the French as oppressed just as Schleswig-Holstein once was for the Germans, and therefore it was very difficult to separate the demagogic chauvinism of professional politicians from the democratic thought of the restoration of a just condition in a part of the country which was under a dictatorship. The line,

"Vous rendez nous l'Alsace et la Lorraine,"

was based therefore on the same idea of justice as our [poem] of a former time:

"Schleswig-Holstein, meerumschlungen,
Deutscher Sitten hohe Wacht,

Wahre treu, was schwer errungen,
Bis ein schön❜rer Morgen tagt."

PHILIP SCHEIDEMANN, SOCIALIST VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE REICHSTAG IN 1912

It is the right or moderate wing of the party that is most extreme in its support of the war and of the government at the present time. Bernstein, as we have pointed out, is an exception. But all the other wellknown revisionists are strongly for the war: Frank, who volunteered and was killed; Suedekum, Richard Fischer, Kolb, David, Heine, and all the leading labor unionists, Legien, Hue, Robert Schmidt, etc. But with the revisionists are also to be found a number of leaders who were formerly of the middle group, then represented by Bebel and Kautsky. The best known of these is Scheidemann, who was given the nomination for VicePresident of the Reichstag that would have fallen to Bebel, and therefore may be considered as a possible successor to Bebel in party leadership.

On August 21st Scheidemann wrote a long letter to the New York Volkszeitung, which was published on September 10th. He says that nobody wanted the war in Germany, and underlines the word "nobody."

He puts the chief blame for the present war upon Russia,

and takes the Russian mobilization as a sufficient cause for the

war:

"The chief guilt for the present war rests upon Russia. At the very time when the Czar was exchanging dispatches with the German Kaiser, apparently working for peace, he allowed the mobilization to go on secretly, not only against Austria, but also against Germany.

"When France, republican France, has allied with the Russian absolutism for the purpose of murder and destruction, it is a difficult fact to conceive that England, parliamentarian England, democratic England, is fighting side by side for 'freedom and culture.' That is truly a gigantic, shameless piece of hypocrisy."

The sole motive of England is "envy of the economic development" of Germany. He continues:

"We in Germany have the duty to protect ourselves. We have the task of protecting the country of the most developed Social Democracy against servitude to Russia. . . . Russia, France, Belgium, England, Servia, Montenegro, and Japan in the struggle for freedom and culture against Germanism, which has given to the world Goethe, Kant, and Karl Marx ! This would be a joke if the situation were not so desperately serious.

"We Social Democrats have not ceased to be Germans because we have joined the Socialist International!

"And if we granted the war credits unanimously in the Reichstag we only did what was often announced we would do by our best tribunes in the Reichstag. Bebel said: "The working classes are at least as much interested in maintaining the independence of Germany as those regarding themselves as the appointed leaders and rulers of the people, and the working people is not disposed to bend its neck under any foreign rule. If it should ever be a question of protecting its skin, the working class of Germany will be ready to offer their last man."

Scheidemann defends the invasion of Belgium and approves the German Chancellor's defense of this action, namely, that it was "necessary."

Scheidemann, in the closing part of his letter, expresses the hope that Germany will conquer France at the earliest possible moment and force peace on that country. He makes the claim

that Germany in the early part of the war had everywhere been victorious, that all contrary statements were lies, that German victory was absolutely certain, and quotes Bebel's statement to the government in the Reichstag in 1904: "Gentlemen, you cannot carry on any victorious wars henceforth without our aid."

This is practically the position of most of the "revisionists." It will be seen closely to resemble the defenses of the position of the German Government in the present war written by non-Socialists, or anti-Socialists.

Scheidemann did not moderate his views with the progress of the war, as may be seen from an article in the Hamburg Echo published in January. After reviewing the attitude toward the war of the various European Parties, the former Vice-President of the Reichstag concludes as follows:

Now we know why the French Socialists have said nothing in the Chamber of Deputies; they did not want to destroy the unity of the nation; they wanted to offer themselves for the service of their government; they wish to struggle to the end that Alsace and Lorraine should come back to France; they wish to fight out this "frightful war" until Europe is ruled-not by a deceptive armed peace, but by the freed peoples of Europe-which means, according to the present conditions, struggle until the enemy is annihilated.

We must not indulge in any illusions; under present conditions the annihilation of German militarism means nothing less than the annihilation of the German army. A fight without mercy; that is to say, the annihilation of our brothers in uniform. In order that this goal shall be reached, Vaillant calls for the help of Japan, while Guesde, like the Englishman, Hyndman, calls upon Italy to give up its neutrality.

A telegram of the 17th of January from Lyons tells us that a conference of the Socialist members of the Chamber of Deputies was held on January 15th. The conference was attended by the French Ministers, Comrades Sembat and Guesde, as well as Comrade Vandervelde.

Vandervelde is reported to have declared that the French and British Socialists were in favor of holding a conference

of the Socialists of the allied countries, but advocated the continuation of the war until the Allies are completely victorious. [This resolution was passed by the Conference called at London a few weeks later-see below.] The German Social Democrat can take note of all this only with great pain, but in these terrible times facts alone must be considered. And so, unfortunately, we must say still more to our German comrades, who have hitherto learned little or nothing of all this: All the steps which have been taken by the comrades of neutral countries, on their own initiative, to move the International Bureau, or to organize international conferences and congresses, have been suspected as manipulations of the German Social Democracy, who are said to be acting "under an understanding with the German Government."

The talk about the absolute necessity of the coercion or destruction of the German barbarians is supported by the reports in the foreign press of the frightful conditions prevailing in Germany. These illusions on the other side of the border might have as a result a material prolongation of the war, and many of our brothers, sons, and comrades, who are now in the fighting, would be forced to give up their lives on this account, but nobody among us desires that, so there is one way and one way alone left open to us: "We must hold out."

This phrase goes against the grain of many people and by many is misinterpreted. "To hold out" with us does not mean the same thing as we hear from hostile countries: "Struggle until the enemy is destroyed." What we mean · by it is to hold out until the goal of the safety of the Fatherland has been reached and our enemies are ready for peace.

In none of the statements of non-German Socialists quoted by Scheidemann is there a direct or remote suggestion that Germany is to be annihilated in order to accomplish their aims. Apparently Scheidemann draws this conclusion from the fact that the French have decided to emancipate Alsace and Lorraine and to allow those provinces to determine their own form of government and the nation to which they are to belong, if to any. If this appeals to Scheidemann as an annihilation

of Germany, that in itself is a highly significant commentary on his own attitude.

VON VOLLMAR

Von Vollmar is not only the best known political leader of the Socialists of South Germany, but he is also the political leader of the revisionists-Bernstein being their leading thinker. In a January number of the Copenhagen newspaper, National Tidende, he thus briefly describes his conception of the attitude of the German Socialists as to the war:

The goal which is aimed at by the political and economic representatives of the working classes and of the Socialist Democracy is well known, also the great struggles they have carried on for many years against their governments and warring classes. But now, when Germany is threatened from without, these inner struggles must go into the background and be postponed until a more favorable time. At the present time the whole German people is prompted by a single unconquerable will, namely, to protect the Fatherland, its independence, and its cultural organization against the enemies that surround it, and not to rest until the latter are conquered. There is not one German who is not ready to make any kind of a sacrifice that is asked of him to reach this goal. If people in other countries have any doubt about this they will experience a great disillusionment.

Von Vollmar, it will be recalled, was formerly an army officer, and perhaps speaks in a somewhat more militaristic manner than would some of his revisionist associates or followers.

His statement, however, that Germany's independence and cultural organization are at stake is evidently deliberate, and this belief is widely shared by the other revisionists, as our other quotations show.