many mistakes without occasionally going down to defeat. This view of the class struggle stands to the electoral campaigns in the same relation as a real charge stands to mere military manoeuvres, as an ordinary regimental hike stands to life in the trenches. That view of the struggle does not come up frequently in history, because its significance and its consequences make themselves felt for entire decades. The days, however, when we will be able and obliged to resort to that form of struggle will count more than any other twenty years of past history.
Let us examine Legien and Kautsky together. This is what Kautsky has to say:
"As long as the party was small, every protest against war constituted a good bit of virile propaganda. The attitude of our Servian and Russian comrades in the recent events received general commendation. But the larger the party comes to be, the more it must take into account in its decisions the practical consequences of such decisions, the more difficult it becomes to weigh properly the various motives and to choose between them. And, therefore, the stronger we become, the more easily differences of opinion may arise among us whenever we face a new, complex situation." Internationalism and war (page 50).
This statement of Kautsky's differs from Legien's statements only by its hypocrisy and cowardice. Kautsky really approves of and justifies Legien's low abstention from revolutionary activity, but he does it on the sly, without committing himself, by way of allusions, paying homage now to Legien, now to the revolutionists of Russia. We Russians were accustomed to observe that attitude only among liberals. Liberals are always willing to recognize the virile stand taken by the revolutionists, but never do they depart from their arch-opportunistic tactics. Self-respecting revolutionists will not accept Kautsky's expressions of approval but reject with disgust this way of presenting the question. If the situation was not favorable for a revolution, if it was not a clear duty to preach revolutionary action, then the attitude of the Servian and Russian revolutionists would be out of place and their tactics faulty. Why can't those great fighters, Kautsky and Legien, have the courage of their opinions and speak it out frankly?
If the attitude of the Russian and Servian Socialists deserves approval then it is not permissible, it is criminal to justify the attitude of strong parties like the German and the French.
By using a very confusing expression "practical consequences" Kautsky tries to conceal the fact that the large parties were afraid
