Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

its own. This political emphasis led the Independent Labour Party to strive for the creation of a Labour Party which would not insist upon Socialism as a test, but would enlist the support of Trade Unionists in carrying out a political policy which would be in its nature a transition from Capitalism to Socialism. The Party preached the doctrine that Trade Unionism could not content itself with being nothing but a protection for labour within the capitalist system, but had to become an instrument for the transformation of Capitalism, and that, in consequence, Trade Union activities should not be purely industrial but political as well. In time, Trade Unionism was persuaded, owing largely to the disappointing experiences it had had with strikes. At the Trade Union Congress in 1899, a resolution was passed directing the Parliamentary Committee to take the initiative in calling, in conjunction with the Socialists, a conference to form such a party. This was held in the Memorial Hall, London, in February, 1900, and the Labour Representation Committee, which, in 1906, became the Labour Party, began its work. In 1905, at its conference at Liverpool, it passed a resolution committing itself to Socialism, in 1904, it joined and was represented at the Socialist International, which met at Amsterdam. In 1918, it issued "The New Social Order," a manifesto embodying its Socialist principles, and showing how these principles could be applied to existing conditions so as to transform the economic structure of society.

I have dealt but summarily with the formation of organizations, and only in so far as it has shown the growth of the movement, and the unfolding of its policy, and I close this chapter with a statement

of how the conception of the new social order has also developed into greater fullness and precision, as its problems have been pondered over in the light of experience and criticism.

DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIALIST IDEAS

Marx had elaborated his theory of surplus value into an explanation and prophecy that capital would concentrate, and that production would become tremendously efficient on its mechanical side, with the result that markets would be supplied irrespective of their needs, the community would suffer increasingly from the lack of co-ordination in the economic system, unemployment would adjust the balance of over-production, and in the end the anarchy of Capitalism would bring social catastrophe. The years preceding the formation of the Independent Labour Party seemed to fulfil that prophecy. There was unemployment, there was increasing poverty, there were trade disputes, there was a spirit of revolt flying about that was upsetting. Only a very small section of British Socialists, however, regarded these surface cracks as the warnings of a crumbling fabric that was about to fall. Men living in communities are slow moving creatures, their spirits are dampened, and do not flare up easily, their trust that the morrow will begin to right their wrongs is unvanquishable. They demonstrate, and vociferate, and threaten, and pose and go on. So there was no Marxian catastrophe, no critical process of the Hegelian dialectic. There was reform which we may call patchwork or evolution, as we regard it in itself or in an unfolding idea. There was politics, but

no revolution. Our Socialists did not look on recording the evidences of a collapse, but took their part in strengthening the tendencies for reconstruction. The municipalization of gas and water was to be the first act in the drama which was to close with the nationalization of the whole industrial capital of the country and the triumph of Socialism. For the conception of Socialism was a simple one. Capitalism was to be transformed by the action of the State when controlled by Socialists. This power of Capitalism was to be limited, that service done by Capitalism nationalized, until at last the world would awake to find that between certain years it had undergone a revolution and that the caterpillar had become a butterfly. That being the expectation, the programme was not to marshal a revolutionary army but to have elected on all governing bodies a Socialist, or a Socialistic Party. This gave a stimulus to public life which, at the time, it sadly required. The municipality became important, municipal government became something which counted. Books were written about it, journals were founded to continue the stimulation, pioneer authorities like Glasgow and Birmingham received homage as though they were ancient Italian Republics, and became places of pilgrimage. A decade or so of this invigoration, saved, I am sure, our municipal government from the serious decay and corruption which seemed to be overtaking it in the eighteen-eighties and early nineties.

The influence on national affairs was less vibrant, and showed itself more sluggishly. Liberal and Conservative had become little more than labels which most people were unwilling to take off their coats; labels, which, belonging to dead days, were

accepted by living electors. The new movement provided not only new labels but new issues, and though, to those brought up in old political faiths and in the worship of old political heroes, it was most confusing and annoying to be told that their faiths were lifeless and their heroes antique, to the younger people entering politics for the first time and asking themselves why they should join this party or that, the propaganda ruddy with youth as themselves was commendable. Its social issues did unite to some extent the wage earning classes divided between Liberalism and Conservatism, and the new party began to appear and then leapt into life as the Labour Party, invaded the House of Commons, and as the result of the war and the political groupings which came out of it, the Liberal Party is threatened with extinction, and the LabourSocialist Party is preparing to face Reaction and class interest as the only organized party which champions freedom and general national well being.

But before the war came a political slackness appeared. In many places the immediately realizable programme of the Socialists had been accomplished, and the road ahead was not quite clear. The army had only been meeting outposts and it was now coming into touch with strong fortifications, or with nothing very definite-sometimes the one, sometimes the other. After gas and water— what? In Parliament it was brought up against similar difficulties, but of a much bigger import. Taff Vale, Factory legislation, Old Age Pensions, and such-like are good, but they can hardly be called the beginnings of a new social order. They are not landmarks which necessarily prove that at last we are on the way that leads to Socialism. In

Parliament one found, what Marx in his forecasts never allowed for, the difference between the craftsman who has to make the transformation and the theorist or constructive critic who only deals in ideas, who thinks he knows something about the effect of the craftsman's work after it has been done, but who generally takes care to assume no responsibility for doing it. So, both on the municipalities and in Parliament, the things ready to be done and easy to be done were soon done, and both bodies threatened to fall back into their old ruts.

Then began a questioning of the efficacy of political methods. It was apparent that if further big work was to be done, majorities on the governing bodies were required, and in but few instances were the Socialist representatives anything but small minorities (in Parliament a very miserable minority). As minorities they could compel majorities to do what obviously everybody wanted, they could prevent evil, they could bring pressure and enlighten by debates and divisions, but they could not change much.

Thus, it was evident, even before the war, that new tactics had to be adopted if the constructive work of Socialism was to be steadily pursued. A section had already appeared, insignificant in numbers, but, to one with a discriminating eye, not at all insignificant in ideas, which discarded political action altogether. Politics was a confusion of interests and ideas from which no change of the magnitude required could come-so it was said. The workman had to act. He had the final word in his keeping if he only knew it. His power to lay industry idle was really the sovereign power in the State, and by the use of it alone could labour purge Society.

« ForrigeFortsett »