THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  THE  INTERNATIONAL.  18/
curious  simplicity.  For  instance  :  “  In  whatever  country  the
Proletariat  triumph,  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to  extend  this
triumph  to  all  other  countries.”  It  is  not  said  how.  “  What
are  the  best  means  of  realizing  as  quickly  as  possible  revolutionary ­
  Socialist  action?”  They  pass  to  the  order  of  the
day.  “  What  are  the  methods  of  propaganda  for  /es  compagnons
d'Egypte  i  ”  The  point  remains  open.
At  Ghent,  on  the  9th  of  September,  1877,  the  “Universal
Socialist  Congress”  opened.  A  procession  of  about  four
thousand  working  men  marched  across  the  town  to  the  sound
of  “  the  Marseillaise,”  with  the  red  flag  borne  in  the  van.
The  police  did  not  interfere,  and  the  public  looked  on  indiflferently.
  Nobody  was  alarmed,  and  order  was  not  disturbed
for  a  moment  The  sittings  were  declared  public,  but  nobody
attended,  not  even  the  working  men  enrolled  in  the  International. ­
  There  were  forty-six  delegates  belonging  to  different
nationalities,  but  the  majority  represented  only  insignificant
groups.  It  was  hoped  to  reconcile  the  Anarchists  and  the
Authoritarians,  but  a  conflict  soon  arose  on  the  subject  of  the
State,  and  of  the  part  to  be  taken  by  working  men  in  politics.
Liebknecht,  deputy  of  the  German  Reichstag,  and  César  de
Paepe  maintained  that  the  functions  of  the  State  should  be
extended  ;  that  it  ought  to  become  the  proprietor  of  all  the
requisites  of  labour,  and  that  in  the  meantime  it  was  the
working  men's  interest  to  take  part  in  political  struggles
and  to  obtain  successive  improvements  in  their  lot.  James
Guillaume,  the  founder  of  the  Federation  of  the  Jura,  defended
the  thesis  of  the  Autonomists.  Capital  and  productive  wealth
ought  to  belong  to  societies  of  working  men,  that  is  to  say
to  trade  corporations.  This  ideal  can  be  attained  only  by
revolution.  Working  men  have  nothing  to  expect  from  political
parties,  even  the  most  radical  ;  they  have  always  deceived  the
people  and  used  them  to  their  own  advantage.  The  parliamentary ­
  system  and  universal  suffrage  are  a  snare  and  a
delusion.  As  to  improvements  in  detail,  they  are  only  a
danger.  By  giving  a  certain  amount  of  satisfaction  to  the
people,  they  deaden  revolutionary  sentiments.
De  Paepe,  in  replying  to  James  Guillaume,  reproduced  a