1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
|
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Social-Democracy & Woman Suffrage, by Klara Zetkin</title>
<link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
<style type="text/css">
body { margin-left: 8%; margin-right: 10%; }
h1 { text-align: center; font-weight: bold; font-size: xx-large; }
h2 { text-align: center; font-weight: bold; font-size: x-large; }
.pageno { right: 1%; font-size: x-small; background-color: inherit; color: silver;
text-indent: 0em; text-align: right; position: absolute;
border: thin solid silver; padding: .1em .2em; font-style: normal;
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; }
p { text-indent: 0; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; text-align: justify; }
sup { vertical-align: top; font-size: 0.6em; }
.sc { font-variant: small-caps; }
.large { font-size: large; }
.xlarge { font-size: x-large; }
.small { font-size: small; }
.xsmall { font-size: x-small; }
.under { text-decoration: underline; }
.lg-container-r { text-align: right; }
@media handheld { .lg-container-r { clear: both; } }
.linegroup { display: inline-block; text-align: left; }
@media handheld { .linegroup { display: block; margin-left: 1.5em; } }
.linegroup .group { margin: 1em auto; }
.linegroup .line { text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em; }
div.linegroup > :first-child { margin-top: 0; }
.ol_1 li {padding-left: 1em; text-indent: -1em; }
ol.ol_1 {padding-left: 0; margin-left: 2.78%; margin-top: .5em;
margin-bottom: .5em; list-style-type: decimal; }
div.footnote {margin-left: 2.5em; }
div.footnote > :first-child { margin-top: 1em; }
div.footnote .label { display: inline-block; width: 0em; text-indent: -2.5em;
text-align: right; }
div.pbb { page-break-before: always; }
hr.pb { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-bottom: 1em; }
@media handheld { hr.pb { display: none; } }
.chapter { clear: both; page-break-before: always; }
.figcenter { clear: both; max-width: 100%; margin: 2em auto; text-align: center; }
.figcenter img { max-width: 100%; height: auto; }
.id001 { width:40%; }
@media handheld { .id001 { margin-left:30%; width:40%; } }
.ig001 { width:100%; }
.nf-center { text-align: center; }
.nf-center-c1 { text-align: left; margin: 1em 0; }
.c000 { margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c001 { page-break-before: always; margin-top: 4em; }
.c002 { margin-top: 2em; }
.c003 { margin-top: 1em; }
.c004 { page-break-before:auto; margin-top: 4em; }
.c005 { margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
.c006 { text-decoration: none; }
.c007 { font-size: 90%; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
div.tnotes { padding-left:1em;padding-right:1em;background-color:#E3E4FA;
border:1px solid silver; margin:2em 10% 0 10%; font-family: Georgia, serif;
}
.covernote { visibility: hidden; display: none; }
div.tnotes p { text-align:left; }
@media handheld { .covernote { visibility: visible; display: block;} }
@media handheld {.ol_1 li {padding-left: 1em; text-indent: 0em; } }
img {max-height: 100%; width:auto; }
body {font-family: Georgia, serif; text-align: justify; }
h1.pg { font-size: 190%;
clear: both; }
h2.pg { font-size: 135%;
clear: both; }
h3,h4 { text-align: center;
clear: both; }
hr.full { width: 100%;
margin-top: 3em;
margin-bottom: 0em;
margin-left: auto;
margin-right: auto;
height: 4px;
border-width: 4px 0 0 0; /* remove all borders except the top one */
border-style: solid;
border-color: #000000;
clear: both; }
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 57474 ***</div>
<h1 class="pg">The Project Gutenberg eBook, Social-Democracy & Woman Suffrage, by Klara
Zetkin, Translated by Jacques Bonhomme</h1>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<table border="0" style="background-color: #ccccff;margin: 0 auto;" cellpadding="10">
<tr>
<td valign="top">
Note:
</td>
<td>
Images of the original pages are available through
HathiTrust Digital Library. See
<a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31175035167884">
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31175035167884</a>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p> </p>
<div class='tnotes covernote'>
<p class='c000'><strong>Transcriber’s Note:</strong></p>
<p class='c000'>The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.</p>
</div>
<p> </p>
<hr class="full" />
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p class='c000'><span class='under'>PRICE ONE PENNY.</span></p>
<div>
<h1 class='c001'><span class='xlarge'>SOCIAL-DEMOCRACY</span><br /> <span class='xsmall'>AND</span><br /> WOMAN SUFFRAGE.</h1>
</div>
<div class='figcenter id001'>
<img src='images/title.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' />
</div>
<div class='nf-center-c1'>
<div class='nf-center c002'>
<div>A PAPER READ BY</div>
<div class='c003'><span class='xlarge'>CLARA ZETKIN</span></div>
<div class='c003'>To the Conference of Women belonging to the Social-Democratic Party held at Mannheim before the opening of the 1906 Annual Congress of the German Social-Democracy</div>
<div class='c002'><span class='small'>Twentieth Century Press, Limited (Trade Union and 48 hours), 37A, Clerkenwell Green, E.C.</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c003' />
</div>
<div class='chapter'>
<span class='pageno' id='Page_1'>1</span>
<h2 class='c004'>Social-Democracy & Woman Suffrage.</h2>
</div>
<div class='nf-center-c1'>
<div class='nf-center c002'>
<div><span class='large'>A PAPER READ BY</span></div>
<div class='c003'><span class='xlarge'>CLARA ZETKIN</span></div>
<div class='c003'>To the Conference of Women belonging to the Social-Democratic Party held at Mannheim, before the opening of the Annual Congress of the German Social-Democracy.</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class='c005'>Comrades,—The decision to discuss the question of Woman
Suffrage at this Congress was not arrived at from any theoretical
considerations, or from any wish to point out the advisability of
such a measure. This desirability has long been acknowledged
by Social-Democrats, and by the women who work with them for
the attainment of their aims. We have been much more interested
in the tactics and in the historical events about which I am now
going to speak. There never was greater urgency than at the
present time for making the question of Woman Suffrage one of
the chief demands of our practical programme in politics. It is
well for us, therefore, to be clear that we are on the right lines,
and in what conditions and in what ways we should conduct
the agitation, the action, the struggle for Woman Suffrage so
as to bring it before the public as a question of intense practical
activity for all. But we should not be what we are, we should
not be working-class women agitators who base their demands
on the ground of a Socialist demand, if we did not, when seeking
on the right lines, with all our strength, for this right, at the
same time show why we base our claim for this reform, and
how we are totally separated from those who only agitate for this
from the point of view of middle-class women. We take our
stand from the point of view that the demand for Woman
Suffrage is in the first place a direct consequence of the capitalist
method of production. It may seem perhaps to others somewhat
unessential to say this so strongly, but not so to us, because the
middle-class demand for women’s rights up to the present time
still bases its claims on the old nationalistic doctrines of the
conception of rights. The middle-class women’s agitation movement
still demands Woman Suffrage to-day as a natural right,
<span class='pageno' id='Page_2'>2</span>just as did the speculative philosophers in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. We, on the contrary, basing our demand
on the teachings of economics and of history, advocate the
suffrage for women as a social right, which is not based on any
natural right, but which rests on social, transient conditions.
Certainly in the camp of the Suffragettes it is also understood
that the revolution which the capitalist method of production has
caused in the position of women, has been of great importance
in causing many to agitate for their rights. But this is not
given as the most important reason, the tendency is to put this
in the background, and, as an illustration of this, I would refer,
for example, to the declaration of principles which the middle-class
international association for the attainment of Woman
Suffrage formulated at its first Congress in Berlin, in June, 1904,
when the constitution of the society was drawn up. In this
declaration of principles there are stated firstly, secondly, and
thirdly, considerations from a purely natural-right point of view,
which were inspired from a sentimentalist standpoint due to
idealistic considerations, and it will need other grounds of action,
other considerations, other ideals if the masses are ever to be
reached. It was only when they came to the fourth clause, after
talking about the economic revolution of society, that they began
to think about the industrial activity of women. But in what
connection? There it was stated that Woman Suffrage is
required, owing to the increase of wealth, which has been attained
by the labours of women. Comrades, I declare that the strongest
and greatest demand for women’s rights is not due to the increase
of wealth among women, but that it is based on the poverty, on
the need, on the misery of the great mass of women. We must
reject with all our might this middle-class agitation of women,
which is only a renewed idle prattling about national wealth. If
you simply argue from the point of view of natural rights, then
we should be justified in adapting the words which Shakespeare
puts into the mouth of Shylock. We might say, “Hath not a
woman eyes? Hath not a woman hands, organs, dimensions,
senses, affections, passions, fed with the same food, hurt with
the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the
same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer
as a <i>man</i> is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle
us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?” But,
comrades, though these questions might be of momentary use,
yet in the struggle for social rights they are like a weapon which
breaks as soon as it is used in fighting.</p>
<p class='c000'>The right to Woman Suffrage is based for us in the variation
of social life which has come about through the capitalist methods
of production, and more especially through the fact of women
working for their living, and in the greatest degree through the
enrolment of working women in the army of industry. This has
given the greatest impetus to the movement. I agree that there
are facts which appear to go against this movement. It is a
<span class='pageno' id='Page_3'>3</span>fact that the agitation for Woman Suffrage, though in a weakened
form, already existed in many countries before capitalist production
had become more important than anything else, before it
had reached its highest point, and had been able to attain its
greatest development owing to the exploitation of women’s labour.
In Russia, in the village communes, women were able to take
an equal share with men, in certain cases, in the government
of the communes. This is an old custom, which has been duly
recognised by Russian law. But this right is due to the fact that
in Russia the old customs of the rights of mothers have lasted
for a longer time than in the West of Europe, and that there
women enjoy this right not as persons or as individuals, but as
guardians of the household, and of the common property which
has lasted longer there. In many other States, as well as in
many provinces, of Prussia, there is still a species of woman
suffrage. In the seven eastern provinces, as well as in Westphalia
and Schleswig-Holstein, the women in the country districts have
votes for the local bodies. But under what conditions? Not
every woman has the right of voting, but it is restricted to those
who own land and pay taxes. The same rule obtains not only
in the country but also in the towns, in part of the Palatinate, and
in other places. In Austria, too, the women in the country districts
have the right of voting for the members of the local district
authorities, but only in so far as they are owners of land and
inasmuch as they are taxpayers, and it is thought that they will
soon be able to vote for the election of members of the local diets
and of the Reichsrath. And the consequence is that, in many
Crown lands of Austria there are women who are indirectly
electors for the Reichsrath, because they are allowed to vote for
the delegates who choose the representatives for that body. In
Sweden women who fulfil the same conditions of property are also
allowed to vote in the elections for local bodies. But when we
carefully consider all these cases, we find that women do not
vote because they are women; they do not enjoy, so to speak, a
personal vote, but they only have this right because they are
owners of property and taxpayers. That is not the kind of
Woman Suffrage which we demand; it is not the right we desire
to give a woman, as a burgess of the State, it is only a privilege
of property. In reality, all these and similar schemes stand out
in marked contrast to the demand for Woman Suffrage which
we advocate. In England we find, too, that women may take
part in elections for local bodies; but this again is only under
conditions of owning a certain amount of property or paying a
certain sum in taxes.</p>
<p class='c000'>But when we demand Woman Suffrage, we can only do so on
the ground, not that it should be a right attached to the possession
of a certain amount of property, but that it should be inherent
in the woman herself. This insistence of the personal right of
woman to exercise her own influence in the affairs of the town
and the State has received no small measure of support, owing
<span class='pageno' id='Page_4'>4</span>to the large increase in the capitalist methods of production.
You all know that already in the beginning of the capitalist
development these thoughts found their first exponents among
members of the middle-class democracy. There is no need for
the middle-class to be ashamed of this, that they—in the time
of their youth—still dreamed their dreams, and that their
more advanced members were brave fighters in the struggle for
women’s rights. We see, moreover, people in England arguing
in favour of Woman Suffrage as a personal right. We see them
also striving like the French middle-class, which achieved their
political emancipation over the body of Louis Capet.</p>
<p class='c000'>We see that they fought with great energy during the struggle
in North America for the abolition of slavery. Briefly, in all
those periods in which the middle-class agitated for the complete
attainment of democratic principles as a means of effecting its
own political emancipation and securing power, it also fought
for the recognition of equal rights for women. But with whatever
zeal and whatever trouble and whatever energy this question
of the rights of women was demanded by the middle-class, yet
it was not till the advent of Socialism that the struggle began in
earnest. Already in 1792 Mary Wollstonecraft, in her celebrated
work, “The Claims of Woman,” already in 1787, Condorcet, in
his Letters from a Citizen of Newhaven,<a id='r1' /><a href='#f1' class='c006'><sup>[1]</sup></a> had claimed equal
rights for women; and the cause also received an impetus from
the French Revolution. The demand for Woman’s Suffrage
was inscribed among the list of reforms desired by some electors at
the French Revolution, and a petition asking for it was also
presented to the National Assembly. But this body contented
itself by issuing a platonic declaration that it relegated the question
to the consideration of mothers and daughters. But in 1793
the Committee of Public Safety, on the motion of Amar, dissolved
all the women’s organisations, and forbade their meetings.
Then the French middle-classes gave up the struggle for Woman
Suffrage; and the first Socialists—the Utopians—Saint Simon
and Fourier, and their disciples, took up the cause. In 1848
Victor Considérant, in 1851 Pierre Leroux, agitated concerning
this question. But they received no encouragement, and their
arguments were received with scorn and derision. In the
English Parliament in 1866 a numerously signed petition in
favour of Woman Suffrage was first presented by John Stuart
Mill, one of the most enlightened minds of the democratic middle-class.</p>
<div class='footnote' id='f1'>
<p class='c000'><span class='label'><a href='#r1'>1</a>. </span>“Letters from a Citizen of Newhaven to a Citizen of Virginia on the Uselessness
of Dividing the Legislative Power in Several Bodies.”</p>
</div>
<p class='c000'>These struggles for the emancipation of women have indeed
secured some concessions, and many advantages have been
gained; but the political emancipation of the female sex to-day,
and especially in industrial lands, is as far off as ever, while the
most stalwart exponents of middle-class democracy for men,
having attained most of their demands, are no longer clamouring,
<span class='pageno' id='Page_5'>5</span>as during the fight, for equal rights for women. The preliminary
condition for success is that there should be a great increase in
capitalist production. It stands in the closest relation with the
revolutionising of the household. With the increase of industry,
which in primitive conditions was carried on in the family, and
when that family carried out industrial operations as a whole in
the home, there was not then a demand for the emancipation of
woman from the family and the household, and women did not
then, always living at home, feel the need for political power.
The same machinery which drove with decisive power the home
industries from the family, allowed woman to become an active
worker outside the home, and her advent on the labour market
produced not only new economic, but also new social, effects.
The destruction of the old middle-class woman’s world has
created, of necessity, a new moral purpose in women’s lives, in
order to secure to them new advantages. Therefore, the middle-class
woman’s world was compelled to recognise the necessity
of advocating the political emancipation of women as a precious
and useful weapon, and with its help to endeavour to procure
changes in the law, so that man should no longer enjoy a monopoly,
and prevent women from earning their living. In the
proletarian women’s world the need, so far from being less, was
indeed much greater to obtain political power, and they advocated
complete political emancipation. Hundreds of thousands, nay
millions, of women workers have been exploited by capitalist
methods. Statistics are there to show how in all capitalist
countries women are more and more going into the labour
market. In Germany, the last census (that of 1895) gives the
number of women working as 6,578,350, and of these the
workers in factories, etc., were no less than 5,293,277. In
Austria, in 1890, there were 6,245,073 women working, and of
these there were 5,310,639 working in factories; in France, in
1890, the numbers were 5,191,084 and 3,584,518; in the United
States, in 1890, 3,914,571 and 2,864,818; in England and Wales,
in 1891, 4,016,571 and 3,113,256.</p>
<p class='c000'>This I only give as an illustration, not only to show that
women deserve the suffrage, but also to show what importance
the labour of women has attained. It is evident that the question
of woman’s rights must be greatly influenced, owing to the
fact of so many women being in the labour market. Hundreds
of thousands of working women who labour with their brains
are just as much exploited by the action of capitalists and middle-men
as the millions of women who work with their hands, because
the whole capitalist class hangs together, and defends its interests.
By this economic process, women have also been taught to think
and act for themselves. And they now demand Universal
Suffrage as a social necessity of life as the aim and means which
will give them a stimulus to obtain protection and improvement
by obtaining an improvement in their economic and moral
interests. But when we place the demand for Woman Suffrage
<span class='pageno' id='Page_6'>6</span>in the front as a social necessity, we also argue that it
should be granted to us as a self-evident act of justice.
Woman is not only now emancipated from the family and
the home, but she is determined to use the activity of her
brain and hand in order, just as man, to improve her mental and
social position, for the clear light which the furnace of great
factories has thrown on the path of woman has made her conscious
of the social worth of her activity, and has directed it into
other channels. It has taught her the great social importance
and the great social worth of her career as a mother and the
educator of youth. For the multitude of women who go to
factories will generally become wives; they then will become
mothers and bear children, and they know that the care which they
give to their new-born children, the zeal with which they discharge
their duties in training children, shows that the service rendered
by the mother in the home is no private service simply to her
husband, but an activity which is of the highest social importance.</p>
<p class='c000'>Because millions are condemned, not through their own fault,
not through a want of their motherly instinct, but owing to the
pressure of capitalist influence, to forego their bodily, spiritual,
and moral good, then, as a consequence, there is a great increase
in infant mortality, and children do not receive proper attention
in their tender years. All this proves the high social worth of
labour which woman performs in the producing and rearing of
children. The demand for Woman Suffrage is only a phase of
the demand that their high social worth should be more adequately
recognised.</p>
<p class='c000'>But they base this right also on the ground of the democratic
principle in its widest bearing, not only on the fact that the
same duties demand equal rights, but we also say that it would
be criminal for the democracy not to use all the strength which
women have in order that by their work of head and hand they
may take part in the service of the community.</p>
<p class='c000'>We do not maintain, like certain advocates of women’s rights,
that men and women should have the same rights because they
are alike. No; I am of opinion that in bodily strength, in
spiritual insight, and in intellectual aims, we are very different.
But to be different does not necessarily imply inferiority, and if
it be true that we think, act, and feel differently, then we say
that this is another reason which condemns the action of men in
the past, and a reason why we should try and improve society.</p>
<p class='c000'>From this point of view of history, we demand the political
equality of women and the right to vote as a recognition of the
political rights due to our sex. This is a question which applies
to the whole of women without exception. All women, whatever
be their position, should demand political equality as a means of
a freer life, and one calculated to yield rich blessings to society.
Besides, in the women’s world, as well as in the men’s world,
there exists the class law and the class struggle, and it appears
as fully established that sometimes between the Socialist working
<span class='pageno' id='Page_7'>7</span>women and those belonging to the middle class there may be
antagonisms. For women the Suffrage has practically an entirely
different meaning according to the conditions under which they
live. It may indeed be said that the value of the Suffrage depends,
in most cases, on the property they possess. If women happen
to have a large property, the sooner they can hope to attain political
rights, because they can bring more pressure to bear by the
very fact of being rich. The question is also one of great
importance for the women of the middle class. A large number
of them are not in the same pleasant position as their richer
sisters who have not to get their living by their own work.
Often, however, they do not depend so much on their work for a
means of living, but they engage in work rather to increase their
wealth. Naturally, they think a great deal of their class and
their position, and do not imagine that by any possibility they
might become working women, either employed in factories or the
land, because they are earning their bread in so-called free or
liberal callings. The same equality of opportunity with man,
and the possibility of exercising these callings will often, as far
as women are concerned, be hindered by social customs if not by
legal impediments. Therefore, it behoves the women of the
middle classes, women living in fair comfort, to agitate for the
possession of the Suffrage in order to pull down the legal fetters
which in some way hinder their development or cripple their
energies. This middle class should agitate for the Suffrage, not
only in their own interests, in order to weaken the power of the
male sex, but they should also labour in the cause of the whole
of social reform, and give what help they can in that matter.
But while we are ready as Socialists to use all our political might
to bring about this change, yet we are bound to notice the difference
between us and them. The middle-class women really wish
to obtain this social reform, because they think it is a measure
which will strengthen and support the whole of middle-class
society. The working women demand the Suffrage, not only to
defend their economic and moral interests of life, but they wish for
it not only as a help against the oppression of their class by men,
and they are particularly eager for it in order to aid in the
struggle against the capitalist classes. And they ask for this
social reform not in order to prop up the middle class society
and the capitalist system. We demand equal political rights with
men in order that, with them, we may together cast off the
chains which bind us, and that we may thus overthrow and
destroy this society. These reasons show us clearly why, up till
now, the middle-class women have not been in favour of universal,
equal, secret, and direct voting for all legislative bodies without
distinction of sex. Besides, as soon as this simple principle of
Woman Suffrage is adopted, then all the nonsense about the
weakness of woman falls to the ground. The difference of social
classification has been the cause that the middle class demand
for women’s rights has never really fallen into line with the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_8'>8</span>majority of the women workers who demand the Suffrage, because
the upper ten thousand have never really been anxious to obtain
political equality with man. Much less is it right that the middle-class
women’s movement should calmly and placidly be enthroned
in the clouds, far above party strife, in the clear heights of
blameless rectitude and freedom from party spirit. The world
congress for women’s rights has yielded a fine crop of fallacies.
Carefully have its members embarked on a sea of perplexities,
and have declared in a spick and span manner what kind of
Suffrage they wished for. The President of the Society of German
Women has indeed revealed herself more radical than the women
of the radical middle class, for she at all events has said that
she not only wanted a vote, but that she was in favour of universal,
equal, secret, and direct Suffrage for both men and women. Of
the other middle-class women groups, not one has shown itself
in favour of this cardinal point of the Suffrage. For while not
a single one of these ladies has discussed the question of Universal
Suffrage, the President of the united organisation has declared,
personally, that she is only in favour of a vote which shall be the
same for men and for women. This declaration certainly honours
the person who made it, but it cannot alter our position with
reference to the middle-class women who are in favour of obtaining
the vote. It cannot be otherwise as long as these women
will not fall into line and advocate the measures of which we are
in favour. I remember how, in the winter of 1901, the Radical
Women’s Union, “The Welfare of Women,” sent in a petition
to the Prussian Landtag asking that the right of voting for that
body might be granted to women, but only to those who had
qualified by living for one year in the constituency, and who paid
a certain sum, however small, in direct taxation. The meaning
of that is clear, that for this, as for other bodies, the franchise
should only be granted to ladies and not to the working women,
who are without property. As you know, many people would be
in favour of that; and not only would working women not get
the vote, but the next step would be to deprive men of their
vote, for that is what is behind that idea of granting votes only
to people who pay taxes. Yet such a scheme is palpably absurd,
for I would ask—do not the poor pay taxes? They do, and it is
the ruling classes who receive them.</p>
<p class='c000'>The Radical Women’s Union, to which I have referred, have
shown that they are not in favour of Woman Suffrage as we
understand it, because, in 1903, when there were elections to the
Reichstag, their union worked for middle-class Progressives and
Liberals, and opposed the Socialist candidates. I will not here argue
the question any further. The fact has, moreover, been admitted
on the middle-class side, and the middle-class woman’s union has
been guilty of the shameful fact of supporting, in Hamburg,
the middle-class candidate, though his opponent was Bebel, who
has been one of the first and most strenuous fighters in the cause
of the complete emancipation of woman. This is admitted, and,
<span class='pageno' id='Page_9'>9</span>to add to their shame and treachery, it is also to be said that
they have supported candidates of the middle-class Liberals in
opposition to other Social-Democrats. I will now tell you what
that means by reminding you that in the last election for the
Bavarian Landtag the Association for Women’s Rights supported
the National Liberal candidates, though they were declared
enemies and opponents of the extension of the Suffrage to women,
which was advocated in Bavaria by the Social-Democrats and also
by the Centre Party.</p>
<p class='c000'>In the beginning of August, the International Congress for
Women held its sittings at Copenhagen. At this Congress, not
only questions of organisation and of propaganda were discussed,
but also the much more important question what badge the
members of the Union for Woman Suffrage should wear. But
the Congress did not say a word about the question of Universal
Suffrage, and failed to say clearly what they thought about the
matter. This is the more remarkable because the delegates from
Finland and Hungary had declared that the struggle for the
political emancipation of women had made most progress in those
countries where it was advocated in concert with the demand for
Universal Suffrage, especially when the minds of men were
influenced by that demand urged on behalf of the proletariat.
Here, again, where there was an opportunity to join hands with
us, and to press on our just claims, they have adopted a cowardly
attitude instead of a plain, straightforward one. The middle-class
advocates of women’s rights, also, always say that the Social-Democrats
are unwilling champions of the cause of Woman
Suffrage, but that the Progressives and the National Liberals
are best supporters for the political equality of women. In
order to support this assertion against the Socialists, they
say that abroad some of the women leaders of the Social-Democracy
have been lukewarm, or at all events critical,
on the question of female Suffrage, and that, owing to
tactical exigencies, in some countries the struggle for women’s
rights has been kept somewhat in the background. But
as to this opinion, as to the action of the German Social-Democracy,
they are unable to bring the slightest evidence by which
to support their charge. The German Social-Democratic Party
brought forward, for the first time in 1895, in the Reichstag, a
motion advocating universal, equal, secret, and direct Suffrage,
without distinction of sex, in all the States of the German Empire.
Our comrades in Saxony brought forward the same resolution in
their local Parliament. I need not refer further to the action of
our comrades in Bavaria and other States; but I may again call
attention to the fact that while our party this year organised
meetings demanding that in every State of Germany the legislative
bodies should be elected by Universal Suffrage, they also
insisted that women should also have the vote equally with men.
This claim has been advocated in the press, and has been defended
by thousands of speakers—men and women—at meetings, and was
<span class='pageno' id='Page_10'>10</span>finally brought forward as a resolution in the Reichstag. On this
question all the middle-class parties were united. All members
of middle-class parties voted against this resolution, even those
members who generally are praised by the middle-class women
parties as being worthy of honour, because they are friendly to
the cause. In these are included Herr von Gerlach, who declared
that he voted against this Socialistic motion on the ground of
“expediency.” These women’s unions must declare their hostility
to these tactics if they are really in favour of women’s rights,
and not of <i>ladies’ rights</i>. The only real supporters in Germany
of the cause of complete social and political rights for women are
the members of the Social-Democratic Party. But the middle-class
women are afraid to admit this, because they think they
would then have to recognise the justice of our demands.</p>
<p class='c000'>Let me give a characteristic example of the way in which the
middle-class women’s unions try to hoodwink the public on the
question of Woman Suffrage. In the Bavarian Landtag there
was a petition for the granting of the Suffrage to women, and it
was supported by three National Liberal Deputies. Yet Fraulein
Anita Augsping told the Bavarian women that she was glad
to say that in the Bavarian Landtag 50 per cent. of the National
Liberals were in favour of female Suffrage. I can only hope that
shortly there will only be one National Liberal Deputy left in the
Bavarian Landtag, and then she might triumphantly assert that
100 per cent. of the National Liberals were in favour of Universal
Female Suffrage.</p>
<p class='c000'>When I have mentioned these facts here, it is certainly not
with the intention of reproaching the middle-class women advocates
of the Suffrage concerning their attitude. That is not my
purpose. I recognise that they are fulfilling an historical purpose,
and that they are engaged in a struggle from their own middle-class
point of view. But this point of view shows that they are
not in favour of women’s rights, but of the rights of ladies;
they do not fight for the political emancipation of the female sex,
but for the advancement of the interests of the middle class. That
is certainly within their rights; but what I complain of is the
confusion which arises when they state that their agitation is for
the benefit of the whole of the female sex. As a matter of fact,
they only strengthen the political and the social influence of the
ruling classes—that is their aim.</p>
<p class='c000'>I have devoted so much time to this matter in order to make
it perfectly clear that working women must not hope for the
slightest assistance in their struggle for political emancipation
from the middle-class women, and they cannot expect them to
take their side in the struggle. No; we must bear in mind that
in order to see this matter through, in order to obtain full social
emancipation, we must rely on our own power, exercised through
our own class.</p>
<p class='c000'>Comrades, two characteristic events are happening before our
eyes. The middle class no longer prizes in the same way the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_11'>11</span>democratic principles which they so formerly extolled, and they
do not see the consequences of those theories relating to the political
emancipation of the female sex. That is shown, for instance, in
the way in which those representing the middle class in Holland
have introduced into the Chamber there a resolution relating to the
Suffrage for women, worded in such a way that it does not confer
Universal Suffrage on women, but a kind of vote which would
only be given to ladies possessing a certain amount of property.
But while the middle class dares less and less, owing to the
growing influence of the proletariat, to carry out the logical consequences
of its democratic principles, we also note, on the other
hand, that the proletariat is compelled by its own class interests
to become the bold supporter of the political emancipation of
women, especially as woman’s labour becomes daily more
important and an increasing factor in capitalist countries, and
that, therefore, the proletariat, in carrying out its economic
struggle, must rely more and more on the disciplined, united and
organised help of women. The organisation of women in trade
unions is only possible, however, in a complete way, if they
possess equal political rights, otherwise the help which their
unions give to those of men will be illusory, owing to the political
weakness underlying them. The whole proletariat must raise
the cry, “Down with all political arrangements which deny to
woman her full political equality.” She must be entitled to all
rights of a burgess in towns, so that there, too, women may
take part with men in the local struggles. It is, therefore, for
the practical interests themselves of the proletariat that they
should be energetic supporters of the cause of women. Social-Democracy,
which is the political fighting organisation of the
proletariat, has, from practical considerations, understanding the
need of an improvement in the conditions of the existence of the
proletariat, included Woman Suffrage in its programme, and
actively advocates it. But also on account of the knowledge of
the tendencies of the united economic and social needs, the Social-Democracy
is in favour of Woman Suffrage as a social necessity
for women on the ground of their being in an entirely revolutionary
age, and also as a consequence of social justice following
on the putting into practice of democratic principles. But when,
passing from the inscription of these aims in the programme of
Social-Democracy, we wish to enter into action for the attainment
of Woman Suffrage, then we must bear in mind something of
importance. With the keenness of the opposition of classes, with
the bitterness of the class struggle there arise historical situations
in which the question of Woman Suffrage acquires a new practical
bearing. The question of Woman Suffrage is becoming one of
the gravest practical importance, not only for the proletariat, but
also for reactionary parties. In all circumstances, when the self-conscious
proletariat has fought on this plan, we see that the
reactionary parties, more and more under the influence of the
situation of women’s rights, argue, as a last attempt at reaction,
<span class='pageno' id='Page_12'>12</span>when they can no longer withstand the demand for Universal
Suffrage for men, that only a weakened form of Suffrage should
be extended to women. That is what happened, for instance, in
1902, in Norway. These same tendencies have also shown themselves
in Belgium, and they are also partly advocated in Germany
by the Centre. At last year’s Catholic Congress in Strasburg,
the members of the Centre Party brought forward this question
of Woman Suffrage. At that meeting Father Auracher brought
forward a resolution on the subject, supporting it with remarks
which no Socialist could take exception to, and saying that owing
to industrial changes the position of women had changed, and
that some form of women’s rights should be conceded. Soon
after this the Centre, in the Bavarian Landtag, went much further.
A petition from the middle-class union, “The Welfare of Women,”
was supported by 23 Deputies belonging to the Centre. Dr. Heim
spoke in its favour in such a way as to do honour to his historical
insight. All honour to him! But, on this point, it does not
follow that the Centre to-day or to-morrow will become an
enthusiastic supporter of woman’s rights. The difference between
theory and practice is, as you know, a very great matter.
When the Belgian comrades in 1902 brought forward their motion
for Universal Suffrage in communal councils and provincial diets,
then the Clericals at once said that they would agitate for
Woman Suffrage; and they did, only to get the Liberals to vote
against the Socialist proposal. When it came to the voting,
however, none of the Clericals voted for the resolution of the
Belgian comrades, and one only had the courage to abstain from
voting. The tactics which I have described are characteristic,
because they prove that the Centre, in taking part in the agitation
for Woman Suffrage, is not—when things are looked at closely—actuated
by any principle except the one of securing the
ascendancy of the Church, and that of the ruling classes. The
Clericals, as they have often declared, are ready to assert that
women should be silent in the assembly<a id='r2' /><a href='#f2' class='c006'><sup>[2]</sup></a> as long as it suits the
interests of their power; but they are now quite prepared to
loosen the tongues of women there if by so doing they can
strengthen the authority of the Church, and that of the capitalist
class, which is the chief supporter of the Church. The reactionary
classes are only now beginning to show themselves friendly to
the idea of Woman Suffrage, because they think that, by the
help of the women’s votes they may thus diminish the power of
the men’s votes, and they are actuated in this matter by the
following reasons. They believe that their power over the minds
of a great number of women, and especially of those belonging
to the proletariat, is still strong enough for them to be able to
make use of the unemancipated women as against the men that
are already emancipated. They reckon on this modified Woman
Suffrage to act as a counterpoise against the increasing growth
<span class='pageno' id='Page_13'>13</span>of free thought among men, and to counteract the steady march
of Catholic working men into the camp of Social-Democracy.
This is a reason why in some countries, and not only in the ranks
of the middle class, but also among Social-Democrats, many
persons are opposed to the movement in favour of Woman
Suffrage. Thus in Holland Troelstra has stated that if the question
of extending the franchise was brought forward he would vote
against it, because it would undoubtedly lead to a strengthening
of reaction, because the women there are still unemancipated.</p>
<div class='footnote' id='f2'>
<p class='c000'><span class='label'><a href='#r2'>2</a>. </span>An allusion to the opinion of St. Paul I. Timothy C. II., 12.—J.B.</p>
</div>
<p class='c000'>So that where Clericalism rules there will be a strong movement
against Woman Suffrage, because it will be thought to be
a source of danger, as by means of it the Clericals would receive
such an increase of support that the political class struggle of the
proletariat would for a long time be in danger. It would be
foolish to deny that directly Woman Suffrage was granted, a
certain number of women would at once give their votes to reactionary
candidates, and so strengthen the party of reaction. But
that is no reason for withholding the vote from women. If it
were so, the proletariat ought never to agitate for an extension
of the Suffrage. For every fresh democratisation of the Suffrage
allows large masses of men to take part in voting whose political
education is imperfect, and who have not yet been properly trained
as to how they should vote. But we ask for Universal Suffrage,
not as a means for a political dodge, but as a working means of
training and organising the masses properly.</p>
<p class='c000'>If we acted otherwise we should always have to disfranchise
a large number of citizens. The “<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Revue Socialiste</span>” had a
series of articles on this question of granting the Suffrage to
women. Comrades from different countries sent contributions,
and they were all agreed that the backwardness of women from
a political point of view was no reason not to give them the vote,
because the very possession of that right would act as a corrective
to the danger. Allemane, for the French Socialists, Ferri for the
Italian, Keir Hardie and MacDonald for the English, and Kautsky
and Bernstein for the German, all took the same view of the
question. This alleged danger of Woman Suffrage to the cause
of the proletariat affords no ground for an alteration of the
programme of Social-Democracy.</p>
<p class='c000'>But now there is another point to be considered. The action
of the Social-Democracy with reference to Woman Suffrage is
more and more energetic and thorough, and the question that
arises is whether we weaken the danger of the granting of a
partial Woman Suffrage by agitating as we do for Universal
Suffrage. But to that I reply that by carrying on a propaganda
of enlightenment and organisation of working women we shall
so improve the political knowledge and outlook of these women
that it will be impossible for reaction ever to reckon on the
support of women’s votes. After, however, making that point
clear, there are yet, in many countries, comrades who have
worked hard in order to obtain Universal Suffrage for men, and
<span class='pageno' id='Page_14'>14</span>who are doubtful whether it is wise at present to agitate for
Woman Suffrage. That we saw in Belgium in 1902, where the
Labour Party, in their struggle for equal Universal Suffrage,
gave up the agitation for Woman Suffrage, on the ground that
the Liberals declared they would not support the demand for a
reform of the Suffrage unless the Socialists gave up the demand
for Woman Suffrage. What happened then? The Labour Party
in Belgium, in their campaign in and out of Parliament for the
advocacy of equal Universal Suffrage, was most shamefully
deserted by the Liberal Party. There has been no practical result,
though the demand for Woman Suffrage was abandoned. The
same kind of thing happened this year in Sweden. Under the
stress of the agitation of the Socialist Party, the Government
promised to bring in a Bill for the extension of the Suffrage, but
they had previously declared, when asked by the leaders of the
middle-class partisans of Woman Suffrage, that if they did so
they would also bring in a Bill establishing a modified form of
Woman Suffrage. The Social-Democratic Party then determined
not to ask for Woman Suffrage, but to vote for it if that measure
was advocated by another party. The measure for the reform
of the Suffrage was passed by the popular Chamber, but was
wrecked by the Upper House. Though the working men had
reduced their demands, yet the Socialists were left in the lurch
by the middle-class parties. The abandonment of the principal
demand led to no practical result. Comrade Branting declared
recently that the struggle would enter into a new phase, and that
a reform of the Upper House would be demanded, and he finished
by saying that this struggle would be one of great importance,
as it would be a struggle between the power of the classes possessing
property and those having none, and that the proletariat
must use all its power in the struggle. But a struggle which is
to be so important, and which is to have such far-reaching
consequences, must be fought on the question of principles, and
not carried on in any petty opportunist manner; it must be a
fight for universal, equal Suffrage for both men and women. A
similar situation has also occurred in Austria. Here the proletariat,
after a long, weary struggle of ten years, has at last
compelled the Government to grant a complete reform of the
Suffrage, to bring in a measure to establish universal, equal and
direct Suffrage for the elections to the Reichsrath, and to do
away with the system of class voting which weakened completely
the political power of the proletariat in Parliament. The reform
in the Suffrage is important, but it does not meet the demands of
the Social-Democracy. In this situation the Austrian comrades
have determined that it is highly important to secure Universal
Suffrage for men, and, as the attainment of this object appears to
be endangered by the agitation in favour of Woman Suffrage,
they have determined not to agitate for that reform. The
Austrian Social-Democracy has thus weakened itself by using all
its power against the Government, though they think that by
<span class='pageno' id='Page_15'>15</span>leaving Woman Suffrage aside they will the easier obtain Manhood
Suffrage. I do not know how the idea originated that by
foregoing the demand for Woman Suffrage they would more easily
obtain the votes for men. The greatness of the reform to be
obtained is one which, indeed, will require all the force of the
proletariat, but I cannot see how it would have been hindered,
in any way, by also pressing forward the claims of women. We
must all recognise the discipline of our female Austrian comrades,
and the help which they have given when they accepted the
decision of the party; but it is still, to my mind, an open question
whether this decision was necessary.</p>
<p class='c000'>No one of us is so foolish as to claim that the demand for
Woman Suffrage should have been made a test question in the
active programme of our Austrian comrades. That would have
been a crime. But it is another question when it is said in the
beginning of the struggle that the question should be entirely
kept out of the fight. We, therefore, regret that both in the
agitation and in Parliament these questions should have been
put on one side, and we hope that afterwards they will receive
the consideration they deserve. But at present no action is
being taken to show the connection between an extension of the
Suffrage and the granting of Woman Suffrage. The Democrat
Hock has made a motion in favour of Woman Suffrage, while
two reactionaries, Hrubi and Kaiser, have advocated ladies’
Suffrage. Our comrade Dr. Adler then also took part in the
question in a determined manner, and it is to be regretted that
this was not done from the first. If retaliation was feared from
our opponents it would have been easier to meet this if we had
presented a united front to our opponents. In such a question
as this we should always act from the point of view of principle.
For the fight for the Suffrage is a struggle for the capture of
political power by the proletariat. This is what the middle classes
well understand, and that is why they fight against us with great
vivacity, great energy, great wickedness whenever we agitate
for an extension of the franchise. They fear the growing power
of the proletariat, and they will never concede this reform to us
from a sense of justice, but only because they are afraid of us.
And this brings me again to the question, and I ask: “Do we
strengthen our power, and do we take the best way of strengthening
our cause by putting this demand in the background?” We
must broaden the basis of our demands in order to get better
terms for the masses.</p>
<p class='c000'>I must refer to another historical point. When in the mass
we agitate for Woman Suffrage we are weak in marching against
the enemy because we have to reckon with those who are half-hearted
and those who are hostile in our own ranks. We must
put on one side all questions which would divide men and women,
and we must compel all middle-class parties to take part in the
question of granting Woman Suffrage.</p>
<p class='c000'>We must always press on the question of Woman Suffrage when
<span class='pageno' id='Page_16'>16</span>we are agitating about the Suffrage. We have always argued in
the Suffrage agitation that it was a question of equal rights for
men and women, and we must continue to do so till we succeed.
We must be united. We know that we shall not attain the
victory of Woman Suffrage in a short time, but we know, too,
that in our struggles for this measure we shall revolutionise
hundreds of thousands of minds. We carry on our war, not as
a fight between the sexes, but as a battle against the political
might of the possessing classes; as a fight which we carry on
with all our might and main, without hatred of the other sex;
a fight whose final aim and whose glory will be that in the broadest
masses of the proletariat the knowledge shall arise that when
the day of the historical development shall have made sufficient
progress then the proletariat, in its entirety, without distinction
of sex, shall be able to call out to the capitalist order of society:
“You rest on us, you oppress us, and, see, now the building
which you have erected is tottering to the ground.”</p>
<p class='c007'>The speaker then submitted the following resolution:—</p>
<p class='c007'>“The demand for Woman Suffrage is the result of the changes
which have occurred owing to the capitalist method of production
in modern economic and social conditions, especially since
the changes in labour, owing to the position and the destiny of
women. Woman is in this position as a consequence of the
middle-class democratic principle which regulates the destiny of
all social callings, not depending on wealth and on social
position. The demand for Woman Suffrage has thus, from the
beginning, been connected in the minds of a few thinkers with the
struggle in which the middle class has been engaged for the
democratisation of political rights as a means of procuring its
political emancipation and its rule as a class. This class has
received great and increasing power partly through the great and
growing wealth produced by woman’s labour, which is continually
increasing in modern industry. Woman Suffrage is the assertion
of the economic emancipation of woman from home, and her
economic independence from the family as an only means of
subsistence.</p>
<p class='c007'>“Active and passive Suffrage for women may be looked upon
as a social question; as a practical measure it is the means of
obtaining political power, of doing away with legal and social
fetters, which hinder the development and the emancipation of
woman. But in woman’s world, as well as in that of man, there
are class conflicts which render the possession of the Suffrage of
great value for woman. The value of the franchise as a means
of engaging in the social war is one which depends largely on
the greatness of the struggle to be engaged in and the social
power to be obtained. Its chief use will be that by means of it
the whole proletariat—men and women—will be able to obtain
political power, and will thus be able to contribute to bringing
about the downfall of the present class system, and the establishment
<span class='pageno' id='Page_17'>17</span>of a Socialist state of society in which alone the full emancipation
of woman will be accomplished.</p>
<p class='c007'>“Complete emancipation of woman is advisable instead of the
middle-class Woman Suffrage movement, and, therefore, it is
absolutely necessary that Universal Woman Suffrage should be
obtained. Working women, in order to conquer their complete
right of citizenship, must rely on their own strength alone and on
their own class. The proletarian needs of the struggle for
emancipation, together with the historic insight and justice,
compel the proletariat to energetically take up the cause of the
political equality of woman. Social-Democracy, the political
fighting organisation of the class-conscious proletariat, therefore,
is in favour of Woman Suffrage, both as a matter of principle,
and as a practical question.</p>
<p class='c007'>“The question of Woman Suffrage, owing to the keenness of
the class struggle, acquires great importance. On the side of
the ruling reactionary classes the belief grows that the granting
of a restricted Woman Suffrage would strengthen the political
power of the capitalist class. On the side of the proletariat the
necessity is seen of revolutionising the minds of women and of
obtaining their help in the struggle. The struggle for Universal
Woman Suffrage is the most powerful means of interesting the
mass of women in the struggle of the proletariat for freedom.</p>
<p class='c007'>“Having considered these historical facts, the Fourth Conference
of Socialist women at Mannheim resolves—</p>
<p class='c007'>“‘That in the struggle which the proletariat has entered into
for the obtaining of universal, equal, secret and direct voting in
towns and elsewhere, all the energies of the party should be
used in obtaining the same franchise for women, and that the
question should constantly be pressed forward. The Conference
of women declares that it recognises the duty of all women
comrades to take part energetically in the political campaign for
the attainment of the Suffrage, and that every effort should be
made to induce working women to take an interest in this matter,
so that the question may be settled as soon as possible.’”</p>
<p class='c000'>In the discussion which ensued,</p>
<p class='c000'>Frau Mensing, from Holland, said: Comrade Zetkin has
referred to the declaration of comrade Troelstra that he for the
moment would not support the extension of the Suffrage to
women. This statement was a very heavy blow to our associations
of women in Holland. We had hoped that the question
would have been raised at our last Congress in Holland,
but there was so much time spent in the discussion between
Marxians and Opportunists that there was no time left to do this.
We trust, however, that at the next Congress of the party its
members will declare against this opinion of Troelstra, and that
the agitation in favour of Universal Suffrage for Women will be
renewed.</p>
<p class='c000'>Comrade Bebel, who was received with loud and hearty cheers,
said: Comrades, after the long and able speech which you have
<span class='pageno' id='Page_18'>18</span>just heard from our comrade Zetkin, I should have thought that
the debate would have come to a close. I quite agree that our
comrade Mensing, as our guest, had an undoubted right to speak,
but I cannot see for the moment why I should say anything. But
the officials at this table have decided otherwise, and they wish
me to say a few words to you. It was of no use for me to
protest, so here I am. I see once more how I have been
compelled to do what women wish.</p>
<p class='c000'>I have once more been strengthened in the opinion that this
question of Woman Suffrage can only be properly considered and
decided from a radical standpoint. Social-Democracy can have
no policy except one directed by principles. Freedom and equality
for all must be our motto in Parliament, on the platform, and in
the press, and in that spirit we must live and act. It is only
in that way that we can win over the mass of the people to our
side, and exercise a powerful influence which finally will help us
to achieve what we desire. Certainly it often happens in Parliament
that we ask ourselves the question whether we should insist
fully on our principal demands, or whether we should allow some
of them to go by, and the Opportunist policy is ever before us.
People think that if we asked for less, we should more easily
get it; but in my political career in Parliament, which now extends
over nearly 40 years, I have made the discovery, which is no less
true in private life, that modesty is an ornament, but one often gets
on better without it. This remark is often quoted by members
of the middle classes. We might make modest demands, and
they would not be complied with unless we had a strong force
behind to back them up. Behind our principal demands
there are our principles, which are strengthened by our force.
We are ready to meet our opponents. They are ready to shamelessly
repel if we ask with modesty. In the last weeks and
months I have often heard about the weakness of Social-Democracy.
There is no falser word. I fearlessly assert that in the
German Empire there is no more powerful party in existence than
ours. Social-Democracy rules the whole political and social life,
both at home and abroad. Without its existence we should still
be far from attaining much we now have. As an example of
this truth, I may speak of the progress of the woman question in
the last 15 years. The Centre in the nineties opposed with all
its power our demand that women should be free to attend
lectures on all subjects in all universities. But before two years
had passed one of the most Conservative members of the Centre,
Freiherr von Hertling, declared, with great force, that he was
quite in favour of women studying whatever they wished. This
is a good example of the influence that may be exercised by a
powerful party which really knows what it wants.</p>
<p class='c000'>Another question is the right of forming unions and of
holding meetings. In many States, even in reactionary Saxony,
women and men have equal rights on this matter. In other States—and
Prussia is naturally foremost in the cause of reaction—the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_19'>19</span>right of women to form unions has been much crippled.
Some progress in this question has also been made by the Centre.
Now that party is ready to declare, not indeed that women
should have freedom to form political unions, but that the millions
of women who are struggling in industry for existence should
have liberty to form unions and associations, and that no impediments
should be placed in their way to prevent them from
combining together. These victories show how we should work
if we wish to be successful. The question of obtaining for
women universal, equal, secret and direct Suffrage is looked
upon somewhat askance by middle-class parties. We need not
wonder much at this, because in many middle-class circles there
is a good deal of dislike to universal, equal, secret and direct
Suffrage for men, and a very influential class thinks that this
Suffrage should at the first good opportunity be subverted or
weakened. These people are naturally not prepared to grant the
franchise to women. But, nevertheless, I venture to prophesy
that in Germany we shall extend this franchise to women before it
shall be taken away from men. I will venture to say that the
proposal to do that cannot succeed, and I am sure it would
be very imprudent to attempt it, because if it were done all men
who have the vote, and who would by the proposal be injured,
would raise such a protest and engage in such a struggle as
Germany has never seen. And just as the Centre in 1898 declined
to follow one of its members when he proposed then the law on
penitentiaries, so I do not think it will care to shake up our
great mass of voters by trying to curtail the franchise. But on
the other hand, as discontent increases in the mass and the power
of Socialism grows, it is possible, in order to weaken our voting
power, that our enemies might try to get the support of women,
because, undoubtedly, there are a large number of them who are
not friendly to the Social-Democratic organisation. Reckoning on
this—I will not consider to-night why it is so—and that women
are often indifferent, and will either be influenced by Conservatives
or by clergymen, the majority may think that the granting
of Woman Suffrage would be a disadvantage to the Socialists.
That is undoubtedly right. But it will be our own fault if, when
women get the vote, they are against us. All the reasons which
are urged to-day against Woman Suffrage were formerly used
against granting the vote to men. I myself, 43 years ago, as a
member of the Builders’ Union, spoke against Universal Suffrage
on the ground that working men were not properly educated.
That has, in fact, been shown to be true, for now, after having
Universal Suffrage in Germany for nearly 40 years, we still have
nearly seven and a-half millions of votes against us. There is no
doubt that the great majority of these men are working men
who vote against the interests of their own class. But no one of
our party has, therefore, thought it necessary to speak against
Universal Suffrage, but we have gone on agitating and trying to
convince people more and more that Social-Democracy is the
<span class='pageno' id='Page_20'>20</span>only cure for the evils of life. Already we have three millions of
voters on our side, and I hope that we may get four, five, and
six millions, and become the majority. Then when the Reaction
calls the women to its aid as a last chance, then we men must
work not only among our sex but also among the women. Then
the last anchor which holds the middle-class society will give way.</p>
<p class='c000'>In Belgium, in Austria, in Sweden, the position of women is
more backward than in our country. Those who know what
power the priest still has in some Catholic countries near
Germany will understand why our comrades did not think that
Woman Suffrage was advisable there at present. Yet I do not
think that in those countries the Reaction was prepared to give
Universal Suffrage to men and to women. But, on the other
hand, it would have done our cause a great deal of good if our
comrades themselves had agitated for this, and thus have made
the reactionaries appear unfriendly to woman. If, then, the
question had really become one of practical politics, they could
have said: “We were the first in favour of this Woman Suffrage.”
But I will not enter here into any polemic with our foreign comrades;
I have only felt myself compelled at this moment to give
the arguments on both sides as briefly as possible. We can
discuss this matter next year at the International Congress at
Stuttgart.</p>
<p class='c000'>For myself I have no doubt in the matter, if we wish to
succeed—and we must succeed—we cannot do so if we put our
principal demands in the background, and declare that we only
expect to get some of our demands. I hold that to be bad tactics,
and that is why I am glad that on this occasion the question of
Woman Suffrage was argued fairly and openly, and I beg of you
to unanimously adopt the resolution which has been read. You
thus will pledge the party to carry on the struggle, and, sooner
or later, to be victorious.</p>
<p class='c000'>Frau Wengels, of Berlin, moved the closure.</p>
<p class='c000'>Frau Braun, of Berlin, wished to speak on behalf of English
supporters of Woman Suffrage.</p>
<p class='c000'>The closure was adopted.</p>
<p class='c000'>The resolution was unanimously adopted, and it was also
decided to print as a pamphlet a full report of the speeches.</p>
<div class='lg-container-r'>
<div class='linegroup'>
<div class='group'>
<div class='line'>Translated by <span class='sc'>Jacques Bonhomme</span>.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class='pbb'>
<hr class='pb c003' />
<p> </p>
</div>
<div class='tnotes'>
<div class='chapter'>
<h2 class='c004'>TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE</h2>
</div>
<ol class='ol_1 c002'>
<li>Silently corrected typographical errors.
</li>
<li>Retained anachronistic and non-standard spellings as printed.
</li>
</ol>
</div>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<hr class="full" />
</div>
</div>
<div>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 57474 ***</div>
</body>
</html>
|
