The Socialist Tradition: Moses to Lenin

533 Pages·2010·43.478 MB·English

by  Alexander Gray

THE- SOCIALIST TRADITION
MOSES TO LENIN
LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO. LTD.
OF PATERNOSTER ROW
43 ALBERTDRIVE,LONDON,s.w. 19
NICOL ROAD, BOMBAY
17 CIDTTARANJAN AVENUE, CALCUTTA
36A MOUNT ROAD, MADRAS
LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO.
55·FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK3
LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO.
215 VICTORIA STREET, TORONTO I
FirstPublished1946
CODE NUMBER: 15631
Printed in EnglandatTHE BALLANTYNE PRESS
SPOTTISWOODE, BALLANTYNE & Co. LTD.
Colchester, London 8 Eton
PREFACE
IT is a chastening thought that some parts of this book have had an
ante-natal existence of approximately twenty-two years. When I
began the final stage ofreducing to writing an unwritten book, I had
in mind the production of·what should be, in size and otherwise, a
companion volume to The Development ofEconomic Doctrine, which
apparently has been found to serve a certain purpose intheeducation
oftheyoung economist. Despite my good intentions, however, it has
refused to be compressed; and in the end it...does not fall far short
ofattainingtwice the modestdimensions originallyplanned. Possibly
the socialists, being in the main dissentients, rebels, and prophets, are
a moreinteresting lotthantheir orthodox and respectable cousins, the
,economists.'
I make no apology for writing this book. It may not be the book
which the general reader requires as an introduction to the develop
ment of socialist thought, but that.at the present moment he does
require a book on the subject is beyond all question. Kirkup's
History ofSocialism dates from 1892; and since then the literature
on the subject has been astonishingly meagre, and-as it may appear
to many-grossly disfigured by prejudice on one side or the other.
It ought to be possible to write of Socialism without the underlying
assumption that socialists alone are right and righteous; that they
alone are the true crusaders against the powers ofdarkness. Equally,
ofcourse, itoughttobepossibletowrite ofSocialismwithoutassuming
that all socialists are fundamentally dishonest, and that Socialism
attracts exclusively the world's incompetents and the world's failures.
And ofthis second view, there are also some glaring examples.
Not that anyone in these matters can be expected to write without
bias: if such a miracle were possible, the result would probably not
be worth reading. There is, however, an obvious duty resting on an
expositorto try to understand a point ofview, even when he disagrees
withit. Inthepresentcase, mybias-somemaysaymy ,prejudice'
is doubtless sufficiently apparent. I shall be told that I am not sym
pathetic to Marx and the Marxian tradition. In a Preface an author,
having rigorously eschewed the First Person Singular throughout
eighteen chapters, may be allowed to talk somewhat more informally
to his readers; and accordingly I am prepared to acknowledge that
Ido notlikeMarx, andthatIdo notlikeLassalle; justasfurther back
I do notlike Rousseau. And though onemayadmit onhighprinciple
that one ought not to allow a small matter of likes and dislikes to
influence judgment, those of us who are honest with ourselves will
v
vi PREFACE
admit that in general 'it does for all that! It is difficult to imagine
any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time. Further,
if in the intimacy of a Preface I may continue to be indiscreet, Marx
irritates me because in the last generation he has so successfully led
so many of the • intellectuals' up the garden path, where at great
length they discuss What Marx Really Meant, and say things which
would astonish you, as they would certainly have astonished Marx,
could he have overheard them discoursing in the garden-house: It
is greatly to his credit that Marx, so it is recorded, protested on one
occasion that he was not a Marxian. Mr. E. H. Carr, who almost
alone in the present generation writes of Marx with balance, comments
on the attitude of the pseudo-Marxists in this matter, and their pathetic
faith that • if but one plank can be saved from the discredited platform
of Marxism, all will be well.' It is an unedifying spectacle. No one
would suggest that Marx was consciously dishonest, but a very great
deal of intellectual disingenuousness has gone to the explaining (and
the explaining-away) of Marx. Accordingly, all things considered,
I do not like the company of Marx.
Spiritually, despite, or because of, their absurdities, I am much
more at home with Saint~Simon and Fourier. While I would do much
to avoid meeting Marx-for this Diotrephes of the socialist church
would merely bark. at me· in his hot displeasure-:-I should greatly
appreciate a long evening with Fourier in a quiet hostelry; and, if the
bar were not too crowded, I believe I could prevail upon him to give
his marvellous impersonation of a fox or of a robin or a giraffe, with
copious comments on the qualities each of them symbolised. It was
a performance which he gave only when his company was entirely
congenial.
While I am thus prepared to acknowledge that I have my likes and
dislikes among the team here assembled, and while this may have
made me in some cases more sympathetic. than elsewhere, I do not
think that I have anywhere been • unfair.' At least, within the space
available, I have tried to allow my witnesses to say all that they have
to say, and to say it in their own words. As a final contribution to
• impartiality,' I have, after searching my heart, confessed herewith
that, should we all hereafter forgather in an Elysium, devised by
Mr. Eric Linklater, it is only with Marx, Lassalle and Rousseau that
I shall hope to avoid being on visiting terms. Having warned the
reader of this, my possible bias, he may make the desired correction
in the other sense.
The only practical reparation an author can make for writing a
book twice the length he had intended is to indicate what parts the
reader-in-a-hurry may skip. While, officially, I am bound to say that
each chapter contributes something to a comprehension of all the
others, in fact most of the chapters are reasonably self.·contained, l:Uld
PREFACE vii
anyone may therefore read the portion in which he is interested. The
reader who is exclusively concerned with the problems of Socialism
to-day may be tempted to begin at Chapter 12 with Marx; but I
would plead with him (unless he is very pressed) to go further back;
we do not in this country know enough about the Fathers of Socialism
(so-called), and on the human side they are much more interesting
than the children they begat. I would therefore suggest that the
hurried reader, after running through the Prologue which gives the
framework, should begin at Chapter 5, with William Godwin. He
might omit Chapter 11, unless, merely for the sake of sampling, he
elects to read the sections on two of the English pre-Marxians (let us
suggest Hall and Gray). In Chapter 12 he might, if he gnaws at the
main joint, omit Lassalle and Rodbertus. In Chapter 13 he could
restrict himself to Bakunin, and in Chapter 14 he might prove his
insularity by leaving Bernstein aside. The concluding chapter, as
it merely contains. disconnected and irresponsible comments by the
author, may also be neglected by those who seek a ' shortened course.'
I am under great obligations to many librarians who have
magnanimously allowed books to go out of their immediate care;
perhaps I may be allowed to acknowledge in particular the help
received from the Custodians of the Libraries of the Universities of
Edinburgh and Aberdeen. To my son, John Gray, I am indebted
for assistance in the tasks of proof-reading and of the preparation
of the Index.
ALExANDER GRAY.
Edinburgh,
September 1944.

CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
PROLOGUE AND PLAN 1
- .
1. THE GREEK TRADITION 10
II. THE JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN TRADITIONS . 32
(a) The Old Testament 32
(b) The Essenes 35
(c) The New Testament 38
(d) The Christian Fathers: General Considera-
tions 42
(e) Certain Christian Fathers 45
(f) St. Thomas Aquinas 54
III. UTOPIA AND THE UTOPIAS 61
(a) Thomas More 61
(b) Campanella 70
(c) Fenelon 72
IV. ROUSSEAU AND SOME OTHERS 76
(a) Rousseau 76
(b) Mably 85
(c) Morelly 93
(d) Babeuf 100
(e) Fichte 109
V. WILLIAM GODWIN 114
:VI. SAINT-SIMON AND THE SAINT-SIMONIANS 136
.
(a) Henri de Saint-Simon 136
(b) The Saint-Simonians 160
VII. CHARLES FOURIER 169
VIII. ROBERT OWEN 197
IX. LOUIS BLANC . 218
ix
x CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
x. P. J. PRQUDHON 230
XI. EARLY ENGLISH SOCIALISM 257
The Agrarians:
(a) Spence. 257
(b) Ogilvie. 259
The Pre-Marxians:
(c) Hall 262
(d) Thompson 269
(~) Hodgskin 277
(I) Bray 283
(g) Gray 289
XII. SCIENTIFIC SOCIALISM 297
(a) Marx and Engels. 297
(b) Lassalle 332
(c) Rodbertus 343
XIII. THE ANARCHIST TRADITION 352
(a) Bakunin 352
(b) Kropotkin 362
(c) Bertrand Russell 371
(d) Conclusions on Anarchism 380
XIV.. EVOLUTIONARY SOCIALISM 384
(a) Fabianism 384
(b) Eduard Bernstein and' Revisionism' 401
XV. SYNDICALISM 408
XVI. GUILD SOCIALISM 433
XVII. LENIN 459
XVIII. POSTFACE 487
INDEX 515
THE SOCIALIST TRADITION
MOSES TO LENIN
PROLOGUE AND PLAN
THE purpose of the present volume is to present the outstanding
figures in the development ofsocialist thought, with some estimate of
the significance of their several contributions. It does not, it should
be observed, aim at being a history ofsocialist thought: such a task,
in its immensity, would probably engage more than the average life
time of any moderately conscientious student. Nor indeed (though
it may·savour ofheresy) is a history ofsocialism on a comprehensive·
scale a primary requirement for the ordinary man, confronted with
the problems of to-day. Further, any temptation to be drawn into
the history of·the socialist movement has, so far as possible, been
resisted. It is admittedly a cognate subject; but again, the effort,
doubtless incumbent on all ofus, to disentangle the confusion ofideas
making up the environment in which we live, would not be materially
aided by embarking on the vain attempt (for instance) to understand
the cross-currents and interrelations among the socialist parties in
France in the second half of the nineteenth century. Here we are
primarily concerned with 'ideas,' as these ideas have been reflected
in the minds of the men who have been most influential in shaping
the socialist tradition. As a consequence ofthis method ofapproach
itis inevitable that many connecting links should be omitted and even
.some considerable movements ignored. It is suggested, however,
withsomeconfidence, that ifthe ordinaryman,who is the bulk ofthe
population, can acquire a knowledge of what Godwin or Proudhon,
or Marx or Lenin stood for, he may, without great immediate loss,
leave to the academic expert the fascinating pursuit of conjectural
sources and hiddeninfluences.
One question barks for anansweronthe threshold ofourjqurney;
but Prudence and Cowardice (a combination ofpotent masters) unite
in suggesting that the question should meantime be avoided. What,
it may at the outset reasonably be asked, are we to understand by
socialism? The definitions of socialism that strew the expositions
and the criticisms of socialism furnish a depressing prospect. Some
are foolish; some are vacuous; some are contradictory; some,
which appear commendable up to a point, leave gaping omissions.
B