Lenart and Lenin.

St. Simon, Fourier and Owen are the ancestors of Dr. Lenart. Social-democracy, having absorbed the humanitarian but unscientific sentiments of these thinkers has digested but little of Marx and Engels, and, finding much of what it has digested unpalatable, disgorges it on inappropriate occasions.

The International Relations Club is to be congratulated on bringing before us a speaker so capable and intelligent as Dr. Lenart. No better exponent of the social-democratic view-point could have been found, and there could certainly have been no finer exposition. This article is not a report of the meeting at which Dr. Lenart spoke; all those interested will have attended the meeting, and, anyway, some fool of a student presented a report of the meeting to the metropolitan dailies, the impartiality of which was breathtaking.

We hope that Dr. Lenart will not be deterred by the stupid action of this student from coming to address us again. We know that the present critique will only make him more eager to come again to the attack. And Dr. Lenart would be the first to admit that the tenuous scheme of social-democracy as a saviour of mankind has certain very grave defects. Actually the question of social-democracy is the most vital political problem or the day, as social-democracy plays a particularly important part in time of war. Every "left", "liberal", or "socialist" government in the world today, except that existing in the Soviet Union, is social-democratic.

What, then, is the nature of Social-democracy? What is its role in times of war and crisis? Does social-democracy hold out any hope for a rationally constructed colony?

It is the intention of this critique to prove that social-democracy leads to an utter betrayal of working-class principles; that in times of war and crisis its nature leads it directly into the reactionary camp; and that not only does it present no hope for a new society, but it actually produces a fascist regime in every country in which it grows powerful.

St. Simon, Fourier and Owen, were filled [unclear: with] [unclear: the] [unclear: situ]ation of the working class of their day by a rising capitalism. They understood the fundamental opposition of bourgeois and proletariat but, having no scientific method of analysis, they did not see in the proletariat a class possessing any historical initiative or importance. Their schemes for the betterment of mankind were utopian in the extreme, consisting mainly of isolated social experiments without any revolutionary activity. Their ideas were merely an obscure reflection of the instinctive desires of the undeveloped proletariat for a rational reconstruction of society.

Marx, Engels, Lenin and their followers put socialism on a scientific basis, developing a complete philosophical, economic, and political analysis of society. From these men sprang the concept of dialectical materialism, the materialist conception of history, and the first complete statement of the revolutionary role which the proletariat had to play in the reconstruction of society on a socialist basis. It is impossible without a study of their works to realise fully the great erudition and reasoning powers of these men.

Social-democrats recognise more fully than did Owen the class structure of society, but because of an ignorance or misunderstanding of the fundamental doctrines of Marxism, believe that a socialist society, with a rational system of distribution of wealth, can be brought about by gradual methods of evolution - such as progressive liberal legislative measures and increasing taxation of he rich. The scheme, they say, has pitfalls; but anything is better than revolution.

Dr. Lenart presented this view very ably, and defended it brilliantly when it come to question time. His statement of the position can fairly be condensed thus:

"Hitler's" aggressive policy can only have disastrous results for page break the future of civilisation. Chamberlain's policy of weak-kneed submission to Hitler since 1933 was very foolish, but at the outbreak of the present war that polivy was definitely reversed. We should therefore support this war, which is a war against fascism. But capitalism broods wars, capitalism broods misery for the majority of mankind. Capitalism must there for be abolished at the conclusion of the war. But it must be abolished gradually, and not be evolutionary methods. Socialism must come by evolution, not by revolution. In other words, the solution is in the ballot- box and social-democracy".