not be ashamed to apply to specialists in philosophy and law, of whom there is never any lack. Jaur^ never stops repeating this kind of stuff. This expansion of Socialism is contrary to the Marxian theory, as also to the conception of the general strike; but it is evident that the conception of the general strike makes a much more striking appeal to the mind than any formula.
(2) I have already called attention to the danger for the future of civilisation presented by revolutions which take pla^e in a period of economic decadence; many Marxists do not seem to have formed a clear idea of Marx's THE PROLETARIAN STRIKE 149 thought on this subject. The latter believed that the great catastrophe would be preceded by an enormous economic crisis, but the crisis Marx had in mind must not be confused with an economic decadence; crises appeared to him as the result of a too risky venture on the part of production, which creates productive forces out of pro- portion to the means of regulation. which the capitaUstic system automatically brings into play. Such a venture supposes that the future was looked upon as favourable to very large enterprises, and that the conception of economic progress prevailed absolutely at the time. In order that the lower middle classes, who are still able to find tolerable conditions of existence imder the capitalist regime, may join hands with the proletariat, it is essential that they shall be able to picture the future of production as bright with hope, just as the conquest of America formerly appeared to the EngUsh peasants, who left Europe to throw themselves into a life of adventure* The general strike leads to the same conclusions. The workers are accustomed to seeing their revolts against the restrictions imposed by capitalism succeed during periods of prosperity; so that it may be said that if you once identify revolution and general strike it then becomes impossible to conceive this of an essential transformation of the world taking place in a time of economic decadence. The workers are equally well aware that the peaisants and the artisans will not join hands with them unless the future appears so rosy-coloured that industriaUsm will be able to ameliorate the lot not only of the producers, but that of everybody.^ It is very important always to lay stress on the high * It is not difficult to see that propagandists are obliged to refer frequently to this aspect of the social revolution: this wiU take place while the intermediary classes are still in existence, but when they become sickened by the farce of social pacification, and when a period of such great economic progress has been reached that the future will appeau: in colours favourable to everybody.
rso REFLECTIONS ON VIOLENCE degree of prosperity which industry must possess in order that the reaUsation of Socialism may be possible; for ex- perience shows us that it is by seeking to stop the progress of capitalism, and to preserve the means of existence of classes who are on the down-grade, that the prophets of social peace chiefly endeavour to capture popular favour. The dependence of the revolution on the constant and rapid progress of industry must be demonstrated in a striking manner.^ (3) Too great stress cannot be laid on the fact that Marxism condemns every hypothesis about the future manufactured by the Utopists. Professor Brentano of Munich relates that in 1869 Marx wrote to his friend Beesly (who had pubhshed an article on the future of the working class) to say that up till then he had looked upon him as the sole revolutionary Enghshman, and that hence- forth he looked upon him as a reactionary — for, he said, " the man who draws up a programme for the future is a reactionary/' ^ He considered that the proletariat had no need to take lessons from the learned inventors of solutions to social problems, but simply to take up pro- duction where capitahsm left it. There was no need for programmes of the future; the programmes were already worked out in the workshops. The idea of a techno- logical continuity dominates the whole of the Marxian position.
* Kautsky has often dwelt on this idea, of which Engels was particu- larly fond.
* Bernstein said about this story that Brentano might have exag- gerated a little, but that " the phrase quoted by him was not incon- sistent with Marx's general line of thought " (Mouvement socialiste, September i, 1899, p. 270). Of what can Utopias be composed? Of the past and often of a very far-ofi past; it is probably for this reason that Marx called Beesly a reactionary, while everybody else was astonished at his revolutionary boldness. The Catholics are not the only people who are hypnotised by the Middle Ages, and Yves Guyot pokes fun at the collectivist troubadourism of Lafargue (Lafargue and Y. Guyot, La Propriiti, pp. 121-122).
THE PROLETARIAN STRIKE 151 Experience gained in strikes leads us to a conception identical with that of Marx. Workmen who put down their tools do not go to their employers with schemes for the better organisation of labour, and do not offer them assistance in the management of their business; in short, Utopias have no place in economic conflicts. Jaur^ and his friends are well aware that this is a very strong argu- ment against their own ideas of the way in which SociaUsm is to be realised: they would like even now to have fragments of the industrial programmes manufactured by learned sociologists and accepted by the workers introduced into strike negotiations; they would like to see the creation of what they call industrial parliamentarism which, exactly as in the case of political parhamentarism would imply, on the one hand, the masses who are led and, on the other, demagogues to show them the way. This would be the apprentice stage of their sham SociaHsm, and might begin at once.
With the general strike all these fine things disappear; the revolution appears as a revolt, pure and simple, and no place is reserved for sociologists, for fashionable people who are in favour of social reforms, and for the Intellectuals who have embraced the profession of thinking for the proletariat.
Cs Socialism has always inspired terror because of the enormous element of the unknown which it contains; people feel that a transformation of this kind would permit of no turning back. Utopists have used all their literary art in the endeavour to lull anxiety by pictures of tlie future, so enchanting that fear might be banished; but the more they accumulated fine promises, the more did thoughtful people suspect traps, and in this they were not altogether mistaken, for the Utopists would have led the world to disasters, tyranny, and stupidity, if they had been hearkened to.
Mairx was firmly convinced that the social revolution L IS2 REFLECTIONS ON VIOLENCE of which he spoke would constitute an irrevocable trans- formation, and that it would mark an absolute separation between two historical eras; he often returned to this idea, and Engels has endeavoured to show, by means of images which were sometimes a httle grandiose, how economic enfranchisement would be the point of departure of an era having no relationship with the past. Rejecting all Utopias, these two foimders of modem Socialism renounced all the resources by which their predecessors had rendered the prospect of a great revolution less formidable; but however strong the expressions which they employed might have been, the effects which they produced are still very inferior to those produced by the evocation of the general strike. This conception makes it impossible for us to ignore the fact that a kind of irresistible wave will pass over the old civihsation.
There is something really terrifying in all this; but I believe that it is very essential that this feature of Socialism should be insisted on if the latter is to have its full educa- tional value. Socialists must be convinced that the work to which they are devoting themselves is a serious, formidable, and sublime work; it is only on this condition that they will be able to bear the innimierable sacrifices imposed on them by a propaganda, which can procure them neither honours, profits, nor even immediate intellectual satisfaction. Even if the only result of the idea of the general strike was to make the SociaUst con- ception more heroic, it should on that account alone be looked upon as having an incalculable value.
The resemblances which I have just established between Marxism and the general strike might be carried still further and deeper; if they have been overlooked hitherto, it is because we are much more struck by the form of things than by their content; a large number of people find great difficulty in believing that there can be any parallehsm between a philosophy based on Hegelian- THE PROLETARIAN STRIKE 153 ism and the constructions made by men entirely devoid of higher culture. Marx had acquired in Germany a taste for very condensed formulas, and these formulas were so admirably suited to the conditions in the midst of which he worked that he naturally made great use of them. When he wrote, there had been none of the great and numerous strikes which would have enabled him to speak with a detailed knowledge of the means by which the proletariat may prepare itself for the revolution. This absence of knowledge gained from experience very much hampered Marx's thought; he avoided the use of too precise formulas which would have had this inconvenience of giving a kind of sanction to existing institutions, which seemed valueless to him; he was therefore happy to be able to find in German academic writing a habit of abstract language which allowed him to avoid all discussion of detail.i No better proof perhaps can be given of Marx's genius than the remarkable agreement which is found to exist between his views and the doctrine which revolutionary Syndicalism is to-day building up slowly and laboriously, keeping always strictly to strike tactics.
Ill Ill For some time yet, the conception of the general strike will have considerable difficulty in becoming acchmatised in circles which are not specially dominated by strike tactics. I think it might be useful at this point to enquire ^ I have elsewhere put forward the hypothesis that Marx, in the penultimate chapter of the first volume of Capital perhaps wished to demonstrate the difference between the evolution of the proletariat and that of middle-class force. He said that the working class is disciplined, united and organised by the very mechanism of capitalist production. There is perhaps an indication of a movement towards liberty, opposed to the movement towards automatism which will be discussed later when we come to consider middle-class force {Saggi di criiica. pp. 46-47).
IS4 REFLECTIONS ON VIOLENCE into the motives which explain the repugnance felt by many intelligent and sincere people who are disturbed by the novelty of the Syndicalist point of view. All the members of the new school know that they had to make great efforts in order to overcome the prejudices of their upbringing, to set aside the associations of ideas which sprang up spontaneously in their mind, and to reason along lines which in no way corresponded to those which they had been taught.
During the nineteenth century there existed an in- credible scientific ingenuousness which was the direct out- come of the illusions that had aroused so much excitement towards the end of the eighteenth century. ^ Because astronomers had managed to calculate the tables of the moon, it was believed that the aim of all science was to forecast the future with accuracy; because Le Verrier had been able to indicate the probable position of the planet Neptime — which had never been seen, and which accounted for the disturbances of observable planets — it was believed that science could remedy the defects of society, and indicate what measures should be taken to bring about the disappearance of the impleasant things in the world. It may be said that this was the middle- class conception of science: it certainly corresponds very closely to the mental attitude of those capitahsts, who, ignorant of the perfected appliances of their workshops, yet direct industry, and always find ingenious inventors to get them out of their difficulties. For the middle class science is a mill which produces solutions to all the problems we are faced with: ^ science is no longer con- 1 The history of scientific superstitions is of the deepest interest to philosophers who wish to understand Socialism. These superstitions have remained dear to our democracy, as they had been dear to the beaux esprits of the Old Regime; I have touched on a few of the aspects of this history in Les Illusions du progris. Engels was often under the influence of these errors, from which Marx himself was not always free.
• Marx quotes this curious phrase from Ure, written about 1830: " This invention supports the doctrine already developed by us: if THE PROLETARIAN STRIKE 155 sidered as a perfected means to knowledge, but only as a recipe for procuring certain advantages.^ I have said that Marx rejected all attempts to determine the conditions of a future society; too much stress cannot be laid on this point, for it shows that he took his stand outside middle-class science. The doctrine of the general strike also repudiates this science, and many professors consequently accuse the new school of having negative ideas only; their own aim, on the other hand, is the noble one of constructing universal happiness. The leaders of social democracy, it seems to me, have not been very Marxian on this point; a few years ago, Kautsky wrote a preface to a somewhat burlesque Utopia.^ I believe that among the motives which led Bernstein to part from his old friends must be counted the horror which he felt for their Utopias. If Bernstein had lived in France and had known our revolutionary Syndicalism, he would soon have perceived that the latter was on the true Marxian track; but neither in England nor in Germany did he find a working-class movement which could guide him; wishing to remain attached to realities, as Marx had been, he thought that it was better to carry on a policy of social reform, pursuing practical ends, than to lull himself to sleep to the soimd of fine phrases about the happiness of future himianity.
The worshippers of this useless pseudo science did not allow themselves to be stopped by the objection, legitimate in this case, that their methods of calculation were entirely inadequate of their means of determination. Their con- ception of science, being derived from astronomy, supposes capital enlists the aid of science, the rebel hand of labour always learns how to be tractable " {Capital, Eng. trans., vol. i. p. 188, col. 2).
* To use the language of the new school, science was considered from the point of view of the consumer and not from the point of view of the producer.
* Atlanticus, Ein Blick in den Zukunftsstaat. E. Seilli^re reviewed this book in the DSbats of August 16, 1899.
IS6 REFLECTIONS ON VIOLENCE that everything can be expressed by some mathematical law. Evidently there are no laws of this kind in sociology; but man is always susceptible to analogies connected with the forms of expression: it was thought that a high degree of perfection had been attained, and that already some- thing had been accomplished for science when — starting from a few principles not offensive to common sense, which seem confirmed by a few common experiences — it had been found possible to present a doctrine in a simple, clear, and deductive manner. This so-called science is simply chatter.^ The Utopists excelled in the art of exposition in accordance with these prejudices; the more their exposi- tion satisfied the requirements of a school book, the more convincing they thought their inventions were. I believe that the contrary of this belief is the truth, and that we should distrust proposals for social reform all the more, when every difficulty seems solved in an apparently satis- factory manner.
I should like to examine here, very briefly, a few of the illusions which have arisen out of what may be called the little science?' which beUeves that when it has attained * " It has not been enough noticed how feeble is the reach of deduc- tion in the psychological and moral sciences...Very soon appeal has to be made to common sense, that is to say, to the continuous ex- perience of the real, in order to inflect the consequences deduced and bend them along the sinuosities of life. Deduction succeeds in things moral only metaphorically so to speak " (Bergson, Creative Evolution, p. 224). Newman had already written something similar to this, but in more precise terms: " Thus it is that the logician for his own purposes, and most usefully as far as these purposes are concerned, turns rivers, full, winding and beautiful, into navigable canals...His business is not to ascertain facts in the concrete but to find and dress up middle terms; and, provided they and the extremes which they go between are not equivocal, either in themselves or in their use. Sup- posing he can enable his pupils to show well in a viva voce disputation,...he has achieved the main purpose of his profession " {Grammar of Assent, pp. 261-262). There is no weakness in this denunciation of small talk.
THE PROLETARIAN STRIKE 157