The old time “scientific” socialist had a lofty scorn for any less dogmatic philosophy than his own or for any less sweeping social change than that he expected.  Moderate social reform to him was but temporizing; indeed, it was evil, inasmuch as it helped to postpone the inevitable, but in the end, beneficent catastrophe of the social revolution.  A step-by-step movement toward socialism, state socialism,[19] even of a pretty sweeping character, was, to the old-time Marxians, not really socialism at all.  A valid reason for this attitude was found in the extremely limited manhood suffrage and in the aristocratic class government of most European countries, especially of Germany; so that, as the party socialists saw it, multiplying state enterprises but increased the power of the ruling, and eventually of the militarist, class.  The social-democratic leaders felt that until they themselves were in power, the growth of “state socialism” would be a calamity for the nation.  The events of 1914 may make our judgment tolerant toward their feeling.

Sec. 19. #Its unreal and negative character.# The so-called “scientific” socialism had, therefore, a peculiarly unscientific spirit; for, in a modern sense, science implies a patient search for truth, not a sudden revelation; a constant testing of opinions by observation and experiment, not a dogmatic conviction that refuses the test of reality.  “Scientific” socialists talked much (and still talk much) of the “evolution” of social institutions; but they refused to admit the essential condition for institutional evolution, the competitive trial on a small scale, of a new form of economic organization to prove its fitness to survive.  Indeed, it had been tried on a small scale many times, and had always failed in a brief time.

Lincoln said that a man’s legs ought to be long enough to reach to the ground; but “scientific” socialism was not built on that plan.  To be sure it contained many elements of truth, but these were so distorted that the result was a caricature of history, of philosophy, of economics, and of prophecy.  The most important influence of radical socialism has been exerted through negative criticism.  It has performed the function of a party in opposition, relentlessly hunting out and pointing out the defects of existing institutions, arousing the smugly contented, and, by its very recklessness and bitterness, inspiring at times a wholesome fear of more revolutionary evils.  This has been a real service to the cause of moderate and constructive reform.

Sec. 20. #Revisionism and opportunism in the socialist party#.  Most men have always agreed in an adverse judgment of the claims of “scientific” socialism.  The criticisms have been admitted in part even by the intellectual leaders among the Social-democrats.  They lost some of their fantastic illusions, they tempered some of their exaggerated claims of oracular inspiration.  “Revisionism,” the socialist higher criticism, became influential in the party.