Contenu du sommaire : Le réformisme radical

Georges Renard and Eugène Fournière, disciples of Benoit Malon, were concerned to find a way of bringing greater intellectual cohesion to the story of French socialism. As opponents of the Marxist current in France, they reflected on the way in which Saint-Simon, Proudhon, Fourier and other nineteenth-century precursors could be recuperated and made relevant once more in the very different context of the early twentieth century. Georges Renard in particular reflected deeply on the cause of social reform in 1848. From their historical writings, a deeper philosophical point emerged that gives real definition to the variety of associationist reformism that they espoused. Renard and Fournière believed that, without losing the optimism of the “socialist idealists” of the nineteenth century, contemporary socialism had to think afresh about time and the flow of social reform. The lesson of the nineteenth century was that socialism had to pay greater attention to the daily, pragmatic development of socialism, rather than being blinded by future promises of revolution.

Frédéric Rauh (1861-1909) is not amongst the most important socialist philosophers. Many historians of socialism have ignored him. Of course Rauh have not written many texts about socialism but his thought got influence upon many close socialist friends, often former students of Ecole normale supérieure where he was himself student then teacher of philosophy. Rauh was very sensible to the socialist movement of his times. His socialism was a kind of moral doctrine with a critical approach of Marxism. One can consider him as one of the forgotten philosophers of reformist socialism.

This article deals with the impact of anti-reformism in the birth of the French Communist Party in France at the beginning of the 1920s. It describes the various processes of reappraisal and redeployement of a wide range of anti-reformist ideas by a new generation of young revolutionary militants, eager to overthrow their former socialist leaders. This paper therefore examines the formation of anti-reformist discourse in the late 19th-century around key issues of nascent socialist organizations and trade unions, such as political representation. It then describes the reinstatement of this heritage during the First World War by a generation of militants known as the “minorité de guerre” and striken by a deep crisis of their “socialist conscience” after the collective collapse of 1914. Anti-reformism is thus a key issue in the massive transfer of Bolshevik ideas in France. After 1920, anti-reformism inspires the nascent French Communist Party in some of its most innovative measures, such as the strict control of the communist parliamentary group. Anti-reformism hence had a true effectiveness, and a great influence over the first communist generation.

The trade unionism of the French miners before 1914 has thoroughly been analysed and almost systematically criticized through the concept of “reformism” to which it has always been associated. The aim of this article is neither to speak out for or against it but rather to look further into the notion of “reformism” when applied to that particular kind of actions led by trade unions. We will not only analyse the French case but also draw a parallel between this case and the British situation. On both sides of the Channel it seems, “reformism” was built almost as much by the way social sciences look at it as by the historical players of the process.

The Fabian Society, incepted in 1884, remains the most figurative reformist organisation, both in Labour movement and in European socialism. As such, it sharply highlights the opportunities as well as the strong hardships of a specific path towards social revolution, that would not go through violence, but would follow the lines of natural and peaceful progress. The Society, headed by Sidney and Beatrice Webb, and by George Bernard Shaw, challenges the idea of a mere pragmatic reformism, without any clear doctrinal basis. This theory was worked out between 1884 and 1889, according to contemporary controversies, where theoretical oppositions were not settled. Therefore the main difficulty facing reformism, as illustrated by the Fabian case, was not the definition of a doctrine, but rather its practical implementation, submitted to a required competence that would ensure reforms' efficiency and legitimacy. Without neither party support nor political advocates, the Society was reduced to the role of a mere think tank after 1910, with an unheard voice compared to the rising influence of Labour Party. The lack of a channel through which reforms could be voted and applied was obvious before 1914, and was overcome during the war: Fabians were increasingly tied to Labour, so that they gave the main principles of the party programme in 1918.

In the history of reformist socialism, the antifascist socialist activist Carlo Rosselli (1899-1937) occupies a singular place. He was indeed the theorist of a “liberal socialism” which he defended in his only book. The formula now suggests an ideology of adaptation to the liberal globalization, but Rosselli had something else in mind. Returning on the context and the genesis of the “liberal socialism” of Rosselli, this paper shows that this doctrine would break with the old liberalism, communism, but also with the evolutionary reformism of the socialist leader Filippo Turati. Fed by republicanism and by ethical voluntarism, guided by the struggle against fascism, Rosselli's thought will evolve towards a new synthesis combining liberalism, anarchism, socialism and even communism.

After a brief survey of the historiography of socialisms, the article revisits one of the first great debates of international socialism, namely the revisionist controversy at the end of the nineteenth century. Against a simplistic, but broadly accepted, reading which establishes an immediate link between those figures who called for a revision of Marxism and political reformism, the article demonstrates that revisionism, at least in its initial phase, was perceived as a “breath of fresh air” in the face of an orthodoxy which had sterilised all reflection on politics and history.

Thinking in parallel reform and revolution is a misuse of language. The first is a purpose, the second is only a means. There is a moderate reformism and radical one.

Former “communard”, Georges Renard has been exiled in Switzerland. Director of la Revue socialiste, he was at the center of french socialist reformism. Christophe Prochasson chooses and comments fragments of his correspondance with Benoit Malon et Charles Andler. These three men tried to invent a new socialist doctrine (socialisme intégral, socialisme libéral) between collectivism and liberalism against the marxist hegemony.