Graham R (Ed.) - Anarchism - A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas Volume One - From Anarchy to Anarchism (300 CE to 1939)

Origins OfThe Anarchist Movement /81
fond of conquest, in spite of the fact that the experience of centuries may have
proved to him that military triumphs must inevitably lead to Caesarism.
The socialist republican detests the grandeur, the power, and the military glory
of the State. He sets liberty and the general welfare above them. A federalist in the internal
affairs of the country, he desires an international confederation, first of all in
the spirit of justice, and second because he is convinced that the economic and social
revolution, transcending all the artificial and pernicious barriers between states, can
only be brought about, in part at least, by the solidarity in action, ifnot of all, then at
least of the majority of the nations constituting the civilized world today, so that
sooner or later all the nations must join together.
The strictly political republican is a stoic; he recognizes no rights for himselfbut
only duties; or, as in Mazzini's republic, he claims one right only for himself, that of
eternal devotion to his country, of living only to serve it, and of joyfully sacrificing
himself and even dying for it. ..
The socialist, on the contrary, insists upon his positive rights to life and to all of
its intellectual, moral, and physical joys. He loves life, and he wants to enjoy it in all
its abundance. Since his convictions are part of himself, and his duties to society are
indissolubly linked with his rights, he will, in order to remain fa ithful to both, manage
to live in accordance with justice like Proudhon and, if necessary, die like Babeuf.
But he will never say that the life of humanity should be a sacrifice or that death is the
sweetest fate.
Liberty, to the political repUblican, is an empty word; it is the liberty of a willing
slave, a devoted victim of the State. Being always ready to sacrifice his own liberty, he
will willingly sacrifice the liberty of others. Political republicanism, therefore, necessarily
leads to despotism. For the socialist republican, liberty linked with the general
welfare, producing a humanity of all through the humanity of each, is everything,
while the State, in his eyes, is a mere instrument, a servant of his well-being and of everyone's
liberty. The socialist is distinguished from the bourgeois by justice, since he
demands fo r himself nothing but the real fruit of his own labour. He is distinguished
from the strict republican by his frank and human egotism; he lives for himself, openly
and without fine-sounding phrases. He knows that in so living his life, in accordance
with justice, he serves the entire society, and, in so serving it, he also finds his own
welfare. The republican is rigid; often, in consequence of his patriotism, he is cruel,
as the priest is often made cruel by his religion. The socialist is natural; he is moderately
patriotic, but nevertheless always very human. In a word, between the political
republican and the socialist republican there is an abyss; the one, as a quasi-religious