« The Scribbling Set | Main | Horticulture, not architecture »
Interpretation and Projection
As an addendum to the previous, and as an illustration of a tendency which is still very much with us, consider the following excerpt from Schumpeter's sketch of Syndicalism in France in the latter 19th/early 20th centuries:
'The men who organized and led the Confédération Générale du Travail during its syndicalist stage (1895-1914) were mostly genuine proletarians or trade-union officers, or both. They were brimming over with resentment and with the will to fight. They did not bother about what they would do with the wreckage in case of success. Is that not enough? Why should we refuse to recognize the truth which life teaches us every day - that there is such a thing as pugnacity in the abstract that neither needs nor heeds any argument and cares for nothing except for victory as such? But any intellectual can fill the void behind that brute violence in the way that suits his taste.'
(p. 340)
January 13, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834205dc953ef00e55032c0f88834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Interpretation and Projection:
Comments
Paul,
Wait a minute. Didn't Jaures, as head of the CGT, put the union firmly on the side of Dreyfus, thus risking and receiving a foretaste of the "brute violence" that took over Austria and Germany in the 30s?
Didnt' Jaures also lead the opposition to WWI until he was assassinated?
The brute violence the workers might have dreamed of was as nothing compared to the brute violence wreaked upon them by the governing class. Schumpeter sometimes is a bit blind, n'est-ce pas?
Posted by: roger at Jan 21, 2006 2:24:27 PM
Roger,
I'm not strong on the relevant history, but it's my understanding that Jaurès was a forthright Socialist (and was politically active as a member/leader of the PSU) - not a trade-unionist. Since Jaurès' socialism had a sort of 'Franco-Fabian' quality - gradualist, i.e., anti-radicalist - he wouldn't be the kind of agitator about whom Schumpeter is speaking.
In contradistinction to those in the worker's vanguard, the malign "governing class" wouldn't have had a caste of "Intellectuals" ready to concoct apologetics on behalf of, and argue for the beatification of, the violent within the ranks.
Posted by: Paul Craddick at Jan 23, 2006 4:20:33 PM