and what is the object of the struggle between capitalist groups. This last circumstance is the most important; it alone shows us the historico-economic direction of events. For the forms of the struggle can change, and do change constantly, because of various relatively temporary and special causes, but the essence of the struggle, its class content, cannot change while classes exist. It is easy to understand, for example, that it may be useful for the interests of the German bourgeoisie to hide the reason for the actual economic struggle (the division of the world) and to emphasise one form or another of it. Kautsky makes the same mistake. And it is a question not of the German bourgeoisie, but of the bourgeoisie throughout the world. The capitalists divide up the world, not because of original sin, but because the degree of concentration which has been reached forces them to take this road in order to get profits. And they divide it in proportion to capital, to "strength," because there cannot be any other system of division in a system of commodity production and capitalism. But the forces vary with economic and political development. In order to understand what takes place, it is necessary to know what questions are effected by this change of forces. Whether these changes are "purely" economic or non-economic (e.g., military), is in any case secondary and cannot change at all the fundamental view of the most recent phase of capitalism.
To substitute for the object of the struggles and agreements between capitalist groups the question of the form of these struggles and agreements (to-day peaceful, to-morrow bellicose, the next day peaceful once more), is to descend into sophistry.
