Eleanor Marx Aveling
Source: Commonweal, Vol 2 No. 16, May 1st 1886, page 39
Transcribed: by Graham Seaman, February 2022
The Anti-Socialist Law has been renewed for another two years. That this would be the case was a foregone conclusion, but as the Socialists took care to remark more than once, law or no law the movement will, nay must go on. That it had been practically ineffectual in the past was, indeed, admitted on all sides.
The debate, which lasted over three sittings of the Reichstag, and was as exciting and full of "incident" as an "Irish night" in the House of Commons, has been a tremendous success and triumph, not for the Socialists of Germany alone, but for us all. "The doctrine" has never been more admirably, more boldly preached, more thoroughly and with less high falutin'. The Anti-Socialist Law prohibits Socialist meetings; Herr Puttkammer (Minister of the Interior) declared that so great had been the effect of Bebel's speech at a Berlin meeting which he had not prohibited by way of experiment, that for the future, "so long as he had the honour to watch over the execution of this law, Bebel, except from this tribune, would not again be allowed to speak in public in Berlin." But "this tribune" is there, and not all Bismarck's Puttkammers can prevent thousands from reading the reports of this debate, and consequently of some of the best speeches ever made, even by Bebel and Liebknecht.
Of course the Commune and the "murder of the hostages" were trotted out. Equally, of course, reference was made to Nihilism, Belgian riots, London riots, etc. Bismarck became quite pathetic about the horrors of a "Communistic state of society." In his opinion "life," under these Communistic conditions, "will be valueless, and I shall be grateful if you will take mine," he said, " before it comes about. ... Existence will be wretched ... before you attain your ideal, shoot me, with all well-thinking men." But even if he wished it very much I don't think we could oblige him in this way. He is too valuable a coadjutor. Then he went on to speak of the bold bad Socialists and their aims. They — these wicked Socialists — have "no higher aims, no nobler strivings; they have no hope in another life, but look upon enjoyment in this as their sole object, and they therefore promise their followers a life of enjoyment; they want to get as much enjoyment out of life as possible, and they want to make that enjoyment as common to all as possible. Socialists want equality of enjoyment, and because our present Society does not give this equality they want another Society, in order to bring about this equality of enjoyment." Bismarck must really have been exceptionally drunk or exceptionally sober when he put the question so well.
The old "Communist Manifesto" was largely quoted, especially to prove that Socialists want to "abolish marriage" and "have women in common." Liebknecht thereupon read a passage from the manifesto on bourgeois marriage and bourgeois morality, which I hope the virtuous and moral gentlemen enjoyed.
That good, gentle Christian, perjurer and Jew-baiter, Chaplain Stöcker, was also much to the fore, and helped to enliven the debate considerably. The Socialists reminded him more than once that having been proved to have committed perjury he was not the man to show himself among decent-minded people at all. They also told him he was a "liar," that to "be compared to him was "an insult," that he was "one of the most contemptible of creatures," and other pretty things, more accurate than polite. But for my own part I feel grateful to the gentle pastor. As usual, he could not speak without dragging in the Jews, and he bore such testimony to the good work they are doing for Socialism, to the "extraordinary percentage of them" among the Nihilists, that, I repeat, I am personally very grateful to him.
It is to be hoped that the speeches of Bebel (he spoke three or four times) and of Liebknecht and Vollmar will be published in pamphlet form. Bismarck declared the Socialists had no programme, but these very speeches set forth that programme very clearly. I regret that I cannot here give them. The whole drift of them was to point out that this social revolutionary movement is not one that is "made" by any few men, but is a historical development and necessity; that this revolution must come, and that it means the expropriation of the present exploiters of labour, of the bourgeois class, itself the outcome of revolutions; that all this tinkering called "social reform" is of no avail, because if it were genuine it would mean really the same as the dreaded "revolution." Bebel concluded a speech with these words: "Whatever you may do, we have this conviction, our party will grow, it will develop, and we shall force the State and Society to do justice to our demands, till at last in one way or the other a Socialistic State of Society is realised." Liebknecht concluded his speech thus: "We are reproached with wanting to make a revolution. But revolutions are not made. ... We are in the very midst of revolution. Look back for the last twenty years ... everywhere revolution, upheavals, constant changes. And if you see what has happened in the past, I beg you also to look forward. ... Of course I can see into the future as little as yourselves, but this I know, what exists to-day will not exist then. ... Every one must be responsible for his own acts. I will only cry this to you. To your pity we do not appeal, the result (on the voting of the law) is indifferent to us, we shall conquer anyhow. Do your worst, it will be for our best! And the more insensate your rage, the more rapidly will it draw towards an end with you; the pitcher goes often to the well, but is broken at last!"
Among other things Bismarck took occasion to state that he "did not know whether Marx had bred murderers, but this he had heard, that the man, of whose shots he still bore the scars, was a pupil of Marx." To this statement my sister Laura Lafargue and I have sent a short reply to Herr Bismarck, in which we point out that the fright our dead father inspired in him was quite unnecessary; that he never saw poor young Ferdinand Blind after he was 12 or 13 years old; that all the objects Blind could have had in courageously braving death by firing at Herr Bismarck were of complete indifference to our father; that like his master and model Louis Bonaparte, Bismarck was to Marx only a comic personage, useful perhaps as involuntary accomplice of the proletarian revolution; finally that the ridiculous idea that a man like Marx could have spent his time "breeding assassins" only proves how right Marx was to see in Bismarck nothing but a Prussian clodhopper, who despite his cunning is utterly incapable of understanding no matter what great historical movement.
E. M. A.