The emergence of certain theories of social development, as a rule, is associated with practice, with the emergence or discovery of new moments of objective reality. At the same time, however, the difference between the two types of theories is clearly visible. Some, arising in connection with practice, do not fetishize it, do not adapt to it, but on its basis, Answering the tasks of the day, at the same time open up new perspectives, pave unknown paths. It is no accident that opponents of such theories often talk about their utopian and romantic nature. In fact, it is precisely such theories that serve as a powerful searchlight illuminating the historical highway of social development, a true compass for moving forward. Theories of a different kind adapt to practice, are designed to sanctify it and its adaptability to certain existing conditions. Their authors and proponents usually boast of realism and practicality, the "obvious" feasibility of their tasks, although in reality this is far from the case.

Theories of the first kind include Marxism-Leninism in its origin and constant development. An example of theories of the second kind is revisionism. The true role of theoretical reasoning, which is subordinated to the justification of narrow practicality, is vividly revealed by the history of Bernsteinism in German social democracy at the beginning of the twentieth century.

In his herostratically famous book "The Prerequisites of Socialism and the Tasks of Social-Democracy", E. Bernstein proclaimed the task of the followers of Karl Marx and F. Engels '"Restoring unity between theory and practice"1 . At the same time, it was emphasized that the book is intended "primarily for workers", and its right to exist "lies not in the fact that it reveals the unknown, but in the fact that it recognizes what has already been discovered", stated or noted by others .2 The appeal to the workers to explain what others have already discovered is very revealing. After all, the" new critical " trend in social-democracy, as V. I. Lenin noted, reproduced the bourgeois criticism of all the main ideas of Marxism, which had long been conducted "both from the political rostrum and from the university department, and in the mass of pamphlets and in a number of scientific treatises"; in its content, this trend "was directly transferred from bourgeois literature to socialist literature " 3 .

Now, however, the herald of the "new theory" was a prominent social-democratic figure who declared that, while criticizing the new theory, Marx was not a member of the party.-

1 E. Bernstein. Die Voraussetzungen des Sozialismus und die Aufgaben der Sozialdemokratie. B. (West) - Bonn-Bad Godesberg. 1973, S. 50.

2 Ibid., S. 50, 51.

3 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 6, pp. 7, 8.

page 67

On the other hand, he is primarily concerned with the correctness of Marx and for this reason advocates the further development and improvement of his teaching .4 Thus, the opportunist practice in the ranks of the working - class movement, which in one way or another reflected the influence of the bourgeois worldview on it, received a pseudo-Marxist justification and cover, which to a certain extent obscured the odious connection between bourgeois theories and social-opportunist practice. At the same time, since E. Bernstein followed bourgeois theories in solving the task he proclaimed of bringing Marxism in line with the new trends of social development and the possibilities of the working-class movement, his concepts very clearly reflected their inherent features. We are talking about those features peculiar to the works of bourgeois authors, about which Lenin wrote that " not a single professor of political economy who is capable of giving the most valuable works in the field of factual, special research can be trusted in a single word, since it comes to the general theory of political economy. For this latter science is just as much a party science in modern society as epistemology." 5
The fact that Bernstein sometimes expressed sound judgments when clarifying certain specific aspects of the reality of that time only served to camouflage the true essence of his concepts, which were generally imbued with a rejection of the class - proletarian line. Revising Marxism under the banner of bringing it in line with the changed historical situation, of strengthening the "realistic element" in it, actually meant forgetting the fundamental tasks of the proletariat in the name of an agreement with certain strata of the bourgeoisie. This was the fundamental essence of Bernstein's task: to combine theory with practice. As an epigraph to the section of the book devoted to the immediate tasks of social-democracy, he took the words from Schiller's "Mary Stuart": "And what she is, let her dare to appear." 6 It went on to explain that social democracy would be able to find a common language with its opponents, who were inclined to political reforms in order to avoid a socialist revolution, and would contribute to the growth of their influence if it had the courage "to free itself from obsolete phraseology and present itself as what it really is today: a democratic-socialist reform party".7 .

Bernstein also interpreted the increasingly acute questions of the attitude of the working class and its party to the imperialist foreign policy of Germany from this point of view. Reassurances about the high importance of internationalism8 resulted in a complete disregard for it. It was motivated, first,by the fact that the position of the proletariat in society was changing, and consequently its attitude towards the fatherland. "A worker who, in the state, community, etc., is an equal voter and, consequently, a co - owner of the public domain of the nation, whose children are brought up by society, whose health it protects and whom it protects from injustice - this worker will have a fatherland," Bernstein wrote. He was not disturbed by the incongruity of such an idyllic picture with the true state of affairs and prospects for changing the situation of workers in Germany. In the name of rapprochement with bourgeois circles, he completely "forgot" that under capitalist conditions the political and economic rights of the proletariat are not granted to them, but are won in the struggle, and the right to vote does not determine the right to own property. Secondly,

4 See E. Bernstein. Op. cit., S. 50 - 51.

5 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 18, pp. 363-364.

6 E. Bernstein. Op. cit., S. 198

7 Ibid., S. 230.

8 Ibid., S. 205.

9 Ibid., S. 204.

page 68

Bernstein argued that social democracy, in the event of gaining political supremacy in Germany, must prove, in order to strengthen its position, its ability to care equally for both class and national interests .10 His thesis that "internationalism cannot serve as a basis for weakly yielding to foreigners" 11 was organically connected with this .

The logical application of such arguments was to justify the aggressive policy of German imperialism in China, although it was accompanied by statements that social-democracy should not assume responsibility for German foreign policy. Bernstein strongly objected to the SPD's principled condemnation of Germany's acquisition of a stronghold in China, because, in his opinion, " the German people are extremely interested in ensuring that China does not become the prey of other peoples.. so that Germany has the final say on all issues concerning China"12 . He argued: "There is no reason to see in advance something reprehensible in the acquisition of colonies", " the savages can only be recognized as a conditional right to the land they occupy. A higher culture ultimately has a higher right. " 13
Bernstein gave the appearance that, without deviating from Marxism, he was guided by "a principle that expresses a higher stage of economy and the whole of social life", which should be imbued with the goals of the proletariat .14 In fact, the question of these goals was solved by the father of revisionism by ignoring the world-historical significance of the fundamental class proletarian interests, their indissolubility with the main line of social progress. Bernstein rejected the problems of revolution, reducing its meaning "in the political sense of the word" only to insurrection, " extra-legal violence." To denote a radical change in the social system, he used the term "social transformation", which allowed us to consider the question of the means of its implementation open .15 At the same time, ignoring the true role of the state mechanism, especially its repressive organs, Bernstein argued that unlike the petrified, frozen institutions of feudal society, the "liberal institutions" of capitalist society are "flexible, capable of change" and only need to be developed further. "This requires organization and vigorous action, and there is no need for a revolutionary dictatorship." 16 Thus, Bernstein, who persistently pursued a course of breaking away from Marxist dialectics, also tried to avoid the dialectical task of dealing with bourgeois (and practically junker-bourgeois) statehood, condemning the working-class movement to develop within the framework and direction that is acceptable or at least allowed by those in power.

Bernsteinism along all lines provided theoretical cover and ideological justification for the opportunism that had already developed in the ranks of the SPD. "Defending class cooperation, renouncing the idea of socialist revolution and revolutionary methods of struggle, adapting to bourgeois nationalism, forgetting the historically transitory borders of nationality or fatherland, turning into a fetish of bourgeois legality, renouncing the class point of view and the class struggle for fear of alienating "the broad masses of the population" (read: the petty bourgeoisie).-

10 Ibid., S. 205.

11 Ibid., S. 206.

12 Ibid, S. 208.

13 Ibid., S. 210. 211.

14 Ibid., S. 256.

15 Ibid., S. 133 - 134.

16 Ibid. S. 197.

page 69

such are undoubtedly the ideological foundations of opportunism, " wrote V. I. Lenin. It is characteristic that the German bourgeois and governmental circles were very sympathetic to the Bernsteiniad. The Ministry of Internal Affairs noted the publication of the book "Prerequisites for Socialism" as a positive development. The Ministry of Justice, at the direction of Chancellor B. Bulow, decided not to renew the order to capture Bernstein in the event of his illegal return from exile to Germany, and the liberal weekly Zukunft hoped that with Bernstein's arrival, a new chapter in the history of German social democracy would begin .18
The proclamation of revisionism contributed to the growth of opportunist forces in German social-democracy, to their consolidation as a special trend in the party, and to the intensification of attacks against Marxism on the whole range of questions of theory and practical activity of proletarian organizations included in it. And if some opportunist party leaders declared their preference for a" quiet " reformist policy without the revelations that Bernstein made, the reason was not so much to underestimate his role in strengthening the position of opportunism, but rather to avoid open confrontation with the revolutionary forces of the labor movement. On this basis, the opportunists also tried to portray the unfolding struggle of the Marxists against the Revisionists as a purely "academic" dispute, which has no significance for practical politics. 19 In the same spirit, numerous party authorities later insisted that the magazine Sozialistische Monatshefte, which had become a de facto revisionist organ, was not read by anyone. V. I. Lenin wrote in this connection: "The most prominent and responsible figures, parliamentarians, leaders of trade unions, who write in the Socialist Monthly, hold their view in the following terms: mass constantly and steadily " 20 .

Revisionist "critics" of Marxism demanded that we take a sober view of the realities of capitalist reality and the working-class movement, abandon the "utopian way of thinking in socialist theory"21 , and turn it into a doctrine that should not contradict reality 22 . In fact, however, the revisionists turned a blind eye to the content and essence of the most important new phenomena and processes in world history, the liberation movement of the proletariat and other working people.

In 1905-1907, the first people's revolution of the imperialist era took place in Russia. It stirred up the whole world, caused the growth of revolutionary actions of workers and peasants in many countries, and the rise of the national liberation movement in the colonies. The Russian Revolution has shown new perspectives and ways of fighting for democracy and socialism.-

17 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 26, p. 36.

18 See N. E. Ovcharenko. German Social Democracy at the Turn of two Centuries (Ideological and political evolution of the SPD in the period of imperialism), Moscow, 1975, pp. 78-79.

19 For more information, see: H. Bartel. Zur Auseinandersetzung zwischen Marxismus und Revrsionismus in der deutschen Arbeiterbewegung am Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts. "Beitrage zur Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung", 1977, N 2, S. 205 - 207, 215 - 217; Д. Фрикке. Magazine "Sotsialistische Monatshefte" in 1895-1914. " Yearbook of German History. 1974". Moscow, 1975, pp. 224, 226-227.

20 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 25, p. 109.

21 E. Bernstel. Op. cit., S. 13.

22 P. Kampffmeyer. Die sozialistische Theorie und die Praktiker der Arbeiterbewegung. "Sozialistische Monatshefte" (далее - "SM"), 1909, Bd. 2. S. 1486.

page 70

lim. It has demonstrated with great force the role of the proletariat as the hegemon of a broad democratic liberation movement, capable of winning not so much with the help of the bourgeoisie as in spite of its attempts to stop in the middle. The revolution gave a vivid example of the militant self-activity of the broadest masses; their work created the Soviets as the embodiment of the revolutionary - democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry; the mass revolutionary strike was born-a new weapon of struggle of the working class, a powerful means of its influence on the non-proletarian strata of the population. The proletariat under the leadership of the revolutionary Marxist Party demonstrated historically progressive class interaction with various non-proletarian strata and classes, and the implementation of the "left bloc" at all stages of the revolution, in all fields of struggle, both parliamentary and extra-parliamentary. The revolution revealed objective, organic dynamics and interrelationships, the mechanism of interaction and transition from one form of struggle to another, so that the development of the mass movement went in an ascending line from peaceful demonstration to armed insurrection. The revolution in Russia, Lenin's elaboration of the problems of "two tactics of social-democracy in a democratic revolution," and all the activities of the Bolsheviks once again showed the true role of scientific theory and politics, the place and significance of a truly Marxist party of the working class.

However, the revisionists did not want to notice all this. They persistently continued to propagate the necessity of an alliance between the Russian proletariat and the very bourgeois liberals who, fearing the development of the revolution, were coming to an agreement with tsarism .23 The revisionists spoke of the December armed insurrection in Moscow, which prompted even the very "cautious" K. Kautsky , contrary to his previous statements, to pay attention to the triumph of the new barricade tactics of struggle, 24 with regret and fear that the fall of tsarism might lead to the chaos of revolution and counter - revolution .25 Bernstein argued that the result of the defeat of the armed insurrection was only the strengthening of the autocracy, which changed the prospects for the victory of democracy in a revolutionary way. 26 Once again, he defended the special effectiveness of parliamentarism, sought to prove that in "the current economically developed society" "the right to vote and the struggle for parliament and in parliament that rests on it is an essential element of democracy... a continuous organic revolution " 27 . It is true that when Bernstein spoke of the possibility of street battles against a government that resorted to extreme measures, he admitted that in the most important questions, "which deeply affect the social position of the classes, the latter cannot reflect on such dangers." However, he was zealous to ensure that the working class did not so much prepare for such clashes as it hoped for the indecisiveness of the government, which, fearing the strength of the popular movement, would not risk "resorting to extreme measures."28
The denial of the historical experience gained for the world army of labor by the heroic struggle of the workers of Russia in 1905 - 1907 served as a basis for the revisionists to speak out against the "revolutionary revolution".-

23 R. Strellzоw. Uber die okonomischen, sozialen und geistigen Ursahen der russischen Revolution. "SM", 1906, N 10, S. 863 - 864; ejusd. Die beiden Richtungen in der russischen Sozialdemokratie. "SM", 1906, N 12, S. 1003.

24 "Vorwarts", 28.I.1906.

25 P. Kampffmeyer. Rundschau offentliches Leben. Politik. "SM", 1906, N 2, S. 175.

26 E. Bernstein. Fragen der Taktik in Russland. "SM", 1906, N. 3, S. 211.

27 E. Bernstein. Politischer Massenstreik und Revolutionsromantik. "SM", 1906, N 1, S. 20.

28 E. Bernstein. Strike, St. Petersburg, 1907, p. 127.

page 71

mantiki " in the German labor movement 29 . They didn't want to take into account his combative, offensive nature.

Meanwhile, the real fact was the growing struggle of the German proletariat, the development of its"independent activity". It often went against the opposition of reformist leaders, especially trade unionists. The workers ' demands covered both economic issues, the implementation of the country's democratization, and the problems of militarism and the imperialist foreign policy of the ruling circles. Sometimes it came to particularly massive or sharp performances. Such were the grandiose Ruhr strikes of 1905 and 1912, the political strike in Hamburg (1906), the street battles between workers and the police in Moabit and Wedding (1910), the strike in the shipyards (1913), and so on. The desire for mass action, not limited only to parliamentary means, was expressed in the growing popularity of the demands preparations for a mass political strike.

The revolutionary forces of German social-democracy, noting the aggravation of economic and political contradictions in the country, the need for the proletariat to defend itself with increasing force against the blows of the ruling classes, to strive to improve its economic situation and expand its political rights, demanded that the center of gravity of the struggle be shifted to the actions of the masses, and parliamentary activity should also be used in this regard .30 They sought, as K. Zetkin wrote, "to destroy the superstition that the proletariat's path to victory runs straight through parliamentarism and that the parliamentary struggle is the only all-saving method of class struggle." 31 The revisionists, not being able to completely ignore the rise of the mass movement, ignored its real content. They continued to argue that the most effective means of "implementing reforms that revolutionize continuous organic development" is parliamentarism based on universal suffrage.

The whole significance of mass actions, and especially of a mass political strike, was reduced by the revisionists to the conquest of the right to vote, which was regarded as the most significant in the struggle of the workers for their rights .32 Moreover, the artificial restriction of the goals of the mass political movement of the proletariat was supplemented by the desire to prevent "excessive" determination and effectiveness. Fears were expressed that otherwise the "general public" (!) would consider "only one party"interested in them. At the same time, while falsifying the experience of the Russian workers ' struggle, the revisionists regarded mass strikes not as a means of attracting other strata of the population to the proletariat's side, but as a means whose application was conditioned by the sentiments of these non-proletarian strata .33
As a rule, the revisionists insisted that conditions in Germany were completely different from those in Russia, and therefore the experience of Russia's political strikes could not be applied here .34 Yandex. Maps-

29 E. Bernstein. Politischer Massenstreik und Revolutionsnomantik, S. 12 - 20.

30 "Protokoll uber die Verhandlungen des Parteitages der Sozialdemokratischen Partei Deutschlands. Abgehalten in Jena vom 14. bis 20. September 1913". B. 1913, S. 194- 195; R. L. [uxemburg]. Die alte Programmforderung. "Sozialdemokratische Korrespondenz", 27.I.1914; J. K. [arski]. Lasset die Toter die Toten begraben. Ibid., 28.II.1914; F. M. [ering]. Regierung und Reichstag. Ibid., 12. V. 1914; ejusd. Parliamentarismus und Proletariat. Ibid., 25.IV.1914; R. L. [uxemburg]. Nicht zustanding. Ibid., 5.V.1914.

31 Cit. by: "Lenin in the struggle for the Revolutionary International", Moscow 1970, p. 128.

32 E. Bernstein. Politischer Massenstreik und Revolutionsromantik, S. 20.

33 E. Bernstein. Der Stein ist im Rollen-Wohin? "SM", 1909, N 26, S. 1665.

34 E. Bernstein. Politischer Massenstreik und Revolutionsromantik S. 17; W. Schroder. Zum sozialdemokratischen Parteitag 1913. "SM", 1913, N 18 - 20, S. 1059; P. Hug. Soll der Massenstreik ein Jena finden? "SM", 1913, N 18 - 20, S. 1135.

page 72

The revisionists characterized the mass struggle of the British workers that began in the pre-war years as a deviation from the course of historical development, which cannot be "completely straightforward."35 The opportunists in the leadership of the SPD and the free Trade unions treated the revolutionary Social Democrats in every possible way for their active role in the development of the mass struggle of the German proletariat, and at the same time had to lament the "exceptional popularity" that it was gaining in the party .36
The revisionists ' distorted interpretation of the processes of the mass working-class movement was reflected in the fact that, as Lenin wrote, they were thoroughly imbued with "faith in bourgeois 'legality', in bourgeois 'equality', they took positions from which this bourgeois legality looked eternal, and " socialism-fitting within the framework of this legality"37 . Accordingly, the revisionists tried to prove that popular freedom could "flourish as well as under a republic within the framework of a democratic monarchy", and advocated the "English" path of monarchical development, which would make Republican propaganda unnecessary .38
Such a far-from-realistic approach to the assessment of the Junker-bourgeois German state, the possibilities, prospects and tasks of the mass working-class movement in the country also affected the revisionist position in relation to the foreign policy of German imperialism.

The beginning of the twentieth century was a time when the aggressiveness of the German Empire was growing and increasing, seeking a "place in the sun". The sinister features of Prussian militarism, which was organically intertwined with Junker-bourgeois imperialism, were becoming more and more noticeable. The" lease " of Jiaozhou (Kiao - Chao) was followed by an international intervention in China led by German Field Marshal Waldersee. The German imperialists intensified their expansionist policies and stifled the uprisings of the colonial peoples. The Moroccan crises of 1905 and 1911, provoked by Germany, threatened to turn into a war between the great Powers. The arms race, the naval rivalry with Britain, and the aggravation of relations with France and Russia brought new material burdens to the working people, creating an oppressive atmosphere saturated with nationalism and chauvinism in the country.

The revolutionary forces of German social-democracy, speaking from a principled anti-militarist, anti-colonialist position, exposed the true face of German imperialism, contributed to the correct orientation of the working people, and to the rise of the anti-war movement. Neither the torrents of dirt and slander that poured in from the imperialist camp, nor the police and judicial repression could stop the true patriots of Germany in their relentless struggle against the troubles and catastrophes that the policy of its ruling circles brought to the country. The revolutionary Social-Democrats defended the position of proletarian internationalism, which does not contradict national interests, but rejects bourgeois "patriotism". This is what guided Karl Liebknecht in his selfless anti-militarist activities. As a result, he was accused of high treason and sentenced to imprisonment in a fortress. R. Luxemburg called on German workers in the event of war not to take up arms against the workers of other countries, exposed the arbitrariness of the Prussian military. For this, she was also tried and sentenced to prison. As a practical battle cry against

35 E. Bernstein. Der Klassenkampf und der Fortschritt der Kultur. "SM", 1911, N 18 - 20, S. 1168.

36 "Protokoll... des Parteitages... in Jena... 1913", S. 234, 293 - 298; K. Severing. Verfehlte Beschlusse; "SM", 1914, N 15, S. 351.

37 In I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 20, pp. 11-12.

38 L. Quessel. Sind wir Republikaner? "SM", 1909, N 19, S. 1255, 1262.

page 73

militarism, colonial policy, Junker rule, and the annihilation of Germany, as a generalization of the daily struggle against all manifestations of the dominant reaction, the revolutionary forces of the SPD put forward the popular demand for a republic. 39
The revisionists ' position was diametrically opposed. According to their theoretical writings, German imperialism was not dangerous, and the struggle against it was of any serious importance. The revisionists tried in every possible way to devalue proletarian internationalism and the task of rallying forces for the struggle against imperialism and war. 40 At the same time, Bernstein, ignoring the imperialist reality, preached the desire to achieve a system of treaties of the states of the "cultural world", limiting or eliminating the privileges of individual great powers for trade in colonial countries, regulating issues of "world politics" ("Weltpolitik", that is, the struggle for colonial rule), etc .41. He demanded to abandon the supposedly utopian ideas of the liberation of the colonies, to pursue a "positive socialist colonial policy", stating that most of the German economy uses colonial products with which the natives themselves will not be able to do anything. 42 In the same spirit, the prominent revisionist economist R. Kalver justified support for the colonial and foreign policy of the German Empire in general by "intertwining" the destinies of German workers and capitalists, by the need to provide "living space" for the growing German population in spite of foreign competition .43
Especially frank were the articles in Sozialistische Monatshefte by K. Leitner, editor of the Vienna Arbeiter-Zeitung, and M. Maurenbrecher, one of the most chauvinistic "theorists" of the SPD, who spoke in unison with him. They demanded that foreign policy should not be subjected to "propaganda", but to "business" consideration. It was about stopping criticizing militarism, colonial expansion, and .the entire foreign policy of Germany, not to deny funds for its implementation 44 . However, even many revisionists, including Bernstein, were afraid of Leitner's frankness at that time. V. Heine, who was very influential in the Sozialistische Monatshefte, in particular, was afraid that the general revisionist cause might suffer from the publication of such articles; he considered it futile to try to "suddenly try to direct the' organized working class 'in the direction of an armament policy." 45 But one way or another, the revisionists gradually did their job. But the true results of the revisionists ' "realistic activity" were as little in keeping with their promises as their theories were with objective reality.

In his book The Prerequisites for Socialism, Bernstein rejected socialism as a goal in the name of socialism as a movement. He defined socialism as a movement directed towards a cooperative social system, or as such a system itself46 . Path to the osu-

39 R. Luxemburg. Gesammelte Werke. Bd. 2. В. 1972, S. 303.

40 K. Leuthner. Allgemeine Friedensburgschaften. "SM", 1910, N 16 - 18, S. 1017 - 11020.

41 E. Bernstein. Der Klassenkampf und der Fortschritt der Kultur, S. 1168.

42 "Internationaler Sozialisten-Kongress zu Stuttgart. 18 bis 24. August 1907". B. 1907, S. 28 - 29.

43 . R. Calwer. Der 25. Januar. "SM", 1907, N 2, S. 105.

44 K. Leuthner. Umlernen. "SM", 1909, N 9, S. 565 - 566, 568; M. Maurenbrecher. Englische oder proletarische Politik? N 10, S. 624 - 629.

45 Cit. by: D. Fricke. Op. ed., p. 218.

46 E. Bernstein. Die Voraussetzungen des Sozialismus.., S. 130.

page 74

In the opinion of the father of revisionism and his apostles, "the professional struggle and the political struggle for social reforms" proved to be the realisation of socialist society, because these two types of struggle "lead to an increasing control of society over the conditions of production" and, with the help of legislation, "reduce the owner of capital more and more by limiting his rights to the role of administrator". The tendency of trade unions "is to crush the absolute power of capital and to gain direct influence for the worker in the management of industry." 48 True, the revisionists had differences about further evolution. K. Schmidt believed that the leadership and management of production would be taken away from the capitalist, for whom his property would become more and more devalued and whose resistance would be broken .49 Bernstein himself wrote that trade unions, to which the state would give certain powers of control over industry, would provide "all possible guarantees against harassment through wages and excessive work." At the same time, such a provision will be provided "so that no one will have to sell their labor on undignified terms due to extreme necessity." In this case, " society will not care whether there are also enterprises that are run by private individuals for their own benefit, along with public and cooperative enterprises. They will eventually become cooperative by themselves. " 50
Another component of the "introduction of socialism" advertised by the revisionists was political democratization. In Bernstein's words, democracy "is in the hands of the working class an instrument for the destruction of capital," but it is also something more; "Democracy is both a means and an end at the same time. It is a means of winning socialism, and it is a form of realizing socialism. " 51
The theoretical inconsistency of the Bernstinian recipe for the realization of socialism was thoroughly clarified by R. Luxemburg already at the time of the publication of Bernstein's articles and book 52. R. Luxemburg noted that the preaching of" legislative transformation " of capitalist society ignores the relations of capitalist property, replaces the relations of capital and labor with those of wealth and poverty, which are supposedly capable of changing In fact, all this means "instead of implementing a new social order, only minor changes in the old one".53 R. Luxemburg emphasized that the development of "elements of the future society" in capitalism takes place in such forms that are class-antagonistic (socialization of production in the form of cartels) and complicate the implementation of socialism (the rule of the military state, its class character)54 . In contrast to Bernstein, R. Luxemburg noted an upward trend of militarism and a downward trend of bourgeois democracy in capitalist society. It drew a conclusion about the dependence of democracy on the development of the revolutionary movement of the working class, and showed the organic relationship between the development of democracy and the proletarian revolution. 55
48 "Vorwarts", 20.II.1898; Е. Bernstein. Die Voraussetzungen des Sozialismus.., S. 174.

49 "Vorwarts", 20.II.1898.

50 E: Bernstein. Die Voraussetzungen des Sozialismus.., S. 190.

51 Ibid., S. 178.

52 See R. Luxemburg. Social Reform or Revolution, Moscow, 1959, pp. 29-42.

53 Ibid., pp. 70-71.

54 Ibid., pp. 73-74.

55 Ibid., pp. 66-69.

page 75

An exceptionally profound and insightful description of the essence of revisionist politics was given by V. I. Lenin. He emphasized that "every" new " question, any unexpected and unforeseen turn of events, even if this turn only changed the main line of development to a minuscule extent and for the shortest possible time, will inevitably always cause one or another variety of revisionism." For such is the revisionist policy:"To determine one's own behavior from time to time, to adapt oneself to the events of the day, to the twists and turns of political trifles, to forget the fundamental interests of the proletariat and the main features of the entire capitalist system, the entire capitalist evolution, and to sacrifice these fundamental interests for the real or supposed benefits of the moment." 56
The true nature of the revisionist policy has been clearly revealed over time in its practical consequences.

The Bernsteinists promised the working class the gradual realization of socialism through professional struggle and the strengthening of trade unions. Their theories were adopted by the practical "predecessors of revisionism" from the ranks of the leaders and functionaries of the social - democratic free trade unions of Germany. These alliances truly represented an increasing amount of power. By 1914, they had over 2.5 million members. If in 1905 only four trade unions had more than 100 thousand members each, then in 1913 there were already seven such trade unions, and the metalworkers ' union united more than half a million people. The total amount of material and monetary resources of the free trade unions increased from 19.6 million marks in 1905 to 88.1 million marks in 1913.57

However, the trade unions did not provide the promised revisionist control of industry and guarantees "against harassment through wages and excessive work." As V. I. Lenin noted in 1912: "According to bourgeois social-politicians who rely on official sources, the wages of workers in Germany have increased by an average of 25% over the past 30 years. During the same time period, the cost of living has increased by at least 40%!!"58 . The wages of the German worker, as a rule, were not even sufficient to maintain the miserable standard of living that was provided for by the official subsistence minimum .59 Excessive workloads led to an increase in the number of accidents. According to Y. Kuchinsky's calculations, the overall situation of German workers in 1903-1913/14 worsened by about 1/3 compared to the period 1887-189460 . The flip side of the coin was the growing wealth of industrialists. The total amount of profits of the German monopolies, according to B. N. Mikhalevsky's calculations, amounted to 15 billion rubles in 1913. The company's profit margin was 30%, which meant an increase of 18% compared to 1895.61 The number of millionaires increased from 5,265 to 9,341 between 1895 and 1911 .

Despite this, the opportunist leaders of the German trade unions were exceptionally active in restraining the initiative

56 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 17, p. 24.

57 D. Fricke. Zur Organisation und Tatigkeit der deutschen Arbeiterbewegung (1890 - 1914). Dokumente und Materialien. Leipzig, 1962, pp. 225-228; I. Maisky. Professional movement in the West. Basic types, L. 1925, p. 202.

58 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 22, p. 221.

59 According to some estimates, the deviation from this minimum was 10% in 1909-1914 (Yu. Kuchinsky. History of labor conditions in Germany, Moscow, 1949, p. 148), according to others-1/3 (B. N. Mikhalevsky. On the working aristocracy in Germany. Voprosy Istorii, 1955, No. 1, p. 103).

60 J. Kuczynski. Lohne und Konjunktur in Deutschland. 1887 - 1932. B. 1933. S. 9.

61 B. N. Mikhalevsky. Op. ed., p. 103.

62 W. Bartel. Karl Liebknecht gegen Krupp. В. 1951, S. 15.

page 76

the masses fighting to improve their situation. Such major actions of the German proletariat as the Ruhr strikes of 1905 and 1912, the shipyards strike of 1913, and many others were thwarted by trade union leaders or nipped in the bud even before the workers ' discontent took shape in the form of a strike. At the Cologne Congress of Free Trade Unions (1905), the trade union leadership passed a resolution condemning all propaganda for a mass strike. The opposition of many social-democratic and trade-union organizations and the decisions of the Jena Congress of the SPD (1905) testified to the discrepancy between this resolution and the sentiments of the broad masses.

A similar situation developed in the field of social reforms and the implementation of political democracy, which were advertised by the revisionists. And the reason for this was not the weakness of German social-democracy. In 1910, it had 720,000 members, and in 1914, 1 million 86,000. The number of SPD-supporting voters increased. In 1912, it collected 4.25 million votes, more than a third of the total; in large cities, the SPD led by half the population, and in Berlin, its candidates collected about 75% of the vote. Since 1912, the SPD has had the largest faction in the Reichstag, with 110 deputies.

German social-democracy sought to achieve such a position, sometimes sacrificing its principled class position. In 1911, during the second Moroccan crisis, when the overseas adventures of the German imperialists, openly supported by the revisionists, threatened to unleash a war between the great Powers, the SPD leadership was afraid to take a principled anti-imperialist position. The German social-Democratic leadership refused the proposal of the Chairman of the International Socialist Bureau (MSB), K. Huysmans, to gather representatives of the socialist parties of Germany, France, England and Spain to discuss the situation. Ignoring the principles of proletarian internationalism, SPD Board member G. Molkenbourg, who was replacing A. Bebel at that time, declared on behalf of the party that agitation on the Moroccan question, the desire to provoke opposition to government policy, would harm the "vital interests" of German social democracy, since domestic policy issues would be relegated to the background .63 Party leaders feared that as a result, they would not get a share of the vote in the upcoming 1912 Reichstag elections.

In contrast to this position, R. Luxemburg, on behalf of the revolutionary section of German social-democracy, demanded not to hunt for mandates, not to try to gather huge crowds of fellow travelers who did not talk about anything, but to use the electoral struggle to explain social-democratic tasks to the masses .64 However, as a result of the growing revisionist fervor, the "realistic policy" of the opportunist leaders turned into a contradiction between the apparent strength of the party and the results of its activities in favor of the working class, democracy, for which the revisionists so strongly advocated. The SPD did not even achieve the reform of the electoral law system in Prussia, the abolition of the same three-class system, according to which the owner of a brothel enjoyed the rights of the first class, and the prime minister-the third, according to which the SPD, having collected 599 thousand votes in 1908, received 6 seats in the Prussian landtag, and the Conservatives and free conservatives, who 418 thousand votes, got 443 me-

63 "Protokoll uber die Verhandlungen des Parteitages der Sozialdemokratischen Partei Deutschlands. Abgehalten in Jena vom 10, bis. 16, September 1911". B. 1911, S. 466 - 467.

64 See R. Luxemburg. Rechi. M.-L. 1929, p. 78.

page 77

a hundred. It is significant that in May 1914, the newly appointed Prussian Minister of the Interior, a representative of monopoly circles, von Lebell, in his first speech at a meeting of the Prussian Landtag, declared that the hopes that the authorities would propose to introduce direct and secret suffrage were groundless. The Minister stressed that the Government "never intended to increase the influence of the masses, to democratize the right to vote." 65
Lenin's analysis of the "two worlds" in the SPD, given in connection with its Magdeburg Congress in 1910, reveals important reasons for the low effectiveness of the "realistic policy" of the revisionists. Lenin wrote: "Opportunist phrases about positive work in many cases mean working for the liberals, in general, working for others who hold power in their hands, who determine the direction of activity of a given state, society, or collective." 66 This is exactly what happened in the SPD. A vivid example of this was the events related to the increasingly acute military issue.

In 1913, the Social Democratic faction of the Reichstag voted funds for a new arms race. This opportunist step was justified by the "practical" considerations that social-democracy could not resist the increase in German military forces anyway (there were voices that it should not), and therefore the main thing was to ensure that the military expenses were covered at the expense of the propertied classes. The idea that it was the duty of the Workers ' Party to reject war loans in principle, and the reminder that the workers would ultimately have to pay for war expenses, were dismissed. The well-known revisionist publicist L. Kvessel, while admitting that the funds requested by the government would ensure preparation for the struggle against Russia and "participation in imperialist conquests in Africa and Asia,"67 argued in unison with the party leadership that it was not a question of where the money would go, but from whom it would be obtained. Defending the position taken by the social-Democratic group of the Reichstag, the revisionist A. Sudekum, speaking at the SPD congress, cynically declared about the social-democratic principles of the struggle against militarism and war:"We are not a party of antiquaries." 68
All this caused violent expressions of discontent in the local organizations of the SPD. "Reports and resolutions came pouring in from all sides, which, when assessing the position of the Reichstag faction on the issue of the military bill and the bill on covering military expenditures, literally left no stone unturned... and good luck to those who can still hide their heads in safety, " 69 lamented the revisionist W. Schroeder. However, the "practical politicians" continued to stand their ground. In the end, they managed to achieve that at the Jena Congress of the SPD (1913), a resolution on the "tax question" was adopted, which supported the position of the faction. Almost a third of the delegates voted against the resolution - 140 people. R. Luxemburg prophetically predicted that the approval of the congress by the "military spending group" would logically force the Social Democrats ' deputies in the event of war... vote for approval of military expenditures " 70 .

65 "Stenographische Berichte uber die Verhandlungen des Preufiischen Hauses der Abgeordneten. 22 Legislaturperiode, II Session 1914 - 1915, 83 Sitzung". B. 1915. S. 7144, 7146.

66 V. I. Lenin. PSS. T. 20, p. 13.

67 L. Quessel. Die Stellung der sozialdemokratischen Fraktion zu den Wehr und Deckungsvorlagen. "SM", 1913, N 13, S. 795 - 797.

68 "Protokoll... des Parteitages... in Jena... 1913", S. 469.

69 W. Schroder. Zum sozialdemokratischen Parteitag 1913. "SM", 1913, N 18- 20, S. 1057.

70 "Protokoll... des Parteitages... in Jena... 1913", S. 487.

page 78

Less than a year later, that's exactly what happened. In 1914, the imperialists launched a world war. The most active role in this was played by the ruling elite of Germany, and in the first ranks of their accomplices were the revisionists. During the pre-war July crisis of 1914, A. Sudekum assured the Kaiser's government of the loyalty of social-democracy .71 The revisionists did everything possible to incite chauvinistic anti-Russian sentiments in the country. On the eve of the Reichstag vote for war credits, revisionists from among the Reichstag deputies rallied around L. Frank in order to resolutely seek approval of the war. If the opinion to vote against prevailed in the Social-Democratic group, they were ready to break the party discipline they praised and say "Yes!" to the war .72 On August 4, 1914, the social-Democratic group of the Reichstag voted for war credits, approved the policy of "their" government, and helped push the German people into the abyss of imperialist carnage. Thus, the leaders of the Social Democratic Party and trade unions, having concluded a "civil peace" with the government, condemned the working people of the country to bear all oppression, privation and their own destruction without a murmur.

Such were the ominous results of "positive" work in the spirit of revisionist theories that promised to ensure " popular freedom in a democratic monarchy."

71 D. Fricke, H. Radant. Neue Dokumente uber die Rolle Albert Sudekums. "Zeitschrift fur Geschichtswissenschafb, 1956, N 4, S. 758 - 759.

72 S. Miller. Zum dritten August 1914. "Archiv fur Sozialgeschichte". Bd. IV. Hannover. 1964, S. 520.

page 79

Permanent link to this publication: