More impressive insights from S.J. Rutgers on the tendency of imperialism to create greater opportunities for the ‘middle class’ of the metropolitan centers, even as it drives many others into the working class, and how that dynamic has played out in the Socialist Party of the U.S. Only several months in the U.S. and Rutgers was writing editorials for the ISR.

‘Imperialism and the Middle Class’ by S.J. Rutgers from the International Socialist Review. Vol. 16 No. 5. November, 1915.

DEAR Comrades: Your editorial in the October issue I appreciated very much. The parallel between the present war and the struggle for monopolistic concentration in industry, into trusts, etc., is very inspiring. The more so, as both result from the same cause: the development of capitalist means of production- to such a degree, that they come into conflict with the development of production itself, artificial curtailment and destruction of products being the monstrous outcome, making a speedy collapse of the system evident to friend and foe.

Internationally the same cause resulted in exportation of capital to backward countries, and here was found a more positive task, that of conquering the world to capitalist production. This declares why the whole of the capitalist class is behind imperialism, why it became a new class-ideology; it being the only solution, that means a progress in world production on the base of modern capitalism.

This shows us the strongest side of imperialism, to which you pay due attention in your editorial, but there is still another, more political feature, that leads to a further strengthening of this latest and gigantic capitalist move. Industrial concentration had to be accomplished at the cost of small capitalists, which caused opposition, among those classes on the national political field. These elements, combined with the upper layers of labor, who were not much affected by the monopolies, succeeded in getting some parliamentary and economic advantages, although the gains were very poor indeed, and the small bourgeois did not get any adequate compensation for their being expropriated. Hence their growing opposition shown by joining the socialist party, which resulted in nearly killing the labor class-struggle on the political field. On the economic field the influence was less general, and those labor elements, that are degraded by trustified capital to a uniform low level, show some signs of a beginning mass action.

Now the political strength of imperialism is in the fact, that an expansion of capital all over the world, even in the form of concentrated financial capitalism, gives new opportunities also to middle-class intellects and even to small capitalists, be it under the form of greater dependency toward Big capital. Thus the internal concentration of capital into monopolies and trusts has a tendency to drive a part of the middle classes towards labor; whilst the external expansion of concentrated capital over the world, tends to bring middle classes and even parts of labor back to capitalist politics. This must have been one of the principal causes of the absolute failure of Socialism at the outbreak of the present bloody conflict.

So far imperialism means big advantages for capital, and it would be very bad indeed to overlook the strong position of our enemies; that will require all of our energy. But we need not despair, because the position of labor always must be the strongest: capitalism needs labor more than labor needs capitalism. Especially in this imperialistic world struggle, as you point out in your editorial, labor is not only wanted in the process of production, but it is also labor that has to fight most directly the conflicts of their masters, resulting from this new period in capitalism. This means an increase in the fundamental weakness of capitalism in its struggle against labor supremacy. In this struggle, however, labor will have to get rid of all influences of middle class people and intellectuals, unless they are opposed to the bitter end to every form of imperialism. In its own ranks labor will have to fight against those elements, who see some advantage in supporting imperialism, without seeing the far greater danger of being crushed by it. For, as you plainly state it: there is only a choke between rebellion and degeneration. Rebellion or degeneration, because the new imperialistic form of capitalism does not mean any fundamental improvement in the means of production, and therefore does not represent an indispensable step towards a socialistic commonwealth. Labor did not help capitalism in making trusts, but did not oppose them either, although it could have had the support of big parts of the capitalist middle classes.

Labor was neutral, because it could not prevent, and it could not prevent, because this would have been reactionary, the concentration and organization of the means of production being essential to prepare for a new society. Capitalism, although in pursuit of its own low ideals of gain, ever more gain, was fulfilling its historical mission to improve the means of production. This enormous task has so far been fulfilled, that capitalism is now in fear of being crushed by its own productivity. Capitalism now asks to extend its full grown system all over the world by the aid of those workers, that have been tortured to death in factories and are being torn to pieces on the battlefield. This is really too much! It will be the peaceful task of labor to extend gradually the beneficial influence of modern machinery and organization, not as soldiers under capitalism, but as free agents of civilization.

Those who speak so much about democracy, this hypocritical, degenerated form of bourgeois democracy, as being worth fighting for, worth approving and supporting in those, who ought to be our opponents to the death, they look at a splinter, without seeing the wood, they keep to old forms, without noticing the new world that is growing. It is our bad luck that the period behind us gave a decisive influence to small bourgeois and intellectuals in the ranks of labor. Labor not only stopped its fighting, because of the leaders being too fearful of losing some small advantages in recognition and organization, but it even stopped thinking, leaving it to some leaders and intellectuals to express, what is called the present and future ambitions of labor.

So the interests and ideals of the middle classes not only prevail in labor and socialist literature, but even in the very heads of perhaps a majority of laborers themselves. It will be necessary to awaken to independent thinking, to regain the fundamental truth, that the freedom of labor must be won by labor itself. This means: No compromise whatever with any capitalistic upper or middle class; individuals only being allowed to join labor so far as they are willing to serve rather than to rule.

Dear comrades, if I like so much your REVIEW, if I like it best of all, it is because you always keep to the fighting line of labor, giving it your support, without pretention and because you put your hope in the international mass-action of labor itself.

No doubt capitalism will try some new tricks to divide labor and to tie parts of it to their own damned interests, be it in starting some new peace-movement, some profit sharing system or some bribery and graft towards the upper layers and leaders of the laboring class. Sometimes it may be difficult to see the fraud, but you will always have the best chance if you keep to the rigid, uncompromising class struggle on every domain of public life.

Yours for international solidarity,

The International Socialist Review (ISR) was published monthly in Chicago from 1900 until 1918 by Charles H. Kerr and critically loyal to the Socialist Party of America. It is one of the essential publications in U.S. left history. During the editorship of A.M. Simons it was largely theoretical and moderate. In 1908, Charles H. Kerr took over as editor with strong influence from Mary E Marcy. The magazine became the foremost proponent of the SP’s left wing growing to tens of thousands of subscribers. It remained revolutionary in outlook and anti-militarist during World War One. It liberally used photographs and images, with news, theory, arts and organizing in its pages. It articles, reports and essays are an invaluable record of the U.S. class struggle and the development of Marxism in the decades before the Soviet experience. It was closed down in government repression in 1918.

PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/isr/v16n05-nov-1915-ISR-riaz-ocr.pdf