For Socialists will be judged by what they are doing rather than by what they promise to do. If political reformists and revolutionary reformists are both directing their chief attention to promoting the reforms of "State Socialism," it will make little difference whether the first argue that these beneficial measures are a part of Socialism and a guarantee of the whole; or the second claim that, though such reforms are no part of Socialism, the superiority of the movement is shown chiefly by the fact that they could not have been brought about except through its efforts. Mankind will rightly conclude that the things that absorb the chief Socialist activities are those that are also forming the character of the movement. In direct proportion as reforming Socialists spend their energies in doing the same things as reforming capitalists do, they tend inevitably to become more and more alike. Only in proportion as Socialists can differentiate themselves from non-Socialists _in their present activities_ will the movement have any distinctive meaning of its own. FOOTNOTES: [169] W. J. Ghent, "Socialism and Success," p. 47. [170] Rappaport, "Der Kongress von Nimes," _Die Neue Zeit_, 1910, p. 821. [171] _Die Neue Zeit_, Oct. 27, 1911. [172] "Parlamentarismus und Demokratie," edition of 1911, p. 121. [173] "Parlamentarismus und Demokratie," edition of 1911, pp. 132-133. [174] "Parlamentarismus und Demokratie," edition of 1911, pp. 131-134. [175] "Parlamentarismus und Demokratie," edition of 1911, pp. 131-134. [176] "Le Syndicalisme contre L'Etat," pp. 223-235, 239-242. [177] "Parlamentarismus und Demokratie," p. 114. CHAPTER VI REVOLUTIONARY POLITICS In the most famous document of international Socialism, the "Communist Manifesto" (published by Marx and Engels in 1847), there is a fulmination against "reactionary Socialism," which it will be seen is approximately what we now call "State Socialism." After describing the Utopian Socialism of Fourier, of Saint-Simon and of Owen, the "Manifesto" says:--