Fabian Tract No. 45.
THE IMPOSSIBILITIES OFANARCHISM.
by
BERNARD SHAW
Published by
THE FABIAN SOCIETY
PRICE TWOPENCE
LONDON
To be obtained of the Fabian Society, 276 Strand, W.C.
Reprinted November 1895
THE IMPOSSIBILITIES OF ANARCHISM.[1]
Anarchists and Socialists.
Some years ago, as the practical policy of the Socialist party inEngland began to shape itself more and more definitely into theprogram of Social-Democracy, it became apparent that we could notprogress without the gravest violations of principles of all sorts. Inparticular, the democratic side of the program was found to beincompatible with the sacred principle of the Autonomy of theIndividual. It also involved a recognition of the State, an institutionaltogether repugnant to the principle of Freedom. Worse thanthat, it involved compromise at every step; and principles, as Mr.John Morley once eloquently showed, must not be compromised.The result was that many of us fell to quarrelling; refused to associatewith one another; denounced each other as trimmers or Impossibilists,according to our side in the controversy; and finallysucceeded in creating a considerable stock of ill-feeling. My ownside in the controversy was the unprincipled one, as Socialism to mehas always meant, not a principle, but certain definite economicmeasures which I wish to see taken. Indeed, I have often beenreproached for limiting the term Socialism too much to the economicside of the great movement towards equality. That movement, however,appears to me to be as much an Individualist as a Socialistone; and though there are Socialists, like Sir William Harcourt, towhom Socialism means the sum total of humanitarian aspiration, inwhich the transfer of some millions of acres of property from privateto public ownership must seem but an inessential and even undesirabledetail, this sublimer shade of Socialism suffers from such a lackof concentration upon definite measures, that, but for the honor andglory of the thing, its professors might as well call themselves Conservatives.Now what with Socialists of this sort, and persons whofound that the practical remedy for white slavery was incompatiblewith the principle of Liberty, and the practical remedy for despotismincompatible with the principle of Democracy, and the practical conductof politics incompatible with the principle of Personal Integrity(in the sense of having your own way in everything), the practicalmen were at last driven into frank Opportunism. When, for instance,they found national and local organization of the workingclasses opposed by Socialists on the ground that Socialism is universaland international in principle; when they found their Radicaland Trade Unionist allies ostracized by Socialists for being outsidethe pale of the Socialist faith one and indivisible; when they sawagricultural laborers alienated by undiscriminating denunciations ofallotments as "individualistic"; then they felt the full force of the[4]saying that Socialism would spread fast enough if it were not for theSocialists. It was bad enough to have to contend with the conservativeforces of the modern unsocialist State without also having tofight the seven deadly virtues in possession of the Socialists themselves.The conflict between ideal Socialism and practical Social-Democracydestroyed the Chartist organization h