themselves out in idle debates. The revolutionary government will be a hindrance and a danger; powerless for good, formidable for ill; therefore, what is the use of having it?"
However natural and just, this argument still runs counter to a great many prejudices, stored up and accredited by those who have had an interest in maintaining the religion of government, side by side with the religions of property and of theology.
This prejudice, the last of the three, still exists and is a danger to the coming Revolution, though it already shows signs of decay. "We will manage our business ourselves without waiting for the orders of a government, we will trample under foot those who try to force us to accept them as priests, property owners or rulers," so begin already to say the workers. We must hope that the Anarchist party will continue to vigorously combat government worship, and never allow itself to be dragged or enticed into a struggle for power; we must hope that in the years which remain to us before the Revolution, the prejudice in favour of government may be so shaken that it will not be strong enough to draw olf the people upon a false tack.
The Communes of the next Revolution will not only break down the State, and substitute free federation for Parliamentary rule: they will part with Parliamentary rule within the Commune itself. They will trust the free organisation of food supply and production to free groups of workers—which will federate with like groups in other cities and villages—not through the medium of a Communal Parliament, but directly, to accomplish their aim.
They will be Anarchist within the Commune as they will be Anarchist outside it,—and only thus will they avoid the horrors of defeat, the furies of Reaction.
