Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association

The Socialism of German Socialists

Author(s): W. E. Burghardt Du Bois
Source: Central European History, Vol. 31, No. 3 (1998), pp. 189-196
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Conference Group for Central
European History of the American Historical Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4546794
Accessed: 21/08/2010 03:47

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical
Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Central European History.

http://www.jstor.org
 The Socialism of

German Socialists

W. E. B. Du Bois

one hears that the vote of the socialistic party of Ger?

many rose from 312,000 in 1881 to 1,725,000 at the last elec?
WHEN tion of the Reichstag, the question naturally arises, What is
the true significance of this? How far have the economic theories of
Socialism really penetrated the masses of Germany? Such questions are
apart from the more usual inquiries as to the scientific soundness of the
official manifestoes of this party, or the personal aims of Bebel, Liebknecht
or von Vollmar. Nevertheless, the inquiry into the real economics beliefs
of the nearly two million German voters usually classed as "socialists," is
certainly of deep interest to the sociologist and statesman.
During a sojourn in Germany, I have met and conversed with socialists
and their opponents in many sections of the empire, have watched an
exciting political campaign, and while I am sure that my basis for induc-
tion and conclusion, is, in spite of this, dangerously narrow, yet some of
my observations given with all reserve, may be of value to students.
I distinguish, roughly, about seven classes of socialists in Germany. The
first and lowest class is that anarchistic semi-criminal proletariat, which
always in all countries attaches itself to the most radical party. The social?
ism or anarchism of this class has, naturally, little theoretic unity. They
are only united in desiring change; fretting and chafing under the strict
police-system of the Hohenzollern regime, they stand ever ready to fo-
ment disorder by deeds of violence, and even crime. There are among
them some earnest men who thoroughly believe that the foundations of
modern society are so rotten that any crime for its overthrow is justified.
This group has sometimes sought a separate organization and propaganda
from the socialists, and at no time have they been fairly representative of
the great mass of the Social-Democratic party.
The second group of socialist, and a more important one so far as
economic theory is concerned, is composed of those industrial classes who

Copyright ? 1997 by David DuBois. Reprinted by permission of David DuBois.

Central EuropeanHistory, vol. 31, no. 3, 189-196

189
190 THE SOCIALISM OF GERMAN SOCIALISTS

especially feel the intense pressure of those vast economic changes through
which Germany is now passing; they are the men who in every such
change pay the cost by lower wages, or entire lack of employment, they
bear more than their share of economic losses, and less than their share of
economic gains. Thus, in Germany, which, in spite of its Rhein and
Schwarzwald, is industrially younger than young America, the agricultural
laborer, the small handicraftsman, the common factory hands, and the
like, have, in the period of sweeping economic change since 1870, found
themselves pushed to the wall. They have been displaced by the Ameri?
can farm, outbidden by the factory and stock-company, or left to the
tender mercies of the sharpest industrial competition. In the face of such
facts their economic creed is as simple as powerful: they maintain in
action if not in words that any organization of society which forces a few
to bear the economic burdens of all, is radically false and wrong. While
the line of reasoning has not as yet driven all of this class into the Socialists'
arms, yet they have long formed the most promising field for proselytizing.
They are, not only a positive numerical power in the Social-Democratic
party, but also a well-nigh irresistible negative force: they are living examples
of the economic ills of society, before which the older Economics can, in
the nature of the case, have little to say, and at which the Socialists may
rave with powerful logic.
The third class of Socialists, belong, strange to say, to those who on
the whole have been benefited by the rise of the new Industrialism; they
include the great laboring classes, especially the skilled laborers?the Fourth
Estate. They are men who are earning fair wages?not so much as American
or English artisans, but much more than their fathers earned, and enough
to secure them a decent livelihood. While, then, they may be favorably
compared with most similar classes in other countries, they differ from
others in occupying a position in the political and industrial world, which
is new to them. The changes of the last two decades have aroused and
fired them, and their new aspirations have far outstretched their moderate
material betterment. These form the pith and marrow of the great Social-
Democratic party, because, being suddenly thrown together in the great
cities and manufacturing centres, they have just awakened to class-
consciousness, and realized their almost irresistible power as citizens and
voters; from country districts where almost mediaeval class distinctions
still exist, they have been thrust into communities where the Emperor
himself is freely criticized, and where men of their own class sit beside
Freiherrs and "vons" in the Reichstag. Thus the German laborer today is
flushed and enthusiastic over a new-found consciousness of power and
ability. Here, however, is nothing new; this is the same democratic move?
ment, which, with natural modifications in time, place, and method, has
 W. E. B. DU BOIS 191

played its role throughout the civilized world. I realized vividly as I moved
about amid an assembly of 10,000 socialists at Pankow, that German socialism,
as there represented, though it has new phases, catchwords, and object, is
in substance an old movement under a new name.
That there lies a deep significance in this name is not to be denied; not
that it means that the German workingman is a strict follower of Marx,
La Salle, or the Fabians: it merely indicates the more or less faintly de?
fined ideals which he has set before himself. At present his economic
creed is apt to be more simple than logical. He holds that the present
state of affairs is unsatisfactory because the ruling classes have usurped the
power rightfully belonging to the people, and use it to their own advan?
tage; the people, therefore, ought to have more power. Upon this simple
democratic argument, is then superimposed one more socialistic: the capitalists,
and the official and leisure classes, by gaining possession of the products
of labor, retain for themselves an undue share of these, and thus rob and
oppress the laborer; therefore these rulers of the industrial state should be
deposed, and?with a dextrous swing back to the original argument?the
people made the rulers of the state, where then would be Freedom, Equality
and Brotherhood. These two almost opposing arguments of Democracy
and Socialism are to be heard thus combined in the mouth of the mass of
this class of German socialists. As was printed on the Pankow program,
they declare in one breath: "Nun kommt der Freiheit grosser Tag, Nun
soil die Arbeit siegen."
Further the workingman is especially attracted to the Social-Democratic
party by its shrewd leadership, its superb organization, and its growing
success. They feel it to be their party, take pride in it, and are in no little
degree flattered by the attention and notoriety the party has gained in
aristocratic Germany. Small wonder that "Arbeiter" and "Socialist" have
become almost synonymous terms in Germany: my neighbor, at a great
political meeting in Berlin, remarked: "The socialistic vote at X was small,
because there are few workingmen there."
Manifestly, however, this sort of socialism holds within itself the seeds
of its own decay, and its development will be watched with interest. It
is, of course, possible that strong leaders may infuse the economic doc-
trines of socialism into this class to such an extent that their energies will
bend themselves toward a realization of the Zukunfts-staat. On the other
hand, it is more probable that they will find the spirit of Democracy
which they have evoked by their Freedom-cry, too strong to be long
attracted by the machine-like organization of a socialistic state; indeed,
recent developments in the party seem to point to this latter outcome.
Many measures looking toward the amelioration of the condition of the
masses, and the increase of their political and social activity, are today
192 THE SOCIALISM OF GERMAN SOCIALISTS

advocated by a branch of the Social-Democratic party, which measures,

although democratic enough, are by no means regarded by other leaders,
as germane to orthodox socialism. Democracy and Socialism have too
diverse goals in view for both long to remain the practical objects of one
political organization; and as far as the mass of German working men is
concerned, Democracy would seem at present to hold out the stronger
allurements.
As leaders of these nominal socialists, and as men who, by reason of
their economic beliefs, more nearly deserve to be called real socialists,
come the fourth group. They are composed of the lower middle or burger
class, who feel not only the material, but even more keenly, the moral
revolution, which the new Industrialism has precipitated. The hard com?
mercial bargains, the sharp competition, the higgling of the market, and
the whole idea of reducing human effort to a mere money basis, is pecu-
liarly bewildering to the slow-going good-natured German burger. He
finds his economic calculations all awry, and cannot easily adapt his pro?
ductive efforts to a world market, instead of to the wants of a small
village community. When now the young men of this class start out into
life, with little if any capital, and with ideals and prejudices somewhat
strange to the counting-house and factory, they soon find themselves crowded
back in the competition. An unlooked for result of the Prussian educa?
tional system, renders a man, who can read, write, and cipher, no rarity,
and here again is a cause of increased competition among the young men
of the lower middle class, whose commercial training otherwise has been
limited. For this reason one meets all over Germany young men of hon-
est parentage and good character who are unsuccessful in the new busi?
ness life of the land, and barred out by birth from other avenues of
advancement, and who on this account have turned toward Socialism as
a panacea. My kindhearted old landlady down in the Rheinpfalz pointed
out to me such a struggling young fellow, who was vainly trying to
subsist as bookkeeper in a cotton factory, on a salary of 78 marks per
month: "Do you blame our young men from becoming socialist?" she
asked indignantly.
Undoubtedly, lack of capital and business sense, together with the irre?
sistible competition of sharp, and sometimes unscrupulous, Jews, would
explain much of this misfortune. The young German burger, however, is
beginning to explain it differently. He considers the present low standard
of morals in industry anomalous, and in need of reform. He expects this
reform to come as most social reforms do, in the enlargement of the
number of those who advancement is to be regarded as the Summum
Bonum of the State; as, now, the tale of the century has been toward the
idea of government for All and not for a Few, so we will rise from the
 W. E. B. DU BOIS 193

idea of an industrial system for the Few, to that of industry organized for
the benefit of All. As to the exact way in which this momentous change
is to be effected, there is great diversity of opinion, but most of this class
probably believe that much could be done immediately and that the whole
revolution could be accomplished in a quarter-century. These opinions
are not generally based on very thorough investigation or deep thought,
but come rather from limited observation, guided by political discussions
and socialistic literature. Many of these young men are deterred from
openly joining the Socialists, from social and political motives, and yet,
they share in these opinions, and give countenance to their spread.
While we finish with the last class, the catalogue of those who openly
identify themselves with the Social-Democratic party, or even acknowl-
edge themselves to be socialists, yet there are other classes in Germany,
who, in my opinion, deserve to be classed under that head. The for-
eigner must never forget, that no German gentleman can identify himself
with the Social-Democratic party that all means of rise or preferment in
commercial, political, or social life, would be immediately closed to such
a scape-goat. Consequently the boast, I am a Socialist, is never heard
above the lower middle class, and yet, aid and sympathy for the move?
ment come from higher classes, where socialistic doctrines have many
converts. In only one career, can some modifications of extreme socialis?
tic doctrines be held without danger to holder's advancement; and that is,
in the academic world. In a land where an aristocracy of intellect vies in
authority with that of blood, it is natural that the student class should be
large and influential. If this was true of Germany in the past, it is more
so to-day, when the universities are crowded, and, as a disgusted
Oberregierungsrathin informed me: "Everybody is a student!" Naturally,
one looks to such a class for radical doctrines, and although it would be
wrong to think that any great part of the German students are declared
socialists, yet it is certain that they are so largely tinged with socialistic
doctrines as to deserve a place as the fifth of the socialistic groups I am
considering.
The natural bent of the German mind to systematize all human knowl?
edge, has always given the doctrine of state socialism an irresistible claim
in their eyes; this added to the crowded condition of the learned profes?
sions, and the consequent discontent of the aspirants (to many of whom
this is the sole avenue of escape from the disadvantages of birth) has
opened the door to radicalism of various kinds. As pure theory, Socialism
has, in this class, made many converts. Nevertheless, the socialism of students
is in general radically opposed in many ways to the socialism of the Social-
Democratic party, by the fact that it is thoroughly aristocratic. The most
socialistic of students, cannot overlook the difference between the educated
194 THE SOCIALISM OF GERMAN SOCIALISTS

and ignorant or embrace any theory of the State which assumes their
equality. The Social-Democrat, on the other hand, assumes that Socialism
and Democracy may be identical; in case of conflict, however, he clings
to Democracy, and at all times regards a socialistic Aristocrat, with suspi-
cion. In the Zukunfts Staat of the student, the great, and to him the only
theoretical difficulty, lies in securing the leadership in the hands of an
aristocracy of learning: this point settled and he has little doubt of the
efficacy of Socialism to cure nearly all social ills. He has in common with
all the upper classes of Germany a fine contempt for commercial pursuits,
and consequently his socialistic State, too, rather neglects its economic
basis, to [enjcompass the higher aims of society.
Some Quixotic efforts have been made to unite the student socialists
and the Social-Democrats, and some alleged conferences of German so?
cialistic students have been held in Switzerland. While the strong arm of
the government would of itself preclude any such union, the natural an-
tagonism of the two parties, would, in its absence, probably keep them
apart. A curious hand-bill argument for such a union, was circulated during
my residence at Berlin, and itself illustrated the futility of the attempt; it
declared: "Capital has made merchandise not only of the labor of the
manual workman, but also of the labor of the brain worker. This injures
both producer and product?the producer being the Scientist, the product
Science. Only by the overthrow of Capitalism can Socialism bring this
unseemly situation to an end; therefore, ye brain-workers, especially students,
it is your duty?so long as free, true science, is your heart's desire?to
come to this meeting and inform yourselves in regard to Socialism."
Above the mass of immature young students comes the sixth group of
socialists, composed of young doctors, tutors and professors?the spiritual
descendants of the Socialists of the Chair. Few of these are avowed so?
cialists, and mutual contempt and suspicion generally exists between them
and the Social-Democrats. Indeed, little or no tinge of Democracy taints
the professorial socialist, in a day when a Hohenzollern monarchy has
built a new Germany, most thinking Germans are monarchists "von Gottes
Gnade." The work of the Katheder Socialists, and their followers, has
been to formulate an economic theory which would suit the industrial
conditions of [the] New Germany. That English economic philosophy,
which so admirably generalized the economic situation in England during
the first half of the century, was, naturally, inadequate, misleading and
wrong, when applied without modification to the new and unusual con?
ditions in Germany. Social philosophers and statesmen hastened to stem
the tide of liberalism, which insisted on applying English individualistic,
free-competition, philosophy, to all men everywhere, at all times. They
succeeded, and today no German economist defends the laissez-faire system
 W. E. B. DU BOIS 195

as more than a passing phase of development. On the other hand, the

economists have not succeeded in uniting upon any socialistic theory of
the State, although nearly all seem inclined to some such solution. One
has only to note the sort of omnium gatherum character of new text?
books like Wagner's Lehr- und Handbuch to realize this situation of the
professors. A distant clear note on the attitude of the learned world to?
ward Socialism has, in my opinion, been struck by only one group, the
so-called "younger historical school" led by Schmoller of Berlin and fol?
lowed by a large and increasing number of younger men. This school
does not very clearly announce any ulterior theoretic aim, further than
the preservation of the essential and indivisible unity of all sociological
inquiry. They confine themselves in practice to careful statistical investi?
gation of the history and development of present economic conditions,
and social phenomena. From this gradually increasing basis of scientific
facts, they attempt to recommend remedies for certain more obvious so?
cial ills, but go no further in such recommendations and generalizations
than a careful interpretation of the facts at hand. They contend, however,
that there is a frightful amount of injustices under the present individual-
istic regime: to correct this is their great ethical object.
The practical outcome of the work of this school, and of the other
followers of the Katheder Socialists has been enormous and social changes
in Germany, carried out on such distinctly socialistic lines that Germany
has with reason been called the great socialistic State of the day: its vast
and penetrating army system, its searching inspection and factory laws, its
press and public meeting regulations, its employer's liability laws, its old
age, accident and its workingmen's compulsory insurance, its state and
municipal industries, its governmental interference in industry, politics and
society?all this makes the school, which since the Franco-Prussian war,
has more and more persistently formulated the sort of legislation rightly
deserving to be called socialistic. These social philosophers themselves do
not pretend to be able to prove that all these experiments are successful,
nor do they contend that radical and complete socialism is a panacea for
social ills. On the contrary, they regard its practicableness unproved and
improbable. They think, however that facts, so far, tend to prove that an
organization of industry far more socialistic than at present, would, in
most civilized countries, conserve greater social justice.
For such a movement in the learned world so completely to capture
the German State as it has, it was necessary that the statesmen of the
empire be in sympathy. Since this was the case, I venture, in spite of the
apparent irony, to class the leaders of the German state as the seventh,
and final class of German socialists. It was a rare specimen of opportun-
ism that warded off 18th century Radicalism, and 19th century Democracy,
196 THE SOCIALISM OF GERMAN SOCIALISTS

by transforming the 17th century Paternalism of the Hohenzollerns into

20th century Socialism. This master play sought to stem the rising tide of
Liberalism by the bulwark of social reform on socialistic lines. Curiously,
and yet naturally, the greatest foe of this socialistic state is the Social-
Democratic party of today, and this, for the sole reason, that Germany
today, in spite of reform, remains at bottom paternalistic and aristocratic.
The opposition does not lie in the socialism, but between Democracy
and Aristocracy; the state under the rule of Socialism, seeks to impress
the idea that the conscientious government of the few for the many is
the best government; the Social Democrat declares that only by the rule
of All can the interests of All be perceived. Here is the true antagonism
which today cleaves the German State in twain. German statesmen stand
for the increase of the power of the State, and are socialistic in many of
their schemes for the common weal; but they are as far from Marxism, as
the Social-Democrats are from their ideals of aristocratic social reform.
Finally, let me again say that the foregoing conclusions lay no claim to
finality?they merely state the results of my limited observations.

W. E. BURGHARDT DU BOIS, PH.D.