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 revolu 
tionary 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 indiflfer- 
ently. 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 Inter 
national. 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 parlia 
mentary 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