"Should war nevertheless break out, it shall be the duty of the Social-Democracy to work for a speedy peace, and to strive with every means in its power to utilize the industrial and political crisis to accomplish the awakening of the people, thus hastening the overthrow of capitalist class rule".
What has the Social-Democracy done in this war? Exactly the contrary. By voting in favor of war credits and entering upon a civil peace, it has striven, by all the means in its power, to prevent the industrial and political crisis, to prevent an awakening of the masses by the war. It strives "with all the means in its power" to save the capitalist state from its own anarchy, to reduce the number of its victims. It is claimed—we have often heard this argument used by Reichstag deputies—that not one man less would have fallen upon the battle fields if the Social Democratic group had voted against the war credits. Our party press has steadfastly maintained that we must support and join in the defence of our country in order to reduce the number of bloody victims that this war shall cost. But the policy that we have followed out has had exactly the opposite effect. In the first place, thanks to the civil peace, and the patriotic attitude of the Social Democracy, the imperialistic war unleashed its furies without fear. Hitherto, fear of restiveness at home, fear of the fury of the hungry populace, have been a load upon the minds of the ruling classes that effectively checked them in their bellicose desires, In the well known words of Buelow: "they are trying to put off the war chiefly because they fear the Social Democracy", Rohrbach says in his "Krieg und die Deutsche Politik", page 7, "unless elemental catastrophies intervene, the only power that can force Germany to make peace is the hunger of the breadless". Obviously he meant a hunger that attracts attention, that forces itself unpleasantly upon the ruling classes in order to force them to pay heed to its demands. Let us see,
