Produced by Jeannie Howse, Adrian Mastronardi, Mark C. Orton and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) * * * * * +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | Transcriber's Note: | | | | Inconsistent hyphenation in the original document has | | been preserved. | | | | Obvious typographical errors have been corrected. For | | a complete list, please see the end of this document. | | | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ * * * * * PRICE 10 CENTS Socialism, Revolution and Internationalism By GABRIEL DEVILLE SOCIALISM, REVOLUTION AND INTERNATIONALISM A LECTURE DELIVERED IN PARIS, NOVEMBER 27, 1893, BY GABRIEL DEVILLE Translated by ROBERT RIVES LA MONTE CHICAGO CHARLES H. KERR & COMPANY 1907 PRESS OF JOHN F. HIGGINS CHICAGO SOCIALISM, REVOLUTION AND INTERNATIONALISM. I Socialism, revolution, internationalism--these are the three subjects regarding which I beg your permission to say what--with no pretence of being infallible--I believe to be the truth. At the risk of telling you nothing new, I will simply try to speak truth. Those who reproach the socialists for constantly repeating the same thing, have, no doubt, the habit of accommodating the truth to suit their taste for variety. On the other hand, to talk of socialism is to do what everyone else is doing at this time, but I will speak to you of it from the standpoint of a socialist, and--unhappily--that is not as yet equally common. The signal and distinctive mark of modern socialism is that it springs directly from the facts. Far from resting on the imaginary conceptions of the intellect, from being a more or less utopian vision of an ideal society, socialism is to-day simply the theoretical expression of the contemporaneous phase of the economic evolution of humanity. At this point we are met with two objections. On the one hand, because we say that socialism springs from the facts, we are accused of denying the influence of the Idea and the liberal defenders of the Idea rise up in revolt; they can calm themselves again. How could we deny the influence of the Idea, when socialism itself is as yet, as I have just pointed out, only a theoretical expression, _i.e._, an idea, which we nevertheless believe has a certain influence?