The Maccabaean

Socialism has so many and vaious interpretations that it becomes imperative to make our definition clear before attempting any discussion on such a subject. Omitting the frills with which it has been clothes in the last half century, we can still probably obtain a concensus of opinion on the following definition of Socialism:—A political movement, worldwide in its significance, striving to utilize the political state as an industrial machine with the view of bringing all the social tools of production under the control of the government. The purpose of Socialism is to have the State secure control of all the means of production that require more than individual attention (such as railroads, machinery, trade implements, etc., but not, necessarily, such individual tools as a Singer Sewing Machine, cash register, etc.), to the end that labor may secure its "full" reward, and industry be regulated not by private profit but by public benefits.

It is true that in the early days of Marxism, Socialism went beyond this economic progam and undertook a systematic opposition to nationalism, for it regarded patriotism as a false cry, raised by the ruling classes so that they might, with impunity, exploit the workers. So long as Socialism held forth the hope of a huge cosmopolitan state —a great melting pot of all nations into one common Brotherhood, with one language, one world-country and one people —it had to face the opposition not only of a conservative like Bismark, whose life-work was bound up with the great German nation; not only of a radical like Mazzini, who was unwilling to sacrifice his beloved Italy on the altar of economic freedom: but also of every national group striving for the right to live its own life in its own way, as an entity among the nations. The Bohemians, who refused to accept the German language as a substitute for their native tongue; the downtrodden Poles, who would not be consoled by the pro- pect of amalgamation with their Russian, Prussian and Austrian conquerors; the

Irish Home Rulers, who will not be satisfied with the reflected splendor of the "far flung" British Empire; and, finally, the Jewish precursors of Zionism, those dreamers of the Ghetto, who preached and labored for a restoration of the house of Israel were inevitably brought in conflict with this Socialist teaching.

But at the time that modern Zionism became a fact through the plublication of the "Jewish State" in 1896, Socialism was already in the process of a strong modification. The leaders of the movement, particularly in Germany and France, began to realize that many of their comrades were staunch supporters of the whole economic theory of Socialism, but refused their assent to any proposition that would detract from the devotion due to their native land. In short, while recogniing the economic factor in Socialism, they withheld adherence to that Socialist philosophy which predicated a Universal Brothedhood with one state, one people and one language.

During the last score of years the opposition to the cosmopolitan aspect of Socialist philosophy has kept pace with the rapid advance of the Socialist movement as.an economic program, so that to-day we have a well.defined theory of Internationalism,.which, while directly opposed to the old Cosmopolitan view of Socialism, leaves ample opportunity for the growth of Economic Socialism. Thus, the theory of internationalism indorses the ideal of Universal Brotherhood, but it proposes to secure this "Consummation devoutly to be wished” neither through the abolition of .nationality.nor the mixing of all races in a melting pot of hodge-podge humanity. In fact far better results might be obtained, and nohler purposes. conserved, .through an Inter-Nationalism which would encourage the full developement of various types of nationality. each ‚with its own. peculiar langauge, laws, culture and mode of Jife, yet .all united.as Sister States into some form of Confederation of the World, cemented by an International Parliament that will make Universal Peace a reality.