Rosa Luxemburg

Foreword to the Anthology: The Polish Question and the Socialist Movement
(1905)

First Published: The book to which this essay was the Foreword was published in Polish in Krakow in 1905. In addition to the Foreword, it contained se eral other articles by !osa "u#e$bur%, and reprints o& articles by Karl Kautsky, Fran' (ehrin%, and )Par us* +,. -elphand.. /ource: The Nat onal !uest on " #ele$ted %r t ngs by Rosa Luxemburg, edited and introduced by the late -orace 0. 1a is, (onthly !e iew Press, 1923.

Habent sue fate libelli! as the sayin% %oes, and a &ittin% epi%raph indeed to the present olu$e, a collection o& articles on the Polish 4uestion that ha e appeared, written by arious authors, in di&&erent 5ournals, in di&&erent years, and in di&&erent lan%ua%es. The book, in &act, contains a sa$plin% o& the intellectual history o& Polish /ocialis$, and pro ides us with a conspectus o& a truly uni4ue pheno$enon, na$ely, the len%thy debate that took place in the international press around the political pro%ra$ o& Polish /ocialists, in particular around the International /ocialist 6on%ress in "ondon in 1793. It was no $ere coincidence that the internal a&&airs o& Polish /ocialists were brou%ht into the 8uropean &oru$ and placed be&ore the tribunal o& international socialis$. Indeed, the e#chan%e o& opinion o er the tactics o& the labor parties in the arious countries has beco$e $ore and $ore the custo$ o& late in the /ocialist International. The history o& 9aur:sis$;<= or the %eneral strike o& the 0el%ian "abor Party in ,pril 190<;>= ? certainly illustrate the point@ each pro oked a li ely discussion in the Aer$an, 1utch, and !ussian press ? and elsewhere as well. In particular, the opportunist tendency, which reared its head throu%hout the entire international $o e$ent a &ew years a%o, takin% e erywhere al$ost identical &or$s and pro okin% al$ost identical counterblasts &ro$ the re olutionary &lank, %a e rise to a curious con&raternity a$on% likeB$inded %roups in di&&erent countries. Thus its net e&&ect was actually to ti%hten international bonds, despite its inherent tendency to &oster national and local parochialis$ and &ra%$ent the socialist $o e$ent. 0ut Polish /ocialis$ occupies ? or at any rate once occupied ? a uni4ue position in its relation to international socialis$, a position which can be traced directly to the Polish national 4uestion. That the Polish insurrections should ha e aroused the war$est sy$pathies a$on% 8uropean de$ocrats need hardly cause surprise. 0ut it was political interests ? not $erely the bonds o& sy$pathy ? that tied the Polish 4uestion to the cause o& de$ocracy in the Cest. Fro$ the ti$e that !ussian tsardo$ entered internal 8uropean politics, actin%, throu%h the -oly ,lliance, as the %endar$e o& international reaction, de$ocrats in France, and especially in Aer$any, ha e had to re%ard it as an acti ely hostile &orce which had to be e&&ecti ely neutrali'ed i& a 8uropean re olution was to succeed. Det within !ussia itsel&, within the !ussian society, no re olutionary si%ns were yet isible. The &irst $ani&estations alon% these lines ? the 1ece$brist $o e$ent at the be%innin% o& the nineteenth century,;E= and the atte$pted assassination by Karako'o ;5= in the $iddle o& the century ? as well as other e ents occurrin% later, see$ed to ha e erupted only to illu$inate the black ni%ht o& tsardo$Fs unbendin% barbaris$ with a $o$entary ray o& hope. It is 4uite understandable, then, that in the eyes o& the Cest, the ar$ed Polish insurrections appeared to be the only re olutionary &orce at hand@ but e en beyond that, they ser ed the &unction o& keepin% the &orces o& !ussian absolutis$ occupied, and thus sa&e%uardin% the cause o& de$ocratic re olution in the Cest. Thus the iewpoint o& Aer$an de$ocracy toward !ussia and Poland e ol ed 4uite naturally, and Karl (ar#, in the Neue Rhe n s$he &e tung, was its radical and $ost consistent representati e. The idea o& a declaration o& war a%ainst !ussia, to%ether with a call to insurrection in Poland, constituted the core o& (ar#Fs &orei%n policy durin% the (arch re olution. (ar#, who belon%ed to the $ost radical le&t win% o& the re olutionary de$ocracy o& the ti$e, swun% boldly &ro$ de&ensi e to o&&ensi e tactics in this 4uestion as well: rather than postponin% a clash with tsardo$ until such ti$e as it should decide to inter ene in Aer$any, he chose to challen%e absolutis$ &ro$ the outset by carryin% the torch o& war and re olution into !ussia itsel&. Chat prospects this tactic actually had &or success, or the e#tent to which it had any basis in reality, need not occupy us here. For the present, our only concern is to establish that in these circu$stances, and in the$ alone, lies the basis &or the traditional iews on the Polish 4uestion that international

socialis$ was later to inherit. Got socialist theory or tactics, but the burnin% political e#i%encies o& Aer$an de$ocracy at the ti$e ? the practical interests o& the bour%eois re olution in Cestern 8urope ? deter$ined the iewpoint that (ar#, and later 8n%els, adopted with respect to !ussia and Poland.;3= 8 en at &irst %lance this standpoint re eals its %larin% lack o& inner relation to the social theory o& (ar#is$. 0y &ailin% to analy'e Poland and !ussia as class societies bearin% econo$ic and political contradictions in their boso$s, by iewin% the$ not &ro$ the point o& iew o& historical de elop$ent but as i& they were in a &i#ed, absolute condition as ho$o%eneous, undi&&erentiated units, this iew ran counter to the ery essence o& (ar#is$. To Cestern de$ocracy at that ti$e Poland was the land o& insur%ents and !ussia the land o& reaction ? nothin% $ore. Geither the social circu$stances, the econo$ic basis, nor the political content o& the Polish insurrections had any real e#istence &or either Aer$an /ocialists or bour%eois de$ocrats, or at least they were accorded ery little i$portance: so little, in &act, that as late as 1725, in his reply to Tkace ,;2= in the 5ournal 'ol(staat, 8n%els be%ins his enu$eration o& the &actors under$inin% !ussian absolutis$ thus: )First co$e the Poles. );7= 0ut in point o& &act, when 8n%els wrote these words )the Poles.* i.e., that undi&&erentiated nation whose sole concern was presu$ably the stru%%le &or independence, had lon% ceased to e#ist ? i& indeed they had e er e#isted. For at 5ust this ti$e Poland was e#periencin% the %reatest or%ies o& )or%anic labor,* the &rantic dance o& capitalis$ and capitalist enrich$ent o er the %ra es o& the Polish nationalist $o e$ents and the Polish nobility, by then a thin% o& the past. /hortly therea&ter, history was to pro ide %raphic proo& that Poland had ceased to be the land o& )the Poles* and had beco$e a &ully $odern bour%eois society, rent by class contradictions and class stru%%le: only two or three years a&ter 8n%els wrote these words, the /ocialist $o e$ent was to $ake its &irst entry onto the sta%e o& Polish history. For a lon% ti$e, these traditional iews on Poland lay dor$ant in international socialis$. ,&ter the last insurrection, the tru$pet blasts o& national stru%%le died away. Polish capitalists no lon%er drew the attention o& all o& 8urope by the clatter o& their ar$s. The bour%eois cry, )enrichissez-vous,* re4uires uni ersal peace and tran4uillity@ like the iolet, it pre&ers to hide itsel& away a$on% the shadows, and shies &ro$ nothin% so $uch as &ro$ the en ious eyes o& its nei%hbors. ,nd Polish /ocialists, &or their part, &ar &ro$ stri in% to link their politics with the traditions o& rebellion at the outset, did, in &act, 5ust the opposite: &ro$ the start they took up a &ully conscious and deter$ined stand against these traditions in Polish society, and what is $ore, abstained &ro$ any reliance on the$ e en within the ranks o& international socialis$ itsel&. Indeed, the &irst serious /ocialist or%ani'ation in Poland ? the )Proletariat* Party ? $ade its opposition to the nationalist $o e$ents and its sharp criticis$ o& the$ the keystone o& its class position.;9= The &ounders and theoretical leaders o& the Proletariat Party were by no $eans un&a$iliar with (ar#Fs and 8n%elsF opinions on the Polish 4uestion, yet they were not in the least con&used by the$@ on the contrary, they re%arded the$ $erely as the outworn esti%e o& old iews that had been based on an i%norance o& the social content o& the nationalist $o e$ents within Poland and o& the social chan%es that had taken place within the country since the last insurrection. Chen the %roup, R)wnos*,;10= i.e., "udwik CaryHski, /tanisla (endelson, /'y$on 1ickstein, and their co$rades called an international $eetin% in Aene a in Go e$ber 1770, on the &i&tieth anni ersary o& the Go e$ber insurrection to $ake clear once and &or all their e$phatically antiBnationalist position, a$on% the arious letters and tele%ra$s they recei ed was also one &ro$ (ar# and 8n%els which tersely su$$ed up the historical relationship between the slo%an o& Polish independence and the re olution in the Cest: The cry )"et Poland li eI* which then resounded throu%hout Cestern 8urope was not only an e#pression o& sy$pathy and support &or the patriotic &i%hters who had been crushed by brute &orce ?

this cry %reeted the people all o& whose re olts, in the$sel es so disastrous, always held back the ad ance o& counterBre olution: the people, whose best sons ne er ceased to carry out ar$ed resistance and always &ou%ht under the &la% o& the peopleFs re olutions. Jn the other hand the partition o& Poland consolidated the -oly ,lliance, that $ask &or the he%e$ony o& the Tsars o er all 8uropean countries. Thus the cry )"et Poland li eI* in and o& itsel& $eant: )1eath to the -oly ,lliance, death to the $ilitary despotis$s o& !ussia, Prussia, ,ustria, death to the (on%olian supre$acy o er conte$porary society.* The letter ends with the words: The Poles there&ore played outside the borders o& their country a %reat role in the battle &or the &reein% o& the proletariat: they were its best international &i%hters. ToBday, since this battle is de elopin% a$on% the Polish people the$sel es, the propa%anda and press o& the re olutionary $o e$ent $ay support it, $ay 5oin with the e&&orts o& our !ussian brothers@ that will be one $ore reason &or re i in% the old cry: )"et Poland li eI*;11= In his wideBran%in% address to the $eetin%, "udwik CaryHski said the &ollowin% in reply to this letter: The Triple ,lliance had its ad ersary in the International, which had called all workin% people to stru%%le under a co$$on banner, the banner o& international re olution. 0ut not &eelin% itsel& in possession o& enou%h &orces to $eet the reaction headBon, the International did not trouble itsel& to subsu$e the Polish 4uestion under a %eneral pro%ra$ &or the liberation o& the proletariat. It was thou%ht that the Polish re olutionary patriots were the only or%ani'ed &orce in the !ussian e$pire that could check the tsarFs e&&orts to inter ene in 8urope in support o& reaction. For a lon% ti$e, our part in the international $o e$ent was reduced to this. Even the authors of The Communist Manifesto linked their immortal rallying cry !Proletarians of all countries unite," with another that was attractive even to the bourgeoisie and the #rivileged classes in general the cry !$ong live Poland!" %his regard and sym#athy for Poland, the Poland of the e&#loiters and the e&#loited, demonstrates that #revious #olitical e&#ediencies have still today retained their force in the eyes of its defenders. 0ut the rele ance o& these earlier interests is %radually di$inishin%, and we may ho#e that they will soon be forgotten. CaryHski was wron%. The Polish traditions were, indeed, &or%otten &or a ti$e in the international socialist $o e$ent@ but they did not disappear ? e en thou%h the historical conditions which had ori%inally %i en rise to the$ had chan%ed radically. 8 en ideolo%y bears the sta$p o& conser atis$, and the ideolo%y o& the workin%Bclass $o e$ent ? e en %rantin% the thorou%hly re olutionary spirit o& its world iew ? is no e#ception to this rule. In its positions and attitudes on particular 4uestions it la%s considerably behind actual de elop$ents, to which it $ust &ro$ ti$e to ti$e read5ust throu%h a process o& radical re ision. 0ut the /ocial 1e$ocracy is a party o& political stru%%le, not o& philosophical in4uiry &or the attain$ent o& abstract truths. -ence, it takes up the re ision o& its old, outBo&Bdate iews only when the tan%ible interests o& the workin%Bclass $o e$ent $ake such a re ision necessary. Traditional iews thus o&ten lie &or a lon% ti$e uncontested in the treasure chest o& /ocial 1e$ocracy, thou%h the circu$stances to which they were attuned $ay ha e lon% since disappeared &ro$ the scene. It is only when new de elop$ents cause the e$er%ence o& new ital needs &or the $o e$ent which stand in &la%rant contradiction with these $usty old traditions, and collide with the$, that political opinion dra%s the$ into the li%ht &or a thorou%h critical re iew. That is what happened with /ocialistsF traditional iews on the Polish 4uestion. Thou%h they had been preser ed in spirit, practical politics pro ided the$ no chance &or public airin%. There were no

Polish national $o e$ents that $i%ht ha e %i en the$ a new breath o& li&e, and the Polish /ocialists had, as we ha e seen, a oided the e$barrass$ent o& these old ideas by si$ply i%norin% the$ and pursuin% a stron%ly antiBnationalist policy without askin% anybodyFs per$ission. 0ut the entry o& the socialBpatriotic tendency, represented by the Polish /ocialist Party, onto the scene in 179> chan%ed all that.;1<= True, there had been pre ious atte$pts to link the Polish /ocialist $o e$ent with a pro%ra$$atic de$and &or the restoration o& Poland &or e#a$ple, by the %roup, $ud Polski, in 1771, or the %roup, Pobudka,;1>= in 1779, both under the ae%is o& 0. "i$anowski.;1E= 0ut both o& these two ephe$eral %roups &elt the$sel es so deeply isolated &ro$ the $ainstrea$ o& international socialis$ that they $ade not the sli%htest e&&ort to link u# their iews with the (ar#ist traditions ? especially as their pro%ra$ was 4uite e#plicitly based not on the theory o& $odern socialis$, but on a peculiar brand o& senti$ental and $etaphysical phraseolo%y. The Polish /ocialist Party was the &irst to atte$pt to re i e and reno ate the dor$ant le%acy o& (ar#Fs 17E7 position, and indeed it was 4uite a$bitious in the undertakin%. ,n entire syste$ was created and set into $otion to reclai$, so to speak, the old Polish traditions dri&tin% about a$on% socialists in Cestern 8urope. The present olu$e contains se eral e#a$ples, in particular the article by -err -acker &ro$ 6racow.;15= This syste$ relied ? as one o& our co$rades aptly put it ? on the collectin% o& ) ouchers &or the restoration o& Poland* &ro$ all the lu$inaries o& Cestern 8uropean socialis$, ouchers that were obtained by con incin% the French, 8n%lish, Italian, Aer$an, etc. /ocialists ? the letter by ,ntonio "abriola is a %ood case in point ? that )the whole o& Polish socialis$ wants* the restoration o& Poland, and then solicitin% &ro$ the$ in ad ance a show o& sy$pathy &or this undertakin%. 6on&ronted in this $anner by a fait accom#li, and ha in% no reason to rack their brains unbidden o er the rationality or irrationality o& the pro%ra$ o& so$e &orei%n party, with whose lan%ua%e and ter$s o& co$bat they were un&a$iliar, the Cestern socialists o& course %ranted the solicited oucher, wrote the re4uested letters or essays without too $uch re&lection, and said a &ew words here and there at an occasional $eetin% ? which o& course was precisely why they had been in ited. Thus, the dili%ently accu$ulated endorse$ents by pro$inent &i%ures o& the international workin%B class $o e$ent beca$e rituali'ed into an endlessly repeated litany &or social patriotis$ in the literature o& this tendency durin% the years 1795 to 1793 in the special (ay edition &or 1793, in essays in +r,ed-w t,;13= in .a,eta Robotn $,a/ etc., (ar#, 8n%els, "iebknecht, 0ebel, Kautsky, 0ernstein, Auesde, "abriola, -ynd$an, 8leanor (ar# , elin%, (oteler, "essner, and so on, were incessantly cited as enthusiastic supporters o& the restoration o& Poland@ at the sa$e ti$e, no opportunity was $issed to rekindle the old traditions iii the Cestern 8uropean press. This unprecedented pheno$enon was not the work o& chance, nor was it $erely the product o& bad taste on the part o& the custodians o& social patriotis$. Chen this tendency &irst sur&aced in the Polish labor $o e$ent in 179> and 179E it $et with an e#tre$ely hostile reception. Ai en the radical antiBnationalis$ with which R)wnos* and +r,ed-w t had shaped political opinion in Polish /ocialist circles &or &i&teen years, in the spirit o& the old Proletariat Party, this abrupt aboutB&ace entailed by the pro%ra$$atic de$and &or the restoration o& Poland was %reeted with the %reatest hostility. Fro$ the antiBnationalist perspecti e lon% inculcated by the Proletariat Party, the espousal o& patriotis$, with its indul%ent nostal%ia &or the old watchwords o& the rebellions o& the Polish nobility, could be iewed as nothin% less than a betrayal o& the socialist banner and o& the class stru%%le. To o erco$e this hostile at$osphere and these &ir$ly rooted traditions o& the Proletariat Party, an art&ul ar%u$ent, based on the class standpoint o& the socialist $o e$ent, had to be &ound to

5usti&y these new nationalistic de$ands. 0ut Kin% /olo$on hi$sel& could not ha e pro ided such an ar%u$ent@ &or, as the sayin% %oes, *o' il n(y a rien, le roi #erd ses droits*: social patriotis$ si$ply could not be 5usti&ied. The notorious bit o& sophistry that was hit upon to $ake this )workersF ) pro%ra$ $ore palatable, na$ely, that the constitution o& an independent Poland would surely be $ore )de$ocratic* than any !ussian constitution which $i%ht &ollow a&ter the &all o& the tsardo$, ob iously satis&ied only the $odest intellectual needs o& thirdB and &ourthBrate sy$pathi'ers. ,ccordin%ly, the si$plest way out o& these di&&iculties was throu%h a direct appeal to the traditions o& international socialis$, by callin% upon the na$es o& (ar# and 8n%els and other pro$inent socialists who succeeded the$. , lon% list o& bi% na$es in the hi%h court o& socialis$ was $ade to ser e in de&ault o& any sound ar%u$ent in support o& the social patriotic pro%ra$. In this way, the restoration o& Poland lost its sti%$a as the betrayal o& socialis$ ? a&ter all, the $ost acco$plished theoreticians and practitioners o& the 8uropean $o e$ent had co$e out in support o& this slo%an ? and the Polish /ocialist PartyFs pro%ra$ had obtained the direct sanction o& (ar#is$ ? hadnFt )(ar# hi$sel&* attested to its correctnessK Fro$ this point on, all doubts, $is%i in%s, or a ersions in Polish socialist circles with re%ard to this aboutB&ace toward social patriotis$ were set to rest by recitin% o er a%ain the litany: (ar#, 8n%els, "iebknecht, 0ebel, 8leanor , elin%, "abriola, etc., or perhaps e en the other way around: "abriola, 0ebel, "iebknecht, 8n%els, (ar#, and so on. , $o$entFs re&lection is enou%h to con ince one that such a solution to the proble$ rested upon an utterly pri$iti e, double deception. /ocialists abroad were $isled into belie in% that the entire Polish labor $o e$ent re%arded the restoration o& Poland as their pro%ra$$atic de$and, a de$and no lon%er e en sub5ect to 4uestion, and on this basis e#pressed their support o& it. ,nd Polish /ocialists were, in their turn, be%uiled by all these procla$ations o& sy$pathy &ro$ socialists abroad into assu$in%, also &alsely, that the entire international socialist $o e$ent ur%ently re4uired that they stand acti ely behind the restoration o& Poland. Thus, in both 4uarters, this policy o& social patriotis$ $aintained itsel& only by sti&lin% any critical appraisal, and rested solely on the &orce o& authority ? in 8urope, on the authority o& the entire Polish labor $o e$ent, and in Poland itsel&, on the presti%ious na$es o& (ar#, 8n%els, etc. ,s we ha e seen, the authority o& (ar# hi$sel& on this 4uestion, e en while he was still ali e, had no %reat in&luence on socialists o& the caliber o& "udwik CaryHski: it caused the$ to wa er not at all in their iews. 0ut &or the petitBbour%eois, patriotically $inded intelli%entsia, &ro$ who$ the socialB patriotic tendency had ori%inally drawn its recruits ? because o& and not in spite o& the nationalist aspects o& its pro%ra$ ? &or the$ the personal authority o& (ar#, 8n%els, 0ebel, "iebknecht, etc., was su&&icient to pur%e their $inds o& any and all doubts. ,&ter the lon% years o& a eritable antiB nationalist crusade on the part o& socialists o& the CaryHski sta$p, it was an especially a%reeable disco ery to &ind that perhaps one had been a nationalist all alon%, and e en so ? indeed, almost on that account the purest o& socialists. Gow that the traditional iews o& the /ocialist International on the Polish 4uestion had &inally obtruded into the real$ o& practical concerns o& the labor $o e$ent, it beca$e a $atter o& crucial i$portance &or Polish and international socialis$ to sub5ect the$ to a critical analysis. /peci&ically, it was necessary to do away with the illusions and obsolete iews on Poland &ro$ which social patriotis$ had created an i$posin% obstacle to a socialist class standpoint in the labor $o e$ent in Poland ? a critical analysis had to be applied to the traditions which had been trans&or$ed by the adherents o& social patriotis$ into a eritable article of faith &or Polish /ocialists. ,t the heart o& the $atter was a re ision o& the obsolete iews o& (ar# on the Polish 4uestion, in order to open the way to the #rinci#les of )ar&ist theory &or the Polish labor $o e$ent.

Jn the other hand, there was a ery i$$ediate ai$ behind this re i al and reno ation o& the Polish nationalist traditions a$on% socialists in Aer$any and elsewhere. In &act, these traditions had been speci&ically culti ated &or se eral years by a newsletter entitled 0ullet n 122 $ el du +art #o$ al ste 3olona s. It was hoped that by i$posin% the pro%ra$$atic de$and &or PolandFs restoration not only on the socialists in the kin%do$, but on those in Aalicia and the Prussian sector as well, it would be possible to brin% the three sectors o& the polish labor $o e$ent ? which were stru%%lin% under totally di&&erent circu$stances ? to%ether on a nationalist basis, and thus in opposition to the $ost ital political interests o& the Polish proletariat. J& course, the other thrust o& this tendency was ob iously to isolate the Polish /ocialist $o e$ent politically &ro$ the classBwide Aer$an and ,ustrian /ocial 1e$ocracy $o e$ent, and hence to split the ranks o& the Aer$an and ,ustrian proletariat, at that ti$e ho$o%eneous, alon% nationalist lines. The hi%h point, the crownin% touch to the twoByear e&&orts o& the social patriots was to ha e been the International /ocialist 6on%ress in "ondon in ,u%ust 1793, where the Polish /ocialists were to put &orward a resolution that would ha e %i en sanction to their ca$pai%n to %et the restoration o& Poland reco%ni'ed as an absolute necessity &or the international labor $o e$ent. In this way, the nationalist tendency in the Polish labor $o e$ent $eant to obtain the sanction o& the hi%hest /ocialist body, with all the $aterial conse4uences that entailed. /uch a sanction would ha e e&&ecti ely 4uashed any subse4uent protest that $i%ht ha e arisen &ro$ within the ranks o& Polish /ocialists. Lnder these circu$stances, the proposal put &orward by the Polish /ocialist Party at the "ondon con%ress naturally %a e rise to an e#tensi e debate on the Polish 4uestion. This debate, which was in part o& a theoretical nature, but also e#tended into the real$ o& tactics and practical politics, was initiated in Neue &e t, and later taken up by 'orw4rts, the central or%an o& the Aer$an /ocial 1e$ocracy and other Aer$an party newspapers +Le 3, ger 'ol(s,e tung, #4$hs s$he Arbe ter,e tung., and e en &ound its way into the Italian press. The reader will &ind the entire li ely discussion o& 1793 and the years &ollowin% in the present olu$e.;12= ,s we ? contrary to the socialB patriotic tendency ? consider it a %o ernin% $a#i$ o& /ocial 1e$ocracy to encoura%e rather than sti&le critical thinkin% in socialist ranks, we o&&er the reader all the stated opinions unaltered, all the pros and cons uttered on the issue at that ti$e, without $akin% the least atte$pt to i$pose readyB $ade answers or &inal conclusions. Ce ha e reproduced all o& this abundant $aterial so that the reader hi$sel& $ay ha e the opportunity to e aluate the discussion independently and &or$ his own opinion and 5ud%e$ent on this proble$, so &unda$ental to the Polish labor $o e$ent. Politically, the i$$ediate ob5ecti es o& the debate launched in Neue &e t were certainly achie ed. It stirred up 4uite a &ew $inds, and induced Cestern 8uropean socialists to de ote so$e thou%ht to the political $eanin% and concrete i$plications o& the /ocial Patriotic Party, so that the latterFs proposal at the "ondon con%ress was tabled, and in its place a resolution unani$ously adopted that once a%ain, in %eneral ter$s, a&&ir$ed the sy$pathy o& socialists &or all oppressed nationalities and %a e reco%nition to their ri%ht to sel&Bdeter$ination. J& course there had ne er been any doubts about the sy$pathy and co$passion o& socialists &or oppressed nationsI Indeed, such senti$ents &ollow naturally &ro$ the socialist world iew. ,nd no less clear and sel&Be ident was ? and is to socialists, the right o& e ery nation to independence@ that too &lowed directly &ro$ the $ost ele$entary principles o& socialis$. 0ut the social patriots who sub$itted the resolution were not interested in a $ere blanket declaration o& sym#athy &or all nationalities@ rather, they wanted the restoration o& Poland acclai$ed as a speci&ic political desideratu$ o& the labor $o e$ent. The right o& a nation to independence was neither here nor there@ the crucial concern was to ha e the ca$pai%n o& Polish /ocialists to establish this ri%ht in Poland reco%ni'ed as correct and necessary. 0ut in e&&ect the "ondon con%ress ruled precisely to the contrary. Got only did it set the Polish situation s4uarely on a

le el with the situation o& all other oppressed peoples@ it at the sa$e ti$e called &or the workers o& all such nations to enter the ranks o& international socialis$ as the only re$edy &or national oppression, rather than dabblin% o&& and on with the restoration o& independent capitalist states in their se eral countries@ only in this way could they hasten the introduction o& a socialist syste$ that, by abolishin% class oppression, would do away with all &or$s o& oppression, includin% national, once and &or all. This i$$ediate result o& our critical attack shows clearly the e#tent to which the traditional iews on the Polish 4uestion on which the ery e#istence o& the patriotic tendency in the international $o e$ent depended ? had, &or the $ost part, already outli ed their ti$e, and $oreo er, how dia$etrically opposed they were to the real interests o& the labor $o e$ent. This was brou%ht out especially clearly by the &act that the 4uestion o& PolandFs restoration was posed by the proletariat on the le el o& practical politics in such a way that it ine itably pro oked a whole new series o& international 4uestions which opened up perspecti es that pre iously, the ti$e o& the Neue Rhe n s$he &e tung and the 17E7 !e olution, had not e en e#isted. Thus, the 4uestion was i$$ediately posed: I& the international proletariat were to reco%ni'e the national restoration o& the Polish state as a %oal o& socialist politics, why then should it not reco%ni'e the separation o& ,lsaceB "orraine &ro$ Aer$any and its restitution to France also as a %oal o& /ocial 1e$ocracyK Jr support Italian nationalis$ in its e&&orts to re%ain Trieste and the TrentinoK 8 en the 4uestion o& the separatist a$bitions in the 0ohe$ian territories was raised. Further$ore, reco%nition o& the tendency callin% &or Polish /ocialist or%ani'ations to separate the$sel es &ro$ the e#istin% socialist parties in the countries in ol ed in the Partition, and, con ersely, &or the proletariat in the three Polish territories to $er%e into one workersF party, %a e rise to a whole series o& or%ani'ational 4uestions. In Aer$any, not only Poles, but a lar%e nu$ber o& 1anes, ,lsatian French, and "ithuanians in 8ast Prussia, li e side by side with the Aer$an population. The practical conse4uences o& the principle the socialBpatriotic tendency had adopted &or the bene&it o& the Polish proletariat would ha e been the splittin% up o& the united Aer$an /ocial 1e$ocracy into particular parties de&ined alon% nationalist lines. The sa$e conse4uences would certainly ha e &ollowed &or $any other countries as well, since al$ost none o& the lar%er $odern states has a ho$o%eneous population. For these reasons, a sanctionin% o& the socialBpatriotic tendency would ha e necessitated a thorou%h%oin% re ision o& the e#istin% positions o& the international /ocial 1e$ocracy and a re%ression ? in pro%ra$, tactics, and or%ani'ational principles ? &ro$ a solid &oundation in class politics to a policy based on nationalis$. It su&&iced, then, to draw attention to the concrete i$plications and 4uestions inherent in the socialB patriotic tendency &or the entire a&&air to be raised &ro$ the le el o& a speci&ically Polish 4uestion to one o& truly international i$port, and thus to draw Aer$an, Italian, and !ussian co$rades as well into the discussion. 8specially the last na$ed. The resolution o& the Polish /ocialist Party at the "ondon con%ress, and indeed the whole tendency which would ha e been sanctioned by its adoption, was o& $a5or political i$portance &or the labor $o e$ent in !ussia itsel&. Polish readers who are reasonably well ac4uainted with the publications o& the Polish /ocialist Party know that e er since 179>, the year when it &irst appeared in the public arena, the polish socialB patriotic tendency has atte$pted to 5usti&y its e#istence be&ore the Polish public principally, and in &act al$ost solely, on the basis o& the social sta%nation in !ussia and the hopeless prospects o& the

!ussian labor $o e$ent.;This &inds its $ost pointed &or$ulation in the lead article o& issue nu$ber 11 o& +r,ed-w t, 179E@ the &ollowin% e#tract is characteristic: There are so$e a$on% us who support our pro%ra$, or i$a%ine that they do, yet $ake the &ollowin% reser ation: in all our e&&orts to achie e an independent Polish republic we $ust not &or%et that i& a power&ul rebellion occurs in !ussia pro$isin% success o& the constitutional $o e$ent, we too should 5oin &orces with this $o e$ent and do our part to obtain a constitution. Jthers %o e en &urther, sayin%: to be sure, independence is i$perati e &or the Polish workers, and sooner or later they $ust obtain it, but to do so they $ust &irst possess constitutional &reedo$s@ only when we are able to or%ani'e the $asses o& workers will we stru%%le &or the ulti$ate ob5ecti e o& our political e&&orts ? a de$ocratic republic. ,s we ha e already stated, such persons are in error i& they think we are in their ca$p@ and i& they still a%ree with our de$and &or independence they do so only because they ha e not taken the trouble to draw all the conse4uences &ro$ this step. How can one make room for the #ossibility of a struggle for a constitution in the #rogram when one does not believe in the e&istence of the forces that could achieve such a constitution* +nd yet this disbelief is still ram#ant among us, even since the #resent #olitical #rogram was formulated. Further, how can our su##orters of a !#ossible" constitution reconcile their efforts with their belief in the reactionary nature of ,ussian society and the im#otence of the socialist elements in ,ussia, when the co$bination o& these &actors &orces the$ to assu$e &ro$ the outset that in !ussia our constitutional &reedo$s are either 4uite ne%li%ible or totally nonBe#istent. -n the meantime, none of our arguments en.oys such #o#ularity among our comrades as does the argument of the reactionary nature of ,ussia. 0y rekindlin% and culti atin% the traditional policy on Poland in the Cest, social patriotis$ tried to preser e as well these traditional iews on !ussia within the ranks o& international socialis$. 0y syste$atically portrayin% the Polish labor $o e$ent as the only serious re olutionary ele$ent in tsardo$, it succu$bed to the delusion that the sa$e iews on the social situation in !ussia that were pre alent at the ti$e o& the 17E7 !e olution in the !ussia o& Gicholas I, the !ussia o& ser&do$, had entrenched the$sel es a$on% Aer$an, French, and other socialists. Thus, when the !ussian labor $o e$ent e$er%ed at the end o& the ei%hties, it &ound itsel& &aced with a hi%hly unrecepti e at$osphere in international socialist circles. ,nd 5ust at the ti$e when the eruption o& a $a$$oth strike o& &orty thousand workers in the sprin% o& 1793 in Petersbur% heralded the be%innin%s o& a $ass $o e$ent o& the !ussian proletariat, at precisely this ti$e, international socialis$ was to declare o&&icially, on the stren%th o& a socialBpatriotic resolution, that it placed its hope &or the &all o& tsardo$ not in the political class stru%%le o& this proletariat but in the national stru%%le o& the Poles in e&&ect, a public procla$ation that it placed no stock whatsoe er in the !ussian workers or their re olutionary stru%%le. Thus, the criticis$ at the "ondon con%ress o& the social patriotsF resolution, and hence, by e#tension, o& the entire traditional standpoint on the Polish 4uestion, de eloped al$ost i$$ediately into a criticis$ o& the traditional iews on !ussia: instead o& outdated i$a%es o& the patriarchal !ussia o& Gicholas I, Cestern socialists were once a%ain con&ronted with the picture o& a $odern capitalist !ussia, the !ussia o& a stru%%lin% proletariat, de$onstratin% cate%orically that the !ussian labor $o e$ent had co$e o& a%e, and had earned the reco%nition o& the international $o e$ent as a reality, and a crucial one, that had to be reckoned with. Chat had ori%inally be%un as an internal a&&air a$on% Polish /ocialists pro oked a debate that ended in a thorou%hB%oin% re ision o& pre ailin% opinions in Cestern 8uropean socialis$ in three areas: the international situation, the situation in !ussia, and the situation in Poland.

Jne hears a %reat deal o& talk about (ar#ist )do%$atis$.* 0ut the re ision o& the iews on the Polish 4uestion pro ides &orce&ul de$onstration o& how utterly super&icial such ob5ections are. True, Polish social patriotis$ did try hard &or sonic ti$e to trans&or$ a particular iew o& (ar#Fs on a current issue into a %enuine do%$a, ti$eless, unchan%eable, una&&ected by historical contin%encies, and sub5ect to neither doubt nor criticis$ a&ter all, )(ar# hi$sel&* once said it. -owe er, such an abuse o& (ar#Fs na$e to sanction a tendency that in its entire spirit was in 5arrin% contradiction to the teachin%s and theory o& (ar#is$ could only be de&ended as a te$porary delusion suited pri$arily to the intellectual de$orali'ation o& the nationalist Polish intelli%entsia. Indeed, the essence o& )(ar#is$* lies not in this or that opinion on current 4uestions, but in two basic principles: the dialectical $aterialist $ethod o& historical analysis ? with the theory o& class stru%%le as one o& its corollaries and (ar#Fs basic analysis o& the principles o& capitalist de elop$ent. The latter theory, which e#plains the nature and ori%in o& alue, surplus alue, $oney, and capital, o& the concentration o& capital and capitalist crises, is, strictly speakin%, si$ply the application ? albeit a brilliant one ? o& dialectics and historical $aterialis$ to the period o& bour%eois econo$y. Thus, the ital core, the /uintessence, o& the entire (ar#ist doctrine is the dialectical $aterialist $ethod o& social in4uiry, a $ethod &or which no pheno$ena, or principles, are &i#ed and unchan%in%, &or which there is no do%$a, &or which (ephistophelesF co$$ent, )reason turns to $adness, kindness to tor$ent,*;17= stands as a $otto o er the a&&airs o& hu$an /ociety@ and &or which e ery historical )truth* is sub5ect to a perpetual and re$orseless criticis$ by actual historical de elop$ents. Gor did the Polish /ocial 1e$ocracy e er see as its task the seekin% o& sanctions &or earlier nationalist slo%ans in (ar#Fs obsolete iews on Poland: instead, the method and underlyin% principles o& the (ar#ist doctrine had to be applied to the conditions o& Polish society. 0ut here it &ound a theoretical tabula rasa in the archi es o& Polish /ocialis$ The ori%inal &ounders o& Polish /ocialis$. CaryHski and his co$rades, who brou%ht scienti&ic socialis$ to our country, encountered the re$ains o& the nationalist ideolo%y o& the Polish nobility, includin% the theory o& )or%anic labor,* at that ti$e the do$inant social ideolo%y. ,s representati es o& the interests o& the new class, the proletariat, they had abo e all to settle accounts with the ideolo%ical le%acy o& the rulin% classes, and they proceeded ri%ht to the task by brandin% the theories and earlier $o e$ents o& Polish nationalis$ as the e#pression o& the sel&ish class and caste interests o& the nobility, and the theory o& or%anic labor as the e#pression o& the no less $aterial, narrow, class interests o& our industrial bour%eoisie. Thus, the Polish /ocialists, at the end o& the se enties and be%innin% o& the ei%hties, prepared the way &or the theory o& class contradiction by stru%%lin% a%ainst the nationalis$ o& the nobility no less than a%ainst the bour%eois notion o& )or%anic labor,* which, as theory, proclai$ed the har$ony o& interests o& all social strata. That was the way (ar#Fs %eneral analysis o& capitalist society and its concrete i$plications ? class stru%%le o& the proletariat and socialist pro%ra$ ? were brou%ht to Poland. This, too, was a $eritorious historical contribution o& "udwik CaryHski, 1ickstein, and co$rades. -owe er, by settin% socialist re olution as the immediate task o& the Polish proletariat to counter the political pro%ra$ o& the rulin% class, Polish /ocialists le&t the labor $o e$ent without any political pro%ra$ at all, and placed socialis$ on a conspiratorial and utopian &oundation. In so doin%, they conde$ned the socialist $o e$ent to sta%nate within the narrow con&ines o& a sect, and within a short ti$e, to disappear &ro$ the political scene. ;Jur iews on the successi e trans&or$ations in the political position o& the CaryHski %roup can be &ound especially in )0em +ndenken des Proletariat +-n )emory of the Proletariat 1rou#.= Jne could use the abo eBcited ar%u$ent to hold oneFs own a%ainst the nationalist social patriots as lon% as they opposed socialis$ on open %rounds, under the old, wornBout slo%an o& har$ony o& interests and national unity in the spirit o& T.T. 9e'B(ilkowski,

;19=

or e en when they atte$pted to ally the$sel eswith socialis$, i& only in the pri$iti e, inco$petent, and nai e $anner o& (r. "i$anowskiFs entures with )national socialis$.* 0ut con&ronted with the $odern ersion o& nationalis$ this ar%u$ent was bound to $iscarry, since the latter had disa owed the discredited theory o& national unity and instead hid itsel& behind the theory o& class stru%%le, appearin% on the political sta%e with the pro%ra$ o& the proletariat as its callin% card. -ence, /ocial 1e$ocracy &ound itsel& propelled by the precipitous %rowth o& the Polish labor $o e$ent into $ass di$ensions at the be%innin% o& the nineties, and a&ter the collapse o& the conspiratorial tendency within socialis$ was obli%ed to work out a solid #olitical #rogram &or the class stru%%le o& the proletariat. This could only be achie ed Bin accordance with (ar#ist theory ? by in esti%atin% the current trends o& Polish society, an in esti%ation which sou%ht the key to the understandin% o& pheno$ena o& a political, intellectual, and $oral nature in relations o& production, and the class relations which %rew out o& the$. It was no lon%er a 4uestion o& describing the de elop$ent o& capitalis$ in Poland, to what e#tent it produced capital concentration, proletariani'ation, e#ploitation, in a word, social anarchy and class stru%%le. !ather, what was necessary was an analysis o& this de elop$ent, and o& the e#tent to which it %a e rise to speci&ic political tendencies within society. That is, there was no lon%er any need to show that the patterns o& capitalist de elop$ent ty#ical to all countries were now appearin% in Poland as well@ what was needed was to e#plain the s#ecific &eatures which capitalist de elop$ent had brou%ht to the social li&e o& Poland as a result o& our countryFs particular historical and political conditions. In a word, the $ere application o& the stock, %eneral conclusions o& the (ar#ian analysis o& bour%eois society to the case o& Poland was not su&&icient: it was necessary to undertake an ori%inal analysis o& bour%eois Poland and in so doin% brin% socialis$ back down &ro$ its abstract clouds and e$pty sche$atis$ to the soil o& Poland. This analysis, the econo$ic aspects o& which we atte$pted to sketch out in The 5ndustr al 6e7elo3ment o2 +oland ;"eip'i%: 1uncker and -u$bolt, 1797=, was presented in su$$ary &or$ to%ether with all the essential conclusions in an o&&icial report o& the /ocial 1e$ocracy at the International /ocialist 6on%ress in Murich in 179>.;<0= The result was two&old, with both aspects ? one positi e, the other ne%ati e ? lo%ically related: &irst, it pro ided a theoretical con&ir$ation o& a conclusion which the labor $o e$ent had already reached e$pirically in its $ass de elop$ent, na$ely, that the i$$ediate political task o& the Polish proletariat in the Kin%do$ o& Poland was to 5oin in co$$on stru%%le with the !ussian proletariat to brin% about the down&all o& absolutis$, and institute de$ocracy into political li&e. /econd, it $ade clear that the stru%%le &or the restoration o& Poland was hopelessly utopian in the &ace o& the de elop$ent o& capitalis$ in Poland, that, on the contrary, this ery de elop$ent had led to the abo e political pro%ra$ with the ine itability o& the iron laws o& history. In this way, Polish /ocial 1e$ocracy was &orced to &ind an independent e#planation, as it were, &or the social de elop$ent o& $odern Poland by applyin% the principles o& scienti&ic socialis$ to Polish circu$stances, in the sa$e way that the !ussian /ocial 1e$ocracy was &orced to establish a positi e pro%ra$ &or the !ussian proletariat by analy'in% the speci&ic social relations e#istin% in !ussia itsel&, and si$ultaneously $ark out the path it was to take by its annihilatin% criticis$ o& Garodnik theory. ;<1= Thus, a&ter ha in% tra elled alon% co$pletely di&&erent paths, in the positi e results o& their theories the Polish and !ussian /ocial 1e$ocracies &ound the$sel es on co$$on %rounds ? a co$$on political pro%ra$. There was 5ust one di&&erence: whereas Friedrich 8n%els had, in 1725, already shown a brilliant insi%ht into the principal $istakes o& the !ussian Garodniks in his answer to Tkace in 'ol(staat, where he traced out the $ain lines o& capitalist de elop$ent &ro$ the disinte%ration o& the illa%e co$$une, in the case o& Poland, neither (ar# nor 8n%els had bothered to the ery end to re ise their old position o& 17E7@ in &act, toward the last, they e en $echanically

applied this standpoint to the Polish /ocialist $o e$ent, as we saw in their letter to the Go e$ber 6o$$e$orati e $eetin% in Aene a in 1770, and as was $ore recently $ade e ident in 8n%elsF pre&ace to the Polish edition o& The 8ommun st 9an 2esto in 179<.;<<= Go sooner had /ocial 1e$ocracy co$e &orward &or the &irst ti$e, in 179>, with its criticis$ o& social patriotis$ based on (ar#ian social theory, ;<>= than it beca$e plain that social patriotis$ was capable o& $usterin% no $ore than sopho$oric ar%u$ents &or its own de&ense and 5usti&ication. This intellectual po erty naturally still $aintained a particular brilliance about it since it had to appear in the international arena as well as be&ore the hu$ble Polish public. The partisans o& nationalis$ pro ed the$sel es totally incapable o& e en understanding this (ar#ian analysis, let alone pro idin% so$e plausible re&utation o& it. For e#a$ple, when it was pointed out what direction capitalist de elop$ent was takin% in Poland, na$ely, that the $aterial interests o& the rulin% class were creatin% increasin%ly stron%er ties between our country and !ussia ? the social patriots tried to )brand* this whole ob5ecti e, e#traordinarily co$ple# historical process ? a process e#tendin% &ro$ the purely econo$ic &oundations throu%h key political interests and issues to the $ost subtle aspects o& ideolo%y ? as the sub5ecti e stri in% o& /ocial 1e$ocrats toward )or%anic inte%ration,* or as a sub5ecti e concern &or whether Polish $anu&acturers would still ha e anywhere to sell their )percale* once Poland was restored. The re5oinders o& the supporters o& social nationalis$ were on the sa$e le el: indi%nation that socialists should e en acknowled%e such a conte$ptible sub5ect as capitalist de elop$ent@ or such $a%nani$ous assurances as we &ind, &or e#a$ple, in the Jctober 179E issue o& +r,ed-w t, that /ocialist dele%ates to parlia$ent in restored Poland would $ake it their special concern to ponder o er how one $i%ht &ind e$ploy$ent &or the workers who would lose their 5obs as a conse4uence o& the collapse o& Polish industry brou%ht about by the loss o& !ussian $arkets. ;The &uture historian studyin% the )national hu$or* in $odern Poland will &ind in aluable treasures in the socialBpatriotic publications. Ce o&&er the &ollowin% pearl in its entirety: )"et (essrs. /cheibler N 6o. lose $illions in pro&its they are presently %ettin% &ro$ the sale o& their percale to arious Kal$uks or to 6hiwa@ we shall hardly %rie e about that, and e en i& a certain nu$ber o& workers should ha e to lose their 5obs on account o& di$inished $arket outlets &or the products o& Polish &actories, we will not renounce independence on that account. It will be the responsibility o& the &uture /ocialist &action in parlia$ent to pro ide &or these un&ortunates throu%h appropriate parlia$entary proposals and to a%itate &or a shortenin% o& the workin% day, the ri%ht to work, etc.*=. In the &ace o& a real embarras de richesses, o& this and si$ilar such naO etPs, uttered in all seriousness, it is hard to decide whether the pri'e should not %o a&ter all to the ar%u$ent o& a certain (r. Mborowic', who, like a true (oses, %a e social patriotis$ its ten co$$and$ents: these anticipated e ery concei able stupidity o& this tendency as early as 179< in the pa$phlet, 0e trag ,ur +rogram der +oln s$hen #o, alen 6emo(raten +8ontr but on to the +rogram o2 the +ol sh #o$ al 6emo$rats, 0erlin: (orawski.. The author, who in his 4uest &or )$arkets* &or )our* industry, nai ely re eals the enthusias$ that he and his &ollowers deri e &ro$ an ob5ecti e analysis o& /ocial 1e$ocracy, de elops the 4uestion in the &ollowin% way, worthy o& a (achia elli: )... i& political independence $eans we lose southern !ussian $arkets, !ussia will lose the "ithuanian $arket, presently do$inated by (oscow industries, &or the sa$e reason. It will then be open to our industry@ and add to that the Aalician $arket which is presently inundated with Qiennese products. It see$s to $e the com#ensation is worth the loss.* This $indless and banal reduction o& the whole o& social relations in bour%eois Poland to the 4uestion o& $arket outlets, this atte$pt to e#plain the dyna$ics o& the ob5ecti e historical process in ter$s o& the sub5ecti e wishes, apprehensions, and concerns o& socialists, showed that in the $inds o& social patriots the theory o& historical $aterialis$ and the whole o& (ar#Fs teachin%s had su&&ered

the sa$e caricaturin% as in the $inds o& the bour%eois critics who periodically )de$olish* (ar#ist doctrine by distortin% it and per ertin% it into so$e horrible $onstrosity. That such ar%u$ents, &ro$ a tendency that was tryin% to pass itsel& o&& as socialist, could e en &ind their way into the Polish press and into si$ilar articles in the Aer$an press ? this &act in itsel& was appallin% testi$ony to the intellectual le el o& the Polish intelli%entsia. This was the har est o& lon% years durin% which the $inds o& our )radical* intelli%entsia were educated in the banal and $indless eclectic $ish$ash o& a "i$anowski, that insipid socialist slu$%ullion that &launts the na$e o& )The /ocial Theories o& the 17th and 19th 6enturies,*;<E= or in that ul%ar, obstreperous )re olutionary* ersion o& socialis$ that the &orei%n publishers o& the &or$er +roletar at had been dishin% up in %al(a and +r,ed-w t;<5= since the $iddle o& the ei%hties. The sad &act had at last co$e out: the Polish intelli%entsia had, at best, been educated to believe in the socialist &aith but not to think in the spirit o& scienti&ic socialis$. 9ust as it beco$es i$$ediately apparent in the debates between (ar#ists and their French and Aer$an bour%eois opponents that each side considered the other barbarians, that it was not di&&erences o& opinion on particular issues but their entire $odes o& thou%ht, their 2eltanschauung, that separated the$, in e#actly the sa$e $anner the &eud with social patriotis$ rese$bled a dialo%ue at the Tower o& 0abel. 8 en the replies o& the social patriots bore, &ro$ the be%innin%, that characteristic tre$olo o& e#asperation and whinin% la$ent that usually acco$panies the ripostes o& the bour%eois ad ersaries o& (ar#is$. The Polish social patriots ha e this in co$$on with all petit bour%eois utopians: both consider that the disco ery o& historical &acts which contro ert their utopian drea$s is an act o& personal baseness on the part o& the disco erer. Got &or all the world can they be brou%ht to understand that i& there is any baseness in ol ed, it is at $ost the )baseness* o& the ob5ecti e process o& history, but hardly the baseness o& those that draw our attention to the particular trends o& this process, and that this )base* process is by no $eans brou%ht to a halt $erely by closin% oneFs eyes to it. It is likewise beyond their %rasp that any talk o& the )baseness* o& history necessarily $isses the $ark. The dialectic o& history has this ad anta%e, that as it under$ines and abolishes traditional &or$s o& satis&yin% social needs, it at the sa$e ti$e creates new &or$s. )Interests,* on the other hand, &or whose preser ation social e olution pro ides no $aterial %uarantees whatsoe er, are usually, i& one looks closely, &or the $ost part obsolete, bankrupt, or e en no $ore than $erely i$a%ined. Chen the Aer$an and French de$ocrats announced their position on the Polish 4uestion in 17E7 they were %uided on the one hand by consideration &or the e#istin% national $o e$ent o& the Polish schlachta@ on the other hand, howe er, they were $erely bein% consistent with the interests o& their own de$ocratic politics. They had no connections with the Polish /ocialist $o e$ent, nor indeed could they ha e had, since at that ti$e no such $o e$ent e#isted. Today, howe er, there is one 4uestion that takes precedence o er all others &or us Polish /ocialists in adoptin% a position on any social pheno$enon: what are the i$plications o& that position &or the class interests o& the Polish proletariatK ,ny analysis o& ob5ecti e social de elop$ents in Poland re4uires the conclusion that a ca$pai%n &or the restoration o& Poland this 5uncture is a petit bour%eois utopian &antasy, and, as such, is capable only o& inter&erin% with the class stru%%le o& the proletariat and di ertin% it &ro$ its path. For this reason, the Polish /ocial 1e$ocracy today re5ects the nationalist standpoint out o& consideration &or the interests o& the Polish /ocialist $o e$ent, and in so doin% adopts an attitude dia$etrically opposed to that &or$erly held by Cestern de$ocrats. Thus, the sa$e historical chan%e which turned the restoration o& Poland into a utopian drea$ and put it in opposition to the interests o& socialis$ in Poland, brou%ht alon% with it a new solution &or $eetin% international de$ocratic interests on this point. ,&ter it had beco$e apparent that the idea o& $akin% an independent Poland into a bu&&er and protecti e barrier &or the Cest a%ainst the reactionary !ussian tsardo$ was unreali'able, the de elop$ent o& capitalis$, which had buried this idea in the &irst place, created in its place the re olutionary class $o e$ent o& the united proletariat in !ussia and Poland and in it a

&ar $ore stalwart ally &or the Cest, an ally that would not $erely $echanically protect 8urope &ro$ absolutis$ but would itsel& under$ine and crush it. Gor does this solution stand counter to the national interests o& the Polish proletariat. Its real interests in this respect liberty, the &ree de elop$ent o& the national cultural herita%e, bour%eois e4uality, and the abolition o& all national oppression ? &ind their only e&&ecti e, nay, only possible e#pression in the uni ersal class stri in%s o& the proletariat &or the broadest de$ocrati'ation o& the partition countries, to which national autono$y is a sel&Be ident corollary. 0eyond this, howe er, to think that appropriation o& the state apparatus in an independent class society under e#istin% conditions is in the interests o& the workin% class is no $ore than a utopian delusion, rooted in the pre5udices o& the petty bour%eoisie, and, as such, is alien to the real interests o& the proletariat as it is to the thou%ht o& scienti&ic socialis$ in %eneral. /ocial patriotis$Fs total lack o& any ar%u$ent capable o& understandin% criticis$ &ound its $ost blatant de$onstration in the re$arkable &act that a &orei%n theoretician, no less than Karl Kautsky, was needed to de&end its position in the discussion bein% carried on in the &orei%n press.;<3= In preparin% this de&ense, Kautsky &ound hi$sel& &aced with the necessity o& ha in% to de elop entirely &ro$ his own resources a wholly ori%inal theory in support o& the restoration o& Poland, inas$uch as a$on% the actual ad ocates o& this pro%ra$ not a trace o& a wellB%rounded ar%u$ent could be discerned. The reader will see what di&&iculties con&ronted this illustrious representati e o& (ar#is$ in %rapplin% with the proble$. "ackin% any knowled%e whatsoe er o& social li&e in Poland, he was &orced to deduce the interests o& the di&&erent Polish social classes &ro$ the nature o& thin%s ? by $ere abstract reasonin%. In this way, as o&ten happens with abstract reasonin%, he arri ed at the 4uite re$arkable conclusion that the restoration o& Poland was, in &act, an ur%ent necessity not only &or the Polish proletariat, or e en &or any one particular class, but &or all the social classes without e#ception ? the bour%eoisie, the schlachta, the peasants, the petite bour%eoisie, the intelli%entsia, and the proletariat. Thus, althou%h the reputedly pure )workersF pro%ra$* o& social patriotis$ had achie ed in this alto%ether too con%enial conclusion o& KautskyFs a net %ain in ter$s o& its actual basis and prospects &or success, it had also lost whate er class character it $ay pre iously ha e had@ whereupon it re%ressed to an earlier, $ore pri$iti e phase, when it represented the har$ony o& interests o& all social strata, to the nationalBunity the$e o& the blessed $e$ory o& My%$unt Fortunat (ilkowski.;<2= The &act that KautskyFs article recei ed no direct rebuttal was $ainly due to the circu$stance that its appearance coincided al$ost e#actly with the openin% o& the "ondon con%ress. and it was 4uite i$possible &or a reply to be published in such a short space. ,&ter the 6on%ress, the discussion o& the restoration o& Poland no lon%er possessed the sa$e ti$eliness and practical i$port, since, as we ha e $entioned, the 6on%ress did not adopt the socialBpatriotic resolution which KautskyFs essay was $eant to support. Kautsky ad$itted that the only &actual basis &or his %eneral ar%u$ent ? the theory o& the econo$ic interests o& the bour%eoisie and landed aristocracy ? had been taken on &aith &ro$ an article by a (r. /.A. in Neue &e t.;<7= 0ehind these $odest initials a +r,ed-w t 5ournalist had atte$pted to place the pro%ra$ &or the restoration o& Poland on )$aterialist* &oundations, usin% as a basis a strin% o& statistical &abrications, concocted historical &acts, and 4uotations &ro$ arious authors he happened to ha e at his &in%er tips. Fro$ these 4uestionable sources, he shows that Polish capitalis$, oppressed by tsardo$, $ust %i e rise to a nationalBseparatist tendency a$on% the Polish bour%eoisie. ,s a writer o& 8uropean stature, Kautsky, o& course, could not suspect that such a weed, o& the sa$e species as the one that "assalle had once already pulled up by the roots &ro$ Aer$an soil in his i$$ortal e#coriation o& 9ulian /ch$idt,;<9= still &lourished in the wretched &ields o& Polish

5ournalis$: as the sayin% %oes, )la vermine #ullule chez les mendicants.* /o he &ell prey to the &raud perpetrated by this )national* pur eyor o& &acts. For this reason, it was 5ust and proper that this Polish &aker bore the brunt o& our criticis$, and not the $isled Aer$an theoretician. ,s a $atter o& &act, The 5ndustr al 6e7elo3ment o2 +oland contains a 4uite substantial, i& not co$plete, sur ey o& the principal statistical &alsi&ications o& our (r. /.A., who, at +r,ed-w t, is presently en%a%ed in drawin% up plans o& war and %unrunnin% &or the national cause, and has not yet o&&ered one word in rebuttal. Finally, as re%ards those ar%u$ents in KautskyFs article that are o& a purely political and tactical nature, the reader should ha e no trouble in deter$inin% &or hi$sel& &ro$ KautskyFs articles in the present olu$e that he has brou%ht his iews on the Polish 4uestion $ore closely in line with the /ocial 1e$ocratic position under the in&luence o& &acts which rea&&ir$ this position anew e ery day. This kind o& re ision o& the traditional iews on the national 4uestion was be%un in Poland in 1793, and has continued down to the present ti$e. In that sa$e year, the Polish /ocialist $o e$ent in Aer$any be%an to dissociate itsel& &ro$ the Aer$an $o e$ent, a process which has ended ? a&ter a lon% series o& unspeakably pain&ul incidents ? in 1901 with the Polish /ocialist Party in the Prussian sector &indin% itsel& co$pletely cut o&& &ro$ Aer$an /ocial 1e$ocracy. ;>0= (uch o& what we had ar%ued ? at that ti$e on an a priori basis ? in the &irst article in Neue &e t, in sprin% 1793, to be the lo%ical conse4uence o& the nationalist tendency, was later to be eri&ied with the ut$ost precision. The political contradiction which the socialBpatriotic tendency had ine itably to produce between Polish and international socialis$ ? as we pointed out &ro$ the ery be%innin% ? beca$e a tan%ible &act in the history o& the labor $o e$ent in Aer$any. These e#periences could not help but ha e an i$pact on the iews o& Aer$an /ocial 1e$ocracy, and they indeed &ound o&&icial e#pression in the &a$ous declaration o& ,u%ust 0ebel and the partyFs e#ecuti e co$$ittee: he &ound it i$possible, he said, to reconcile, or e en to link up, the pro%ra$ &or the restoration o& Poland with the class stru%%le o& the Polish proletariat. In !ussia, e ents took a si$ilar course. The contradiction between the socialBpatriotic tendency and the !ussian labor $o e$ent was bound e entually to &ind e#pression in practical ter$s, as the !ussian /ocial 1e$ocracy be%an to %row into a cohesi e party. The resultant re ision that the !ussian /ocial 1e$ocracy had to undertake with respect to the tendency represented by the PP/ was set &orth in se eral articles in 5s(ra, also to be &ound in this olu$e.;>1= Finally, Fran' (ehrin%, who at that ti$e was en%a%ed in editin% the literary re$ains o& (ar#, 8n%els, and "assalle, and e#a$inin% their pre iously e#pressed iews in the li%ht o& later de elop$ents, undertook a criticis$ o& (ar#Fs state$ents on the Polish 4uestion &ro$ a purely theoretical perspecti e.;><= The re iew o& the position taken in the Neue Rhe n s$he &e tung, throu%h application o& the principles and $ethods o& (ar#is$, led to a &ull acceptance o& the iews o& Polish /ocial 1e$ocracy, so that we can now speak o& a decisi e and conscious shi&t on the Polish 4uestion all down the line, throu%hout the ranks o& international socialis$. ;Jne can e en say that this turn a&&ects not only the Polish 4uestion, but nationalist tendencies o& any sort within the labor $o e$ent, which today pro oke pronounced hostility, and, where called &or, sharp re5ection. ;The political independence o& the 3ohemian territories was discussed as early as the end o& 1797 in Neue &e t where Karl Kautsky ar%ued with e#ceptional trenchancy a%ainst this proposition +at that ti$e de&ended by a certain F. /ta$p&er., on the basis o& the principles and tactics o& the ,ustrian /ocial 1e$ocracy. /ee this article o& KautskyFs in 6 e Neue &e t, 1797B1799, Qol.I, nos.10 and 13. ;The e&&orts o& Italian separatists in Trieste and the Trentino, and parallel nationalist tendencies in Italy, led to a special party con&erence o& the Italian and ,ustrian /ocialists in (ay 1905 in Trieste, where any solidarity or support o& this nationalist $o e$ent was e#pressly re5ected by both parties,

thanks lar%ely to the presence o& the ,ustrian, Qictor ,dler, and the Italian, 0issolati.= Kautsky ca$e out a%ainst the separatist tendencies o& certain sections o& the ,r$enian /ocialists in a co$prehensi e article in the Le 3, ger 'ol(s,e tung o& (ay 1, 1905. Finally, the past week has pro ided us with a thorou%hly characteristic pheno$enon that was not without a touch o& co$edy: a iolent con&rontation between the Aalician party and the separatist tendency o& the 4ewish /ocialists within the Polish or%ani'ation. Followin% &aith&ully in the Prussian and !ussian territories, the position o& the PP/, whose separatis$ is publicly supported by the leaders o& the Aalician party, and e en usin% so$e o& the ar%u$ents o& the PP/, the 9ewish /ocial 1e$ocrats isolate the$sel es &ro$ the party o& the Aalician proletariat as a whole, and thereby %i e the supporters o& social patriotis$ the opportunity to see the other side o& the coin: the &ra%$entation o& the proletariat as the lo%ical result o& their tendency. To o erco$e this tendency, which was threatenin% its e#istence, the Aalician party took re&u%e in the authority o& the panB,ustrian /ocial 1e$ocracy &ro$ which they recei ed a &lat conde$nation o& the separatists, i.e., the 9ewish ones. 0ut the $ost e$phatic proo& o& the theory o&&ered by Polish /ocial 1e$ocracy in 179>, and which it be%an to de&end in the international $o e$ent in 1793, is &urnished by the e ents o& the past &ew $onths and years. Indeed, as this book is %oin% to press ;1905=, our country and !ussia &ind the$sel es in the throes o& a deep social crisis. The period &ro$ 1793, when the &irst o& these articles appeared, up to the present, co$prised an entire epoch in the de elop$ent o& both countries, and today the -e%elian re olutionary )trans&or$ation o& 4uantity to 4uality* ;>>= is takin% place &or all to see@ the 4uantitati e chan%es that ha e accu$ulated unnoticed are now bein% trans&or$ed into a new 4uality. Ce are witnessin% the cul$ination o& capitalis$Fs slow erosion o& absolutis$ &ro$ within, a process on which /ocial 1e$ocracy had based its pro%ra$$atic perspecti e. ,nd in this process, the two aspects o& capitalist %rowth ? to which we ha e called attention &ro$ the &irst ? are &indin% their raw political e#pression. The econo$ic $er%in% o& Poland with !ussia into an econo$ic unit that abolishes the $aterial basis &or national separatist tendencies in our society has &ound re&lection in the re$arkable circu$stance that the Polish nationalist $o e$ent, as an e&&ecti e political &orce callin% &or the restoration o& Poland, has disappeared without a trace. The war su$$ons all to li&e and action, and has brou%ht to the sur&ace all re olutionary and oppositional ele$ents in !ussian society@ e en such an essentially tri ial pheno$enon as !ussian liberalis$ has &ound itsel& carried away in 4uite open re olutionary raptures. The war, the last appeal, which once and &or all put to the test o& history all aspirations toward independence, where er e en a spark still e#isted, un eiled be&ore an astonished world a picture o& %hostly silence in bour%eois Poland. Indeed, the only si%ni&icant ways in which the nationalist $o e$ent re%istered the i$pact o& the new re olutionary de elop$ents were the renunciation o& the pro%ra$ o& national independence by one win% o& the nationalists, the Gational 1e$ocratsF formal renunciation in an o&&icial declaration o& policy in 190>, ;>E= and in the actual suppression o& this pro%ra$ by the Polish /ocialist Party, which co$pletely abandoned its slo%an o& ar$ed insurrection &or the liberation o& Poland &ro$ !ussia at the &irst outbreak o& re olution in tsardo$. This partyFs Political 0eclaration at the end o& 9anuary o& this year, which $akes the de$and &or a )le%islati e se.m in Carsaw,* shows the utter bankruptcy o& social patriotis$ in the &ace o& the re olutionary crisis in !ussia. In spite o& all, it retains its reactionary, nationalistic core intact, as re ealed in the &act that the slo%an, a )le%islati e se5$ in Carsaw,* is linked with no pro%ra$ &or de$ocratic &reedo$s &or the !ussian e$pire as a whole. The /ocial 1e$ocratic pro%ra$, by contrast, de$ands a republic &or all o& !ussia with national autono$y &or Poland as an or%anic part o& any %eneral de$ocratic &reedo$s. 0y its silence, and by its aloo& disregard o& &reedo$ &or all o& the tsarist e$pire, social patriotis$ re eals its nationalist character and shows a&ter all that it has retained its utopianis$ fully intact. Indeed, this utopianis$ beco$es all the $ore absurd, in that the idea o& a le%islati e se.m in Carsaw, suspended in $idBair, so to speak, and not tied down to earth by e en a %eneral notion o& de$ocracy &or !ussia, is e en

$ore utopian than the restoration o& Poland: the latter, at least, was only a reactionary re%ression to the blunted, historically obsolete idea o& an autono$ous constitution &or the Kin%do$ o& Poland within the absolutist !ussian state, as %ranted by the %race o& the 6on%ress o& Qienna. -owe er, by disa owin% the slo%an o& ar$ed resistance to wrench Poland loose &ro$ !ussia, and by re ertin% to the slo%an o& an autono$ous Poland, which takes no account o& the 4uestion o& &reedo$ in !ussia, social patriotis$ openly ad$its that the course o& e ents has 4uite si$ply reduced its political pro%ra$ to i$potence. The only aspect re$ainin% o& nationalis$ today is its ne%ati e side ? an aloo&ness &ro$ the re olutionary stru%%le &or &reedo$ in !ussia ? while its positi e side, the de$and &or Polish autono$y, has turned out to be no $ore than an e$pty phrase. This $uch is clear: those who do not raise the call &or PolandFs separation &ro$ !ussia now, when tsardo$ is seethin% with iolent re olution, will ne er do so. In other words, when re olution broke out, the only thing that re$ained o& nationalis$ was reaction, while its outwardly and formally re olutionary side, that which &launted the slo%an o& ar$ed insurrection &or national independence, anished at the &irst wa e o& the present re olutionary upsur%e, ne er to be seen a%ain. The other aspect o& this capitalist process $ani&ested itsel& at the sa$e ti$e in the &or$ o& the uni&ied re olutionary class action o& the Polish and !ussian proletariat a%ainst absolutis$ and indicated to the world the conclusions with which the author o& the present article ended her book, The 5ndustr al 6e7elo3ment o2 +oland, in 1792: ),s the !ussian %o ern$ent incorporates Poland econo$ically into the e$pire and culti ates capitalis$ as an RantidoteF to its nationalist opposition, it breeds, by this ery process, a new social class in Poland the $i%hty industrial proletariat ? a class, which by its ery nature, $ust ine itably beco$e the resolute opponent o& the absolutist re%i$e. ,lthou%h the opposition o& the proletariat cannot ha e a national character, this inability can only render its opposition all the $ore e&&ecti e, since it $ust then counter the solidarity o& the !ussian and Polish bour%eoisie, so co eted by the %o ern$ent, with the only lo%ical response: the political solidarity o& the Polish and !ussian proletariat. The result o& the $er%in% o& Poland and !ussia was a circu$stance o erlooked by the !ussian %o ern$ent, the Polish bour%eoisie, and the Polish nationalists alike: the unification of the Polish and ,ussian #roletariat into at single body to #reside over the coming bankru#tcy of, first, ,ussian tsardom, and then the combined rule of Polish and ,ussian ca#ital* The &irst li4uidation has already be%un. The spirit o& (ar#is$ has triu$phed in the re olution o& the proletariat on the streets o& Carsaw and Petersbur%. The whole course o& social de elop$ent, now reachin% its cul$ination in the re olutionary uphea als in the tsarist e$pire, has struck a &atal blow to our nationalis$ but not to the cause o& Polish national identity. Chere reactionary utopianis$, $ired in the past, sees only ruin, de&eat, and destruction, the scrutini'in% eye, trained to decipher the historical dialectic o& re olution, cannot but percei e the openin% o& new istas &or the deli erance o& Polish national culture. The accusations o& )do%$atis$* a%ainst /ocial 1e$ocracy are no less &re4uent than co$plaints about its )doctrinairis$*: its alle%ed intellectual narrowness that is said to be bent on &orcin% the ast and in&initely aried world o& social pheno$ena into a ri%id sche$a that reco%ni'es nothin% but )$aterial interests,* and is dea& and blind to the hi%her &or$s o& psychic pheno$ena national senti$ents, &or e#a$ple. (ar#is$ can really ha e only one response to such critics: in AoetheFs words, )-hr gleicht dem 1eist, den -hr begreift, nicht mir!*;>5= The /ocial 1e$ocratic world iew is reduced to a narrow, intellectually sti&lin% doctrine by 5ust those critics who co$plain o& its doctrinairis$. The contrary is true: (ar#is$ is, by its ery nature, the $ost &ecund, the $ost uni ersal product o& thou%ht, a theory that $akes the $ind soar, ast as the world is wide, and as rich in color and tones as nature, ur%in% to action, and pulsatin% with the

itality o& youth. This theory, and no other, pro ides the key to the riddles o& past history, and opens the way to our understandin% o& society as it continues to un&old@ li&tin% us, )with one win% sustained in the past, the other %ra'in% the &uture,* it i$pels us &orward in the present to creati e, truly re olutionary deeds. 0ut our bein% aware o& the actual trends o& historical de elop$ent by no $eans absol es us &ro$ in ol e$ent in our own social history, or allows us to &old our ar$s &atalistically across our breasts and like an Indian &akir wait to see what the &uture will brin%. )(en $ake their own history, but they do so not as &ree indi iduals,* says (ar#.;>3= Jne could, with &ull 5usti&ication, state the con erse: $en do not $ake history as &ree indi iduals, but they make their own history. Far &ro$ bluntin% or sappin% our re olutionary &er or, a sensiti ity to the ob5ecti e $o e$ent o& history te$pers the will and pushes us to action by showin% us ways to dri e the wheel o& social pro%ress e&&ecti ely &orward and by sparin% us &ro$ i$potently and &ruitlessly knockin% our heads a%ainst the wall, which sooner or later ine itably brin%s disappoint$ent, despair, and 4uietis$@ throu%h this knowled%e we are protected as well &ro$ $istakin%, as re olutionary acti ity, aspirations that ha e lon% since been trans&or$ed by the &orces o& social e olution into their reactionary opposites. ,s the reader will percei e &ro$ the $odest selection contained in this book, (ar#is$ alone is in a position to pro ide an e#hausti e e#planation &or the re$arkable, pu''leBridden history o& our society o er the last hal&Bcentury, e en to the $ost subtle nuances o& its intellectual physio%no$y, its ideolo%y. Jnly a blusterin% si$pleton would not &ind it pu''lin% that a society su&&erin% such outra%eous sub5u%ation, whose $ost ele$entary national ri%hts ha e been so syste$atically tra$pled under &oot, whose intellectual and cultural li&e has been so brutally stunted ? that such a society would not only %i e up its ar$ed stru%%le &or independence &or &i&ty years, but would also abandon all e&&orts, howe er sli%ht, to obtain a 8uropean, de$ocratic way o& li&e, and renounce all acti e opposition to its sa a%e tyrants. Jnly people who )$ake* re olution and )rebellions* in s$all schoolboy cli4ues can toss o&& such historical proble$s and be done with the$ $erely by brandin% certain classes as )conciliators* and bla$in% conciliation on a )hand&ul* o& their representati es@ they, o& course, do not understand that %i en the &actual $aterial circu$stances o& our social de elop$ent, this )hand&ul* o& conciliators turns out to be the entire Polish bour%eoisie with its present historical $ission, and hardly that other hand&ul o& indi iduals who discourse on )%uns* and rebellions o& petit bour%eois utopians. Jnly the (ar#ist scholar can best co$prehend the deepest inner $oti es o& Polish bour%eois society, its sha$e&ul past and its sha$e&ul present: he is in the best position to see in what directions our countryFs history and the class stru%%le are dri in%. Jnly a penetratin% study into the causes o& the decline o& the rebellious Polish nobility and o& the dis%race&ul history o& bour%eoisBcapitalist Poland, a study unclouded by ro$antic utopianis$, $ade it possible to &oresee the re olutionary re%eneration o& workin%Bclass Poland presently occurrin% be&ore our eyes. Gow, as in the past, it is an understandin% o& national and class de elop$ent that enables us to %rasp that the only real re olutionary deed at this 5uncture is brin%in% consciousness into this spontaneous historical process, there by &oreshortenin% its course and speedin% it onward toward its %oal. 1oubtless the cause o& nationalis$ in Poland bears a special historical relationship to the class stru%%le o& the proletariat@ but not at all in the sense i$a%ined by the social patriots. For the$ the $odern proletarian $o e$ent was a scape%oat &ro$ which one could e#act pay$ent &or all the back debts, lon% since swept away by history, o& the aristocracy and petite bour%eoisie, or which could be ordered to $ake %ood all the obli%ations o& the bankrupt classes. The relationship was, in &act, 4uite otherwise. In the &ra$ework, in the spirit o& the Polish proletarian class stru%%le, the cause o& nationalis$ itsel& takes on 4uite a di&&erent appearance than it has in the aspirations o& the schlachta and the petite bour%eoisie.

The cause o& nationalis$ in Poland is not alien to the workin% class ? nor can it be. The workin% class cannot be indi&&erent to the $ost intolerably barbaric oppression, directed as it is a%ainst the intellectual and cultural herita%e o& society. To the credit o& $ankind, history has uni ersally established that e en the $ost inhu$ane material oppression is not able to pro oke such wrath&ul, &anatical rebellion and ra%e as the suppression o& intellectual li&e in %eneral, or as reli%ious or national oppression. 0ut only classes which are re olutionary by irtue o& their material social situation are capable o& heroic re olt and $artyrdo$ in de&ense o& these intellectual riches. To tolerate national oppression, to toady to it ser ilely ? that is the special talent o& the schlachta and bour%eoisie, i.e., the possessin% classes whose interests today are reactionary to the core, classes that are the per&ect e$bodi$ent o& that ul%ar )%ut $aterialis$* into which the $aterialist philosophy o& (ar# and Feuerbach is usually trans&or$ed in the e$pty skulls o& our hu$dru$ 5ournalists. ,s a class possessin% no $aterial stake in present society, our proletariat, whose historical $ission is to o erthrow the entire e#istin% syste$ in short, the re olutionary class $ust e#perience national oppression as an open wound, as a sha$e and dis%race, and indeed it does, althou%h this does not alter the &act that this particular in5ustice is only a drop in the ocean o& the entire social pri ation, political abuse, and intellectual disinheritance that the wa%e laborer su&&ers at the hands o& presentB day society. 0ut this, as we said, by no $eans i$plies that the proletariat is capable o& takin% upon itsel& the historical task o& the schlachta, as the anachronistic $inds o& petit bour%eois nationalis$ would ha e it@ this task, to restore Poland to its e#istence as a class state, is an ob5ecti e which the schlachta itsel& abandoned, and the bour%eoisie has rendered i$possible throu%h its own de elop$ent. 0ut our proletariat can and $ust &i%ht &or the de&ense o& national identity as a cultural le%acy, that has its own ri%ht to e#ist and &lourish. ,nd today our national identity cannot be de&ended by national separatis$@ it can only be secured throu%h the stru%%le to o erthrow despotis$ and solidly i$plant the ad anta%es o& culture and bour%eois li&e throu%hout the entire country, as has lon% since been done in Cestern 8urope. 6onse4uently, it is precisely the untarnished class $o e$ent o& the Polish proletariat, which %rew to $aturity, alon% with capitalis$, on the %ra e o& the $o e$ents &or national autono$y, that constitutes the best and only %uarantee o& attainin%, alon% with bour%eois e4uality and autono$y, &reedo$ in political li&e and in our national culture. Thus, &ro$ e en a purely national perspecti e, e erythin% that contributes to pro$otin%, e#pandin%, and e#peditin% the workin%Bclass $o e$ent $ust be iewed as a contribution to national #atriotism in the best and truest sense o& the word. 0ut anythin% that checks or i$pedes this de elop$ent, anythin% that $i%ht delay it or cause it to depart &ro$ its principles, $ust be re%arded as in5urious and hostile to the national cause. Fro$ this perspecti e, the e&&orts to culti ate the old traditions o& nationalis$ and to di ert the Polish workin% class &ro$ the path o& class stru%%le to the utopian &olly o& Polish restoration, as social patriotis$ did &or twel e lon% years, represents the politics o& a pro&ound anti-nationalism, despite its outwardly nationalist trappin%s. /ocial 1e$ocracy, sailin% under the banner o& international socialis$, bears in its keepin% the Polish national cultural herita%e that is the present conse4uence o& the dialectics o& history. To understand and &oresee this process, and act in consonance with it that is what the (ar#ist $ethod enables us to do.
;<=

9ean 9aur:s was a leadin% French e#ponent o& re isionis$, and as such sub5ect to ceaseless attack by !osa "u#e$bur%.

;>=

In ,pril 190<, the 0el%ian workers sta%ed a %eneral strike in order to secure the ote. They were unsuccess&ul.
;E=

In 1ece$ber 17<5, youn% o&&icers +1ece$brists. in the TsarFs ar$y sou%ht to introduce Cestern ideas o& re&or$ into autocratic !ussia. The uprisin% was 4uickly put down.
;5=

In 1733, Karako'o $ade an unsuccess&ul atte$pt on the li&e o& Tsar ,le#ander II.

;3=

!osa "u#e$bur%Fs point o& iew on this $atter has recently been sustained by -ansBLlrich Cehler ? see his 5ozialdemokratie und 6ationalstaat +CSr'bur%: 193<., pp.12&&.
;2=

Tkace +17EEB1775. was a Gihilist who de eloped a 0lan4uist theory o& re olution, especially in the 5ournal Nabat +To$s n., which he edited and published in /wit'erland.
;7=

This 4uote by 8n%els is %i en in Aer$an in !osa "u#e$bur%Fs ori%inal, which, it will be recalled, was written in Polish. The 4uote is &ro$ 8n%els, #o, ales aus Russland +#o$ al +ers3e$t 7es 2rom Russ a., (ar#B8n%els %er(e +0erlin: 193<., TQI11, 575.
;9=

The &irst (ar#ist %roup to beco$e acti e in Poland was &ounded in 177< by "udwik CaryHski and others, with the na$e )Proletariat.* It was obli%ed to work under%round, but still succeeded in or%ani'in% se eral bi% strikes in 177>. It was in close touch with the !ussian or%ani'ation, 6arodnaya 7olya +PeopleFs Cill., and, like it, adopted terrorist tactics in the late 1770s. !osa "u#e$bur% did not appro e o& terroris$, then or later, but still traced her spiritual ancestry to CaryHski, includin% his re5ection o& Polish independence.
;10=

:;ual ty. The periodical and %roup by this na$e were the i$$ediate precursors o& the Proletariat %roup.
;11=

(ar#B8n%els, o3< $ t<, TIT, <>9BE1.

;1<=

The Polish /ocialist Party +PP/. was &ounded in "ondon toward the end o& 179<, and therea&ter worked closely with the sister parties in Aer$any and ,ustrian Poland &or the independence o& Poland. ,ssociated with the PP/ was a special co$$ittee in "ondon, the Miria'elc Ma%ranic'ny /oc5alistow Palskich.
;1>=

Pobudka $eans )alar$,* )re eille.* "i$anowski was also the chair$an at the &oundin% con&erence o& the PP/.

;1E=

;15=

/. -acker, 0er 5ozialismus in Polen Eine Entgegnung +5ocialism in Poland + ,e#ly. ;i.e., to !osa "u#e$bur%=, in 6 e Neue &e t, 1795?1793, ol.II.
;13=

6awn. ,t this ti$e the 5ournal was the or%an o& the internationalist Proletariat %roup. "ater it beca$e a oice &or the PP/.
;12=

That is, the olu$e The +ol sh !uest on and the #o$ al st 9o7ement, to which this essay was the Foreword. 6&. abo e.
;17=

Ai en in Aer$an in the ori%inal Polish te#t: )Qernun&t wird Lnsinn, Cohltat ? Pla%e.*

;19=

My%$unt (ilkowski +pseudony$ 9e'., 17<EB1915. Criter and politician, spokes$an &or the )or%anic labor* $o e$ent, which took the point o& iew that the $ain 5ob &or Poland was to industriali'e, with independence as a secondary consideration. -e preached the philosophy o& har$ony o& interests, i.e., a%ainst class war.
;<0=

/ee Qolu$e I o& !.".Fs 8ollected 2orks &or both o& these ite$s.

;<1=

The Garodnik, or Populist $o e$ent in !ussia, was acti e in the last part o& the nineteenth century. Its )socialis$* was not (ar#ist.
;<<=

(ar#B8n%els, o3< $ t<, TTII. <7<&&.

;<>=

The #3rawa Robotn $,a +The %or(ers= 8ause. was &ounded in Paris in 9uly 179> with the collaboration o& "eo 9o%iches, !osa "u#e$bur% under the na$e )!. Krus'ynska*., and ,dol& Cars'awski, and later, 9ulian (archlewski. The &ollowin% $onth this %roup &ounded the political party, /oc5alde$okrac5a Krolesta Polskie%o +/1KP., which, in 1799, throu%h the incorporation o& a "ithuanian %roup, beca$e the /1KPi".
;<E=

> stor a ru$hu s3ole$,nego 7 drug e? 3olow e @'555 stule$ a +"e$ber%: 1777.@ and > stor a ru$hu s3ole$,nego w @5@ stule$ a +"e$ber%: 1790..
;<5=

8lass #truggle. Karl Kautsky, Finis Poloniae*, in 6 e Neue &e t, 1795?1793, Qol.II. 6&. &ootnote 19.

;<3=

;<2=

;<7=

0ie industrielle Politik ,usslands in dessen #olnischen Provinzen +,ussia(s -ndustrial Policy in its Polish Provinces. in 6 e Neue &e t, 179>?179E, Qol.II.
;<9=

Ferdinand "assalle, >err Aul an #$hm dt der L teraturh stor (er +Aul an #$hm dt the > stor an o2 L terature., 173<.
;>0=

The increasin% di&&iculties between the Prussian branch o& the PP/ and the Aer$an /ocial 1e$ocratic Party, endin% in the e#pulsion o& the &or$er %roup, $ust ha e been a pain&ul e#perience &or !osa "u#e$bur%. /he was dele%ated to work &or the /ocial 1e$ocratic Party a$on% the Poles in 8ast Prussia@ she was the Polish e#pert o& the Aer$an party. /he had e en 5oined the PP/, althou%h continuin% to critici'e its e#cessi e nationalis$.
;>1=

"enin, %he 6ational 9uestion in :ur Program, in 8olle$ted %or(s, Qol.QI. In his attitude toward the PP/, "eninFs position appears to be lar%ely identical with !osa "u#e$bur%Fs.
;><=

(ehrin%, ed., Aus dem l terar s$hen Na$hlass 7on Barl 9arx/ Fr edr $h :ngels und Ferd nand Lassalle, Qol.III +/tutt%art: 190<..
;>>=

This phrase is %i en in Aer$an in the ori%inal.

;>E=

The Gational 1e$ocrats were an out%rowth o& a party &ounded in 1772. They included se%$ents o& the bour%eoisie and the bi% landBowners. Their leadin% &i%ure was !. 1$owski.

;>5=

)Dou are not e4ual ;to $e=. Dou are only e4ual to what you think I a$.* Fro$ AoetheFs Faust, trans. 0ryan Fairley +Toronto: 1920., /cene 1, p.10.
;>3=

Karl (ar#, The 1Cth 0ruma re o2 Lou s 0ona3arte, o3< $ t<, QIII, 115.