London, 16 December 1879 
Dear Bebel, 

I find it incomprehensible that Auer should now say he had 
meant Most amongst others, since in the article he all but 
specifically excepted him.*° But let it rest at that. 

In No. 10 of the Sozialdemokrat there are ‘PreBgeschichtliche 
Riickblicke’ which unmistakably stem from one or other of the 
three asterisks.* Here we read that it can only be an honour for 
Social-Democrats to be compared with belletrists such as Gutzkow 
and Laube, i.e. with men who, long before ’48, had already laid to 
rest such political character as they still had left, if indeed they 
ever had any. Again: 

‘The events of 1848 were bound to come, either accompanied by all the blessings of 
peace, if governments had responded to the demands of the time, or, alas—since 
they did not do so—the only recourse that remained was violent revolution,’ °° 

@ Karl Héchberg, Eduard Bernstein and Carl August Schramm 

In a paper in which it is possible actually to deplore the 
revolution of 1848 which, for the first time, opened wide the door 
to Social-Democracy, in such a paper there is no room for us. 
From this article and from Hdéchberg’s letter, it is plainly evident 
that the three asterisks claim the right to advocate in the 
Sozialdemokrat—and this on an equal footing with proletarian 
views—their own petty-bourgeois socialist opinions first clearly 
enunciated in their Jahrbuch.'* And, now that things have gone so 
badly off the rails, I fail to see how you people in Leipzig propose 
to prevent this without an actual breach. Now as before, you 
regard these men as party members. We cannot do so. The 
dividing line created between us and them by the Jahrbuch article 
is distinct and absolute. We cannot even negotiate with these 
people so long as they claim to belong to the same party as 
ourselves. The points that have arisen in this case are ones which 
no longer admit of being discussed in any proletarian party. To 
subject them to discussion within the party would mean jeopardis- 
ing the whole of proletarian socialism. 

In these circumstances it might, in fact, be better if we did not 
contribute. We would be constantly protesting and would, after a 
few weeks, have to give public notice of our resignation, which 
would do nothing to promote the cause. 

We regret very much being unable, at this time of repression, to 
give you our unqualified support. So long as the party in Germany 
remained true to its proletarian character, we were prepared to set 
aside all other considerations. But now that the petty-bourgeois 
elements you have admitted have come out in their true colours,’ 
its a different matter. The moment they are permitted to 
insinuate their petty-bourgeois ideas piecemeal into the organ of 
the German party, that organ, by the same token, is closed to us,” 
no more nor less. 

The matter of the oath is of very little concern to us. It might 
have been possible, as you yourself wished, to find some other 
procedure that would to some extent have eliminated the 

a The following is deleted in the manuscript of the draft: ‘and claim the right 
within the party to advocate as socialism their petty-bourgeois hesitations and 
limitations, its a different matter. A party to which they belong is no place for 
us, nor can we even treat with such people so long as they do not constitute 
themselves an independent petty-bourgeois-socialist faction of the party, or so long 
as they insist that they belong to the same party as ourselves, we cannot even treat 
with them.’ - > The following is deleted in the manuscript of the draft: ‘We can- 
not, and never shall be, able to work hand in hand with petty-bourgeois socia- 
lism.” 

disagreeable impression, but it’s of no great moment.” Discretion 
shall be observed, as you request. 

Malon’s journal* might have a salutory effect, for 1. Malon is 
not the kind of man to do much damage and 2. his collaborators 
among the French will see to it that the thing is kept on its proper 
course. If Héchberg imagines it will provide an arena for his petty 
bourgeoiserie, he’ll find that he’s thrown his money down the 
drain. 

We were very pleased about the Magdeburg election.** The 
staunchness of the working-class masses in Germany 1s admirable. 
The letters from working men in the Sozialdemokrat are the only 
good things in it. 

I return herewith Héchberg’s letter. The man’s completely 
hopeless. If we refused to do anything in company with the 
Zukunft people, this was, it seems, out of personal vanity. But a 
third of these people’s names were, and still are, completely 
unknown to us, and approximately another third are notorious 
petty-bourgeois socialists. And a thing like that called itself a 
‘scientific’ journal! And Héchberg still believes it had an ‘enlight- 
ening’ effect. Testifies to the much vaunted lucidity of his own 
intellect which, right up to this very day, and despite my every 
endeavour, has been unable to grasp the difference between 
petty-bourgeois and proletarian socialism. All differences of 
opinion are ‘misunderstandings’. Exactly as in the case of the 
democratic wailers*°’ of ‘48. Or else ‘over-hasty’ deductions. Of 
course, since any deduction is over-hasty which deduces a speci- 
fic meaning from the chatter of these gentry. For they aren’t 
just trying to say such and such, but also, as likely as not, the op- 
posite. 

Apart from this, world history proceeds on its course untrou- 
bled by these philistine advocates of prudence and moderation. In 
Russia things will surely come to a head within a few months. 
Either absolutism will be overthrown and then, immediately after 
the overthrow of that great storehouse of reaction, a new wind will 
blow across Europe. Or else there will be a European war, and the 
present German party, too, will be submerged in the inevitable 
struggle of each individual people for its national existence. A war 
such as that would, for us, be the greatest of misfortunes; it might 
set the movement back by twenty years. But the new party that 
must surely emerge from it at last would, in all European 

4 La Revue socialiste 

countries, be freed of a host of hesitations and pettinesses such as 
presently hamper the movement everywhere. 

Most cordially yours, 
F. E.