Date: 1897
Source: ru:LS/v28

Date: 1897
Source: Lenin Collection, Volume 28
Pages: 302–307

---

G. ADLER. “THE IMPERIALIST SOCIAL POLICY”
Georg Adler:
“The Imperialist Social Policy.” — D’Israéli, Napoleon III, Bismarck.
A Sketch. Tübingen, 1897 (p. 44). K. II. F. 868 bn \ (The preface is dated: March 1897).
((Reprints of articles from “Zukunft.”))
What a instructive little work! After a brief introduction to Chartism (with remarks on “chilastic expectations” (2), on “illusions” (2), and their role in “mass movements,” etc.), Adler devotes a chapter to Carlyle and his “social-aristocratic doctrine” (a critique of capitalism; a deep-seated hostility toward democracy, the “call for the feudalization of modern industrial activity” (11), the “idea of social aristocracy”). Then comes Chapter III: “D’Israéli’s Social Policy.” A Jew, an adventurer who began as a radical but later shifted to the Tories, perpetually mired in debt, ridiculed for his first speech in Parliament (1838), Disraeli became the leader of the Tories and Prime Minister in 1868. He advanced the ideas of monarchy combined with social aristocracy (in essence: exploiting the antagonism between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat). The electoral reform of 1867—Carlyle furiously denounced it in his pamphlet “Down Niagara—and Then?”—along with concessions and flirtations with the labor movement, which had already lost its revolutionary character, while he pursued a brilliant foreign and colonial policy from 1874 to 1880. DU = “Imperial Socialist” (p. 22) — and throughout, “imperial-socialist policy,” etc.
* Library code. Ed.
[ 294 ]

G. ADLER, “IMPERIALIST SOCIAL POLICY”
Georg Adler:
“Imperialist Social Policy.” — Disraeli, Napoleon III, Bismarck. A Sketch. Tübingen, 1897 (p. 44).
(The preface is dated: March 1897.)
((Reprints of articles from “Zukunft.”))
What a instructive little work! After a brief introduction to Chartism (with remarks on “chilastic expectations” (2), on “illusions” (2), and their role in “mass movements,” etc.), Adler devotes a chapter to Carlyle and his “social-aristocratic doctrine” (a critique of capitalism; a deep-seated hostility toward democracy, the “call for the feudalization of modern industrial activity” (11), the “idea of social aristocracy”). Then comes Chapter III: “Disraeli’s Social Policy.” A Jew, an adventurer who began as a radical but later shifted to the Tories, perpetually mired in debt, ridiculed for his first speech in Parliament (1838), Disraeli became the leader of the Tories and Prime Minister in 1868. He advanced the ideas of monarchy combined with social aristocracy (in essence: exploiting the antagonism between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat).
The electoral reform of 1867—Carlyle fiercely denounced it in his pamphlet “Down Niagara—and Then?”—along with concessions and flirtations with the labor movement, which had already lost its revolutionary character, while he pursued a brilliant foreign and colonial policy from 1874 to 1880. Taken together, this amounted to “imperial-socialist” (p. 22) — and in various places, “imperial-socialist policy,” and so forth.
[ 295 ]

For example: “Der Imperialsozialismus” and others, p. 44, p. 43, p. 35
Chapter IV is devoted to Napoleon III. Also an adventurer, a dreamer. Author of “Extinction of Pauperism” (1844). Brilliant economic development—brilliant foreign policy—fierce struggle against workers’ political organizations and encouragement of economic initiatives ((p. 32))—welfare funds (flirting with all classes). In his book on “French Trade Unions,” Lexis acknowledges the undeniable improvement in the condition of French workers between 1850 and 1870, as well as the notable success of Napoleon III’s policies: “Discipline and oversight of workers on the one hand, improvement of their material conditions on the other: this was an idea that never strayed from the inner politics of Louis N[apoleon]” (Lexis, quoted by Adler, p. 34).
Chapter V: Bismarck’s Social Policy.
Prussia—being a land of “schools and barracks”—naturally became a model country for “imperialist social policy” (p. 36): Bismarck’s struggle against freethinking, his flirtations with the working class, universal suffrage (designed to set the bourgeoisie against the proletariat), social legislation… social insurance (which Adler praises highly).
In the conclusion (p. 43), A[dler] argues that it is “impossible” (! ! ha-ha! !) to compare this with the Caesarism of a declining Rome, because it is not idle plebeians who are supported, but rather those who work. Proudhon wrote (where?) (a quote from Proudhon: “We do not draw a single pfennig from abroad,” p. 43), that Caesarism (in ancient Rome) thrived on the plunder of foreign nations, whereas things are different now.

G. ADLER. “IMPERIALIST SOCIAL POLICY”
297
For example:
“Imperial Socialism” and others, p. 44, p. 43, p. 35
!!
Chapter IV is devoted to Napoleon III. Also an adventurer, a dreamer. Author of “The Extinction of Pauperism” (1844). Brilliant economic development—brilliant foreign policy—fierce struggle against workers’ political organizations and encouragement of economic initiatives ((p. 32)). — welfare funds (flirting with all classes). In his book on “French Trade Unions,” Lexis acknowledges the undeniable improvement in the condition of French workers between 1850 and 1870, as well as the notable success of Napoleon III’s policies: “Discipline and oversight of workers on the one hand, improvement of their material conditions on the other: such was the idea from which the internal policy of Louis-Napoleon never deviated” (Lexis, quoted by Adler, p. 34).
Chapter V: “Bismarck’s Social Policy.”
Prussia—being a land of “schools and barracks”—naturally became a model country for “imperialist social policy” (p. 36): Bismarck’s struggle against freethinking, his flirtations with the working class, universal suffrage (designed to set the bourgeoisie against the proletariat), social legislation… social insurance (which Adler praises highly).
In the conclusion (p. 43), Adler states that it is “impossible” (! ! ha-ha! !) to compare this with the Caesarism of a declining Rome, because it is not idle plebeians who are supported, but rather those who work. Proudhon wrote (where?) (a quote from Proudhon: “We do not receive a single pfennig from abroad,” p. 43), that Caesarism (in ancient Rome) thrived on the plunder of foreign nations, whereas things are different now.

38] Cf. Engels on Napoleon III versus Bismarck: “Bonapartism”
…“Imperial Socialism… represented,
in what of it endured, objectively a powerful step toward integrating the
proletariat into modern society and enabling its positive participation in the cultural tasks of that society” (p. 44). ((The roots of social-chauvinism! !)) —
therefore, “imperial-socialism” was a “world-historical illusion,” useful though it did not reconcile the proletariat—once the enemy of Disraeli, Napoleon III, and Bismarck alike.
((End of Adler’s pamphlet)); At the end of page 39 of his notebook, Lenin noted the transfer of excerpts: “see . 38 + +,” and on page 38, at the end:
+ continuation from page 39.” Ed.

G. ADLER. “IMPERIALIST SOCIAL POLICY”
299
…“In what of it was enduring, imperial-socialism… objectively represented… a powerful step forward in the task of incorporating the proletariat into modern society and in the task of enabling its positive cooperation in the realization of the latter’s cultural objectives” (p. 44). ((The roots of social-chauvinism! ! ))—therefore, “imperial-socialism” was an “illusion of world-historical significance,” useful though it did not reconcile the proletariat—once the enemy of Disraeli, Napoleon III, and Bismarck alike.
((End of Adler’s pamphlet)).
“Bonapartism”
[38]
Cf. Engels on Napoleon III versus Bismarck