man Left Wing was published anon>mously, for instance, in the Berner Tagwackt on May 31st, 1915.
^.a n^w Party, a really revolutionary Socialist Democratic Workers' Party that is in the act of growing
and becoming strong, and not the old, rotten National-
Liberal Party of Legien, Suedekum, Kautsky, Haase,
bcheidmann and Co.*
Hence, Monitor, the opportunist, let out a profound
historical truth in the Conservative Preussischc
Jahrbuecher when he declared it would do no harm to
the opportunists (he should have said "to the bourgeoisie ') if the Social Democracy of to-day moved
further to the Right, since in that case the workers
would forsake it. The opportunists (and the bourgeoisie) need the present Social Democratic Party,
which includes both Right and Left wings, and which
is officially represented by Kautsky, who knows how
to reconcile everything in the world by fluent and
"thoroughly Marxist" phrases. In words he advocates Socialism and revolutionary action on the part
of the workers, but in deeds he is in favour of Suede-
kum's tactics, that is to say, of joining the bourgeoisie
at any serious crisis. We say at any crisis, for not
only in cases of war, but also in every case when a
serious political strike is on both " feudal " Germany
and "free parliamentary" England or France will
immediately introduce martial law under one name or
the other. No man in his senses can doubt this.
From this follows the replv to the question put
above: " How are we to combat Socialist-Jingoism?"
The latter is opportunism which has become ripe,
strong, and impudent, during the long, comparatively
" peaceful " era of capitalism. It has so well defined
its ideological and political theories and has so linked
itself up with the bourgeoisie and the governments that
we cannot tolerate such a current inside S.D. Workers'
parties. One can put up with thin, weak soles for
walking on the civilised pavements of a small provin-
* What happened before the historical voting of the 4th of August
is very characteristic. The official party covered the incident with the
veil of hypocricy, saying that the majority had decided to vote and had
voted unanimously for the credits. But in the paper, Die Internationale,
Stroebel exposed this hypocricy and stated the truth. In the S.D. party
there were two groups,* which both came with their ultimata ready,
that is to say, with fractional or dissenting decisions. One group, the
opportunists, comprising about 30 men, decided to vote for the credit*
come what may; the other group—those of the Left, comprising about
15 men—had decided, but less resolutely, to vote against the credits.
When the Centre, or the " Swamp," which has no firm position, sided
with the opportunists those of the Left suffered a crushing defeat and
. . . submitted! Unity in German Social-Democracy is a hollow shaM
which in practice inevitably means submission to opportunist ultimata.