Page:The Czechoslovak Review, vol3, 1919.djvu/162

 rounded by enemies in Germany, Austria and Hungary and until normal conditions of production and economy are restored. The Socialists, according to the Právo Lidu merely complain of the inefficiency of some of the administrative departments. As to the expropriation of the estates of the noblemen and prelates the Socialists argue that every one in Bohemia is agreed upon the necessity of it. The differences appear only, when it comes to the question of the final disposition of the large estates. The Socialists demand that they remain property of the state and that they be worked either by renters, whose interest may be passed to their children, or worked in common by groups of agricultural laborers; the agrarians on the other hand insist on breaking up the estates and selling them to the peasants on long term payments. Under the circumstances the Právo Lidu is willing to postpone the question of final disposition and merely insists on the immediate taking over of the estates by the government.

The opposing view is most authoritatively set forth in the Národní Listy, the great citizens’ daily owned by Premier Kramář. This paper admits the justice of the socialist demands and claims that the reason why they have not been carried out is simply physical impossibility. The administrative machinery of the new state is not yet working as smoothly and as rapidly as one would like. But the paper objects to the rough form in which the Socialists phrased their demands.

A few days later the Socialist paper, České Slovo, wrote: “The crisis is over, for the responsible men in all parties realize that to break up the coalition government of all parties might mean the breaking up of the Republic.” And then came the news of the Bolshevist revolution in Budapest, and both Socialist parties took the opportunity to declare that they stood firmly back of the Czechoslovak Government in the new and this time real crisis.

The net result of this brief thunderstorm was to accelerate the pace in which social reforms, generally agreed upon as necessary, are to be carried out.

In Bohemia as well as in other countries the war has caused a serious crisis in the Socialist movement. There are at present two Socialist parties in Bohemia: The Czechoslovak Social Democratic Labor party and the Czechoslovak Socialist party. The first is the original Czech Labor party existing now over thirty years. It has four daily papers and many weekly and monthly reviews and local papers. Its local organizations are found in all parts of the Czechoslovak Republic. The second Socialist party was founded a year ago through the reconstitution of the former National Socialist party. It is weaker than the first, but during the last few months it has acquired considerable strength. Formerly these two groups were antagonistic, but today the differences between them are not great and may be summed up as follows: The Social Democratic party is composed of workingmen only, the Socialist party consists of other elements also and has a more pronounced nationalist tendency. Though the congresses of both these parties voted in principle for amalgamation, this has not as yet been realized owing to objections of some influential members on both sides. In both parties there are various political and social tendencies, a fact which proves that their constitution is not definite, and that in the Czechoslovak labor movement a new party constellation is due.

For the last two years the Social Democratic party has been passing through a serious crisis. During the war some of the party leaders followed the opportunistic pro-Austrian policy of Dr. Šmeral of which the Austrian Government made a great use, a policy which was contrary to the opinion of the enormous majority of the party. Only after the energetic opposition of several Social Democratic deputies led by Modráček an end was put to Šmeral’s opportunist policy. In September 1917 Modráček’s sensational manifesto was issued which brought about a radical change in the party. This manifesto sharply criticised the policy of Dr. Šmeral and called for a clean Socialist policy, adapted to the wishes of the nation.