Page:Karl Kautsky - The Social Revolution and On the Morrow of the Social Revolution - tr. John Bertram Askew (1903).djvu/44

32

But does not Democracy offer the basis for a gradual, imperceptible transformation of capitalism into Socialism, without any such violent break with the existing order of things, as would be caused by the capture of political power by the proletariat?

There are a number of politicians who assert that only the despotic rule of a class makes a revolution necessary, whilst Democracy makes it surperfluous. They further assert that in all civilised countries of to-day there is enough Democracy to render a peaceable evolution, free from revolution, possible. It is everywhere possible to establish co-operative stores, which, as they grow, lead to setting up productive co-operatives of their own, and so slowly drive out capitalist production from one sphere to another. It is everywhere possible to organise trade unions, which circumscribe more and more the power of the capitalist in his business, set up in the workshop in the place of an absolutism, constitutionalism, and so prepare the slow transition to a republican factory. Almost everywhere can Social-Democracy force its way into the municipal councils, use the influence of these bodies as regards public works in favour of the workers, extend the range of municipal duties, and by continually enlarging the sphere of communal production narrow the field of private production. Finally, Social-Democracy forces its way into Parliament, wins there more and more influence, carries through one social reform after another, puts a check on the power of capitalism by means of factory laws, and at the same time extends continually the sphere of State production by working for the nationalisation of the big monopolies. Thus, through the mere exercise of the democratic rights within the existing order of things, the capitalist society gradually, and without any disturbance, grows into the Socialist Commonwealth, and the revolutionary capture of political power by the proletariat becomes unnecessary—nay, all endeavours in that direction are harmful, because it can accomplish nothing except a disturbance of this slow but sure progress.

Thus argue the opponents of social revolution.

It is a charming idyll which is thus presented to us, and even in this case one cannot say that it is entirely imaginary. The facts on which it is based- actually exist. But the truth they paint to us is only a half-truth. A small amount of dialectical thinking would have revealed the whole truth to them.

This idyll, namely, is only valid if we take for granted that only one of the opposing forces, the proletariat, grows and gains in strength, while the other side, the bourgeoisie, remains stuck in the mud. In that case the proletariat must gradually grow over the