Complaints against the methods of producing and distributing wealth are not new; complaints of such a character as we hear at present, however, have originated since the middle of the eighteenth century. Before the French Revolution, dissatisfaction with the then existing order of things had been expressed[2] often enough, and had even led to rebellion; but the economic life of Christendom was then different from what it is now, and consequently the discontent and the proposed measures of reform were not of the same nature. While the study of the condition of the laboring7 classes in ancient times and the Middle Ages is highly profitable, it is not necessary to go farther back than the latter part of the eighteenth century to obtain a tolerably accurate notion of existing socialism and communism.
A brief examination of the peculiarities8 of modern socialistic schemes will make this plain. One of these is to be found in the developed self-consciousness and awakened10 desires of the poor, taking their origin in democratic institutions and increased enlightenment. Another is the greater prominence12 given to capital in the present system of production. Disputes concerning capital-profit and wages now lead to communistic and socialistic schemes. “Such war-cries,” to use the words of Sch?ffle’s “Socialism as Presented by Kaufmann,” “as we find Lassalle raising against capital, would not have been even understood among the ancients and the oppressed classes of the Middle Ages. The promises held out by agitators13 to the masses now are: equal rights for all, no monopolies, liberty and equality for the people. Liberalism itself has paved the way to communism. The right of coalition14 among laborers16 for their own interests, liberty of the press, the extension of the suffrage17, together with the facility of rapid and cheap inter-communication by post and telegraph, afford laborers the means for united action where their interests are at stake. The working-man of our day has a consciousness of his own power quite unparalleled by any of his compeers in former ages.”
[3]
A third peculiarity18 of modern forms of communism and socialism is their cosmopolitan19 and practical character. All the plans of reformers, described in this work, were meant to be executed and to inaugurate a new era in the development of humanity. Attempts have been made, or are being made, to realize every one of them. Older socialistic schemes are of two kinds. Those of the first class were applied20 only to sects21 or small associations. Such were the communities of Buddhist22 and Christian23 monks24 and the villages of the Essenes in Judea. Those of the second class were dreamy and speculative25. No attempt was made by their authors or any group of immediate26 disciples27 to regenerate28 the world by substituting them for existing social and economic organizations. Of this character were the “Republic” of Plato and the “Utopia” of Sir Thomas More. Even the speculations29 of French writers immediately preceding the Revolution, like Mably, Morelly, Brissot de Warville, and Jean Jacques Rousseau, were of this kind. Jean Brissot, for example, tickled30 the palates of those craving31 literary and philosophical32 sensation by declaring private property theft, and then defended private property in the National Convention of 1792;[1] while Rousseau, only a few months after lamenting33 that the first man who laid claim to property had not been instantly denounced as the arch foe34 of the human race, speaks respectfully in his “Political Economy” of property as the basis of the social compact, whose first condition was that every one should be protected in its enjoyment35.[2][4] Morley says of him that he “never thought of the subversion36 of society or its reorganization on a communistic basis,” and that would hold generally of French socialistic thinkers before 1789. Modern socialists37 and communists, on the other hand, not only think of a reorganization of society, but work with might and main to accomplish it. This at once draws a broad line between them. This difference finds expression in new designations. A man without property is no longer what he was previous to the French Revolution—viz., a poor man; he is a proletarian, while the class to which he belongs are not called collectively the poor, but the proletariat.
Previous to the French Revolution an attempt had been made to embrace all the inhabitants of a state in some shape in a fixed38 and definite social organism. There were the ruling classes, consisting of the nobility and the clergy39, and the commons. The latter were, to be sure, hewers of wood and carriers of water for the two higher estates, but they were bound to them in a certain manner. The feudal40 lord usually felt some sort of concern for the welfare of his vassals41, looked after their interests, when these interests were attacked by others, and in a general way afforded them protection to be found only in his wealth and power. The greatest of the feudal lords, the sovereign, was the mighty42 father of all, and his government was often a shield to the weak and helpless. The third estate, the bourgeoisie—those who pursued trades and commerce—were connected together, and with the rest of society, by guilds43 and corporations. The arrangements of these institutions brought into close personal contact master and laborers. Manufactures were conducted in small shops, where the employer worked[5] side by side with two or three journeymen and apprentices46, the latter living in the master’s house. According to the rules of the guilds the apprentice45 became a journeyman in a few years, and the journeyman rose in time to the rank of master. Thus there were common experiences and common feelings to unite employers and employed. They were not distinct and separate classes, with interests sharply antagonistic47 to one another.
It is so unusual to hear one speak a good word for the institutions of the Middle Ages, that I fear the reader will be tempted48 to exclaim, “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?” But that it may not be necessary to take my ipse dixit for believing that there was a favorable side to feudalism, I will quote the testimony49 of Thorold Rogers, Professor of Political Economy in the University of Oxford50, and one of the most distinguished51 economists53 of our time. “It is in vain to rejoice over the aggregate54 of our prosperity,” says Professor Rogers, in his “History of Agriculture and Prices,”[3] “and to forget that great part of the nation has no share in its benefits. It may be that the wisdom of our forefathers55 was accidental; it is certain that society was divided by less sharp lines, and was held together by common ties in a far closer manner, in the times which it has been my fortune to study [the Middle Ages], than it is now. The feudal system of the Middle Ages was one of mutual56 interests; its theory of property involved far more exacting57 duties than modern rights ever acknowledge, or remember, or perhaps know.”
The war of La Vendée, in the French Revolution,[6] gives striking corroboration58 of this view of feudalism. In the western part of France, particularly in Anjou, feudal institutions still retained their better characteristics, while in other provinces large landed proprietors59 intrusted their estates to agents, that they might lead idle and dissipated lives in Paris. The landlords of La Vendée and the surrounding country lived on their manors60, and took a paternal61 interest in the well-being62 of their peasants and dependents. The relations of Church and people were those of protection and affection. The result was the obstinate63 adherence64 of this part of France to the old order of things, and the stubborn resistance of the peasants of Anjou and Poitou to the revolution.[4]
Yes, it is true; much more can be said in favor of the social organization of the Middle Ages than is commonly supposed. Nor were those times so backward as many think. Cities like Nuremberg, in Germany, show remains65 of the civilization of the Middle Ages which convince one that a considerable grandeur66 had then been attained67, and that the people of those times were by no means in every respect inferior to us. But the framework of this past civilization, not admitting of expansion, broke to pieces. It was not large enough for the modern growth of population and wealth. Its institutions were abused by those in power, and in a time of general corruption68 and oppression they fell with a terrible crash. The French Revolution swept them away forever. While this revolution formed one of the grandest epochs in history, it[7] left society in a singularly disorganized state. No one appeared to be connected with his fellow-man. Each one stood alone by himself. The individualistic and atomistic condition of modern society had begun. In the reaction which followed upon restraint this was thought to be an unmixed good. Each one was left free to pursue his own interests in his own way. Commerce and industries took a wonderful start, and by the aid of inventions and discoveries expanded in such a rapid and all-embracing manner as to astound70 the world. It is probable that as we, after more than two thousand years, look back upon the time of Pericles with wonder and astonishment71 as an epoch69 great in art and literature, posterity72 two thousand years hence will regard our era as forming an admirable and unparalleled epoch in the history of industrial invention. During this time of growth and increasing wealth it was at first generally thought that everything was moving along finely. The third estate had been emancipated73. Its members had no longer to bear alone the burdens of government. It betook itself to trade and manufactures, grew wealthy, and became the bourgeoisie of modern political economy. But speedily a fourth estate was discovered, whose members consisted of dependents—workers for daily wages. What had been done for them? They had also nominal74 freedom, but did they enjoy actual freedom? They were in possession of political equality, but had they advanced one single step in the direction of social and economic equality? There were not wanting those who went even further than to answer both of these questions in the negative. They pointed76 to the fact that the weak and needy77 had, as never before, lost all connection with the strong and powerful.[8] Hundreds of laborers crowded in a single shop lost all personal feeling with their one employer. Formerly78 the distance between journeyman and master was slight, and the passage from the one condition to the other could invariably be effected by diligence and ability. This change of condition now became absolutely impossible for the greater number. The majority of those engaged in manufactures must, in the nature of things, remain common laborers. A few, unusually gifted or favored, might hope to rise, but even for them it became ever more difficult to ascend79 the social ladder. On the one hand, the division of labor6 was carried so far that the labor performed by each was exceedingly simple. Instead of taxing the ingenuity80, and thereby81 conducing to mental development, the endless repetition and sameness of the labor tended to make one stupid. On the other hand, inventions rendered it necessary not only to employ an ever-increasing number of machines, but to make use of those which were constantly becoming more expensive.[5] The gulf82 between employer and employed widened unceasingly. The employer, losing personal feeling with his laborers, too often forgot that they were men with natures like his own. Frequently, it must be acknowledged, he looked upon them as mere83 beasts of burden, and regarded their labor in the same light as any other commodity which was sold in the market-place. They were hired for the cheapest price, worked to the utmost limit of endurance, and, when used-up, thrown aside like any other old and worthless machine. The capitalist grew richer, and among the higher classes[9] of society luxury and extravagance increased. The laborer15, noticing all this, asked himself if his lot had in any respect improved. He was inclined to deny that it had. His daily bread was not earned with less toil84, nor was he surer of an opportunity to work. His existence was as uncertain and as full of anxiety as ever. Being brought together in large shops with those in like condition, he talked over his wrongs and sufferings with them. A class-feeling was developed. The heartlessness and assumed superiority of those who had become suddenly, and often by mere chance, wealthy were looked upon with frowns and gloomy countenances85 foreboding no good. The harsh separation in material goods between these parvenus86 and the lower classes was accompanied by no mitigating87 circumstances. In the case of the old and wealthy families of a more ancient era the superiority in wealth appeared more just, on account of lapse88 of time and a certain superiority in intellect and manners. They were, to a considerable extent, superior beings in other respects than mere externals. The new rich looked down upon and despised the orders from which they had so recently escaped, and were, in turn, hated by those beneath them. A division of society into caste-like classes was taking place. The rich were becoming richer; it was thought the poor were becoming poorer. Free competition imposed no restraints upon the powerful. They were at liberty to exploit the poor to their heart’s content. The strength on the one side was so great, and the capability89 of resistance on the other so insignificant90, that there could exist no real freedom of contract. As Sismondi said, the rich man labored91 to increase his capital, the poor man to satisfy the cravings of his stomach. The one can[10] wait, the demands of the other are imperative92. To the laborers their state appeared like “a hell without escape and without end” (Mehring). They were prepared to listen to those who should preach them a gospel of hope, even if it involved violent change. Revolution might help them; it could not render their lot more hopeless. They were ready to examine more critically the evils of society, when bidden to do so by their leaders. Verily, they did not need to search long to discover many sore spots on the social body. The luxurious93 immorality94 of the parvenus in European capitals made no attempt to conceal95 itself. When the laborers were told that their wives and daughters were considered rightful booty by the wealthy, they remembered women of their class who had fallen a prey96 to the fascination97 of wealth and the elegance98 of the higher classes, and were angry. The peace of many of them had been ruthlessly destroyed by some rich voluptuary. Perhaps a poor father, thinking of a fair daughter, whose employer in shop or factory had taken advantage of his position and her need to seduce99 her, gnashed his teeth in rage, and was ready to swear eternal vengeance100 against the bourgeoisie.[6]
[11]
But these things were noticed by the more thoughtful among the higher classes. They were bitterly disappointed. The doctrines101 of political and economic liberalism had been expected to usher102 in the millennium103, and instead of that they beheld104 the same wretched, unhappy, sinful world, which they thought they had left. If there had been progress in the general condition of humanity, it was so slight that it was a matter of dispute. Many, finding things in such a sad condition, one so different from what they had expected, affirmed boldly that we had been going from bad to worse.
In speaking of Lamennais, the distinguished French Christian socialist9, the Rev5. Mr. Kaufmann, an English clergyman, describes the grief that eminent105 man experienced, as he observed the economic development of society after the great French Revolution:[7][12] “It was Lamennais’ fate to see three revolutionary waves pass over his country, and to watch with sorrow and bitterness of heart the disappointments to which they gave rise. He had seen the sore distress106 of the people whose condition the political changes of the first revolution left to all intents and purposes unimproved. It had, in fact, given rise to new social grievances107. In destroying patriarchal relationships and feudal bonds of social union, it had handed over the masses to the tender mercies of free contract and competition. The introduction of machinery108, with the rise of modern industry, had a pauperizing effect, and intensified109 popular discontent. Hence the various socialistic and communistic schemes for the liberation of the working-classes from the ‘tyranny of capital,’ and the attempts to promote the free association of labor by means of voluntary co-operation following in the wake of revolution.
“Every section of society was represented in this revolt against the excessive individualism of the laissez-faire system as the result of the new social contract. Among the saviours110 of society who rose rapidly one after another—Saint-Simon, on the part of aristocratic crétins impoverished111 by the revolution; Fourier, as the spokesman of the aggrieved113 lower middle-class, in danger of being crushed by the superior force of the plutocracy114; Bab?uf, representing the communistic materialism115 of the ‘common people’—each in their own way had their theories of social reconstruction116; ... whilst a small band of generously minded churchmen, with Lamennais at their head, made it their object to save society by means of spiritual regeneration.”
A reaction against liberalism set in. This was of two kinds. A romantic party, represented by Adam[13] Müller, and a conservative party, represented by the Kreuzzeitung, advocated a return to the social organization of the Middle Ages. They dreamed of a golden age in the past, in which humble117 simplicity118 and trustful dependence119 on the part of the laborer were met by generous benevolence120 and protecting care on the part of the master. They thought it possible to restore a time in which the Shepherd of Salisbury Plain, happy and contented121 because a kind Providence122 had granted him salt for his potatoes, filled an ideal position.
The communistic and socialistic parties, on the other hand, urged the necessity of an advance to a totally new form of society. Very unlike in many respects, in others these parties resemble and sympathize with each other. The accusations which they bring against our present condition of society are so similar that one often does not know whether one is reading the production of a social democrat11 or of an ultra-conservative.
I will quote the indictment123 of the great socialist, Karl Marx, against liberalism, which, it will be seen, might just as well have been written by a conservative. In fact, if I had been shown the passage and told that it appeared in the Kreuzzeitung, I should not have been in the least surprised. “Although the liberals,” says Marx, “have not carried out their principles in any land as yet completely, still, the attempts which have been made are sufficient to prove the uselessness of their efforts. They endeavored to free labor, but only succeeded in subjecting it more completely under the yoke124 of capitalism125; they aimed at setting at liberty all labor powers, and only riveted126 the chains of misery127 which held them bound; they[14] wanted to release the bondman from the clod, and deprived him of the soil on which he stood by buying up the land; they yearned128 for a happy condition of society, and only created superfluity on one hand and dire75 want on the other; they desired to secure for merit its own honorable reward, and only made it the slave of wealth; they wanted to abolish all monopolies, and placed in their stead the monster monopoly, capital; they wanted to do away with all wars between nation and nation, and kindled129 the flames of civil war; they wanted to get rid of the state, and yet have multiplied its burdens; they wanted to make education the common property of all, and made it the privilege of the rich; they aimed at the greatest moral improvement of society, and only left it in a state of rotten immorality; they wanted, to say all in a word, unbounded liberty, and have produced the meanest servitude; they wanted the reverse of all that which they actually obtained, and have thus given a proof that liberalism in all its ramifications130 is nothing but a perfect Utopia.”[8]
Before considering separately the different varieties of communism and socialism it is necessary to say a few words about the proper method of treating the subject. The movements indicated by the words communism and socialism are designed to aid especially the lower classes. If mankind generally were as happily situated131 as are what we call the middle and higher classes, these systems would never have been heard of. The members of the upper classes have nothing[15] to hope from communism or socialism, but have much which they might possibly lose—I say possibly, because I wish to express it in the most favorable manner. If wealthy and well-to-do writers and politicians oppose social reform they are consequently often suspected of advocating their own selfish interests exclusively. They are not likely, therefore, to have much success in converting socialists and communists, unless they manifest in word and deed their sincere concern for the welfare of their poorer brethren. I think, therefore, that we ought to strive first of all to understand thoroughly132 the various systems of social reformers, and then to describe them in such manner that their supporters themselves could not find fault with our representation. A kindly133, well-disposed criticism might follow, with hope of doing some good. To understand people, however, we must have some sort of sympathy (σ?ν-παθο?—Mitleiden) with them. We shall not be likely to comprehend a social system, if we approach it with coldness or, still worse, with hatred134. The severe Protestant is not likely to appreciate a Madonna of Raphael, unless he is able for a time to forget his Protestantism and enter into the feelings of the devout135 Roman Catholic. As Carlyle so finely says, “the heart lying dead, the eye cannot see.” So, to obtain an adequate idea of socialism and of the justice of its claims, we must imagine ourselves for the time being laborers, with all their trials and sufferings. We must endeavor to think ourselves into (hineindenken) their condition. Nor let us suppose that there is anything to be feared from a disclosure of the full truth. It is only from the opposite course that danger is to be apprehended136. As a distinguished American political economist52 has well said:[16] “The time has passed for dealing137 with the masses as children who are to be treated to truth in quantities and on occasions suited to their welfare or the interests of society. The political economist only abandons his ground of vantage and forfeits138 the confidence of the community when he accepts any responsibility for the use that may be made of the truth he discovers and discloses.”[9]
Bearing this thought in mind, even a hasty examination of the vast majority of books written on socialism and communism shows how utterly139 worthless they are. Their authors start out with such intense hatred of all socialistic systems, that it is simply impossible for them to understand these systems. But the worst of it is, that they couple their misunderstanding with such hard words and severe epithets140 as to excite bad blood and drive the various classes of society farther apart than ever. The wealthier classes lose their ardor141 for reform, and the poorer people become enraged142. As I write, I take up the first book on Communism which lies at my hand, and, opening it, find communists spoken of as “a hideous143 fraternity of conspirators144.” I turn over a few pages and read this: “To-day there is not in our language, nor in any language, a more hateful word than communism.” Of a sentence uttered by a socialist, this writer says “more pestilent words were never spoken.” On the next page communism is spoken of as “infecting” the Russian universities. “Now,” continues our author, “it poisons the blood and maddens the brains of artisans and peasants.” Such words do more than excite[17] the anger of socialists. They arouse the indignation of every lover of fair play, and convince no one. I take up another work and find that a very different effect is produced on me as I read it. A kindly tone pervades145 it, which, if it does not convince error, tends at least to obtain the good-will of those whom it combats. This latter work to which I refer consists of “Lectures on Social Questions,” and was written by the Rev. Dr. J. H. Rylance, of St. Mark’s Church, New York, a large-hearted, fair-minded man.
Once for all, we must rid ourselves of the notion that we can persuade people by misrepresenting them and calling them hard names. Such conduct only reacts against ourselves. The folly146 of such a course has been demonstrated often enough by the history of socialism. A striking instance is given by Mehring in his “History of Social Democracy in Germany” (pp. 96-98).[10] It appears that a large number of working-men’s unions had formed an alliance (Verband deutscher Arbeitervereine), of which the Party of Progress (Fortschrittspartei) had assumed the leadership. This is a political party which was violently opposed to Lassalle, and had considerable sympathy with the doctrines of the Manchester school. When Lassalle began his agitation147, the leaders of this party misrepresented his doctrines in shameful148 manner. It hardly seems as if their misrepresentation could have been otherwise than wilful149. They appeared to believe that the end justified150 the means in fighting so odious151 an opponent, and that they were not required to treat him fairly and honestly. Well, their programme worked brilliantly for a time. At the meetings of these working-men’s[18] unions members of the Party of Progress used to explain the doctrines of Lassalle in such manner as to place them in a false light, and then let the laborers reject his plans by unanimous votes. union after union voted against him, and in the summer of 1863 these unions, at their annual meeting, professed152 the principles of the Progressists, and selected a newspaper edited by a member of that party as their organ. In 1864, at the general meeting of the unions, some followers153 of Lassalle contradicted the misstatements of the teachings of their master. This produced an effect, and Friedrich A. Lange, who had been elected a member of one of the committees of the alliance of the unions, warned the Progressists against the course they were pursuing, and advocated the fairer, more honorable, and more manly154 method of warfare155. He told them that a reaction would surely set in against themselves, when the laborers heard an adequate statement of Lassalle’s plans, especially if they were presented in his own fiery156, eloquent157 words. But Lange’s earnest warnings were unheeded. The laborers learned how to reply to a fictitious158, non-existent Lassalle, but not to the real, living one. Every annual meeting of the working-men’s unions witnessed, accordingly, an approach to social democracy until 1869, when it was accepted without reserve, and the alliance of working-men’s unions was merged159 into the Social Democratic Working-men’s Party (Social-demokratische Arbeiterpartei). As Mehring forcibly observes: “It is, indeed, a singular misfortune, and manifests a rare lack of tact44, to lead to the enemy as welcome auxiliaries160 not merely single recruits, but entire army corps” (p. 98). Thousands of laborers might have been saved from social democracy if its opponents, in fighting it,[19] had adhered to the maxim161, “Honesty is the best policy.” In fact, Mehring attributes the success and popularity of Lassalle more to his enemies than to his own brilliant talents. Falsehoods respecting his teachings were uttered by his opponents without compunction of conscience, and these, when exposed, only gave the laborers new confidence in Lasalle, and less faith than ever in his enemies. Newspapers abused him personally in such manner as to assist him in playing the r?le of a martyr162 and hero. They spoke112 of his unripe163 spirit and of his mental dependence upon a tailor by the name of Weitling, at a time when the most renowned164 scholars of Germany could not find words with which to express their almost unbounded admiration165 for his learning and talent.
As I wish to represent communism and socialism fairly, I will at once correct a few popular errors in regard to them.
First, then, it is supposed that advocates of these systems are poor, worthless fellows, who adopt the arts of a demagogue for the promotion166 in some way of their own interests, perhaps in order to gain a livelihood167 by agitating168 laborers and preying169 upon them. It is thought that they are moved by envy of the wealthier classes, and, themselves unwilling170 to work, long for the products of diligence and ability. This view is represented by the following well-known lines:
“What is a communist? One who hath yearnings
To fork out his penny and pocket your shilling.”
This is certainly a false and unjust view. The leading communists and socialists from the time of Plato up to the present have been, for the most part, men of[20] character, wealth, talent, and high social standing. Of Plato it is unnecessary to speak, since people are not in the habit of calling him a shallow demagogue. Sir Thomas More, the author of the communistic romance “Utopia,” was lovable, learned, and socially honored. Robert Owen, the English communist, was a wealthy manufacturer and a distinguished philanthropist. Of Rodbertus, Marx, and Lassalle I shall speak presently. If we examine the history of even those who are less known among the German social democrats173 of to-day, we shall discover that a great number have made sacrifices for their faith. Hunted about and persecuted174 as they are, it is assuredly no light matter to proclaim one’s self a social democrat. While, of course, among communists and socialists, selfishness, meanness, and enough that is contemptible175 may be found, I do not believe any movement of modern society is able to exhibit a greater amount of unselfish devotion than that they represent.
A second charge against the communists consists in making them responsible for the doings of the Parisian mob in 1871. The error of this has been explained often enough. It is due largely to an accidental resemblance between the words commune and communism. Many who use the word commune glibly176 have a very imperfect understanding of its significance, and little imagine that it is as harmless and innocent a word as township, and means pretty much the same thing. The commune, with an emphasis on the article, means simply Paris, or, in a secondary sense, the administrative177 officers collectively governing Paris. France is divided into departments and communes, the same as our states are divided into counties and townships, and Paris by itself[21] forms one of these communes. The insurrection in Paris, of March 18, 1871, was one in favor of extreme local self-government. The idea was to make each commune at least as independent as one of the states of the United States, and to unite all the communes into a confederation with limited powers.[11] The movement in favor of the autonomy of Paris is an old one, and has been supported by many able and respectable Frenchmen. One in favor of the movement is, however, properly called a communalist, and not a communist, and the movement itself is communalism—not communism. A careful study of the decrees of the commune, of the reports and of the various histories which have described its rebellion in 1871, shows that the movement was political, primarily, and only to a very limited extent economic. Even the economic decrees, like the stay-laws, postponing179 the time for payment of debts due, might be regarded as war measures. However, out of the seventy and more members of the communal178 government nine or ten were social democrats and members of the International, and it is probable that concessions180 may have been made to win them and their adherents181. They were effectual in this, since the Internationalists were disposed to favor the movement from the start, and that for two reasons. First, believing that their ends can be attained only by revolution, they are inclined to look favorably upon any revolution whatever, as tending to cultivate a revolutionary spirit in the people. Second, they favor the[22] autonomy of large cities, holding that the masses in the cities might more readily be induced to adopt communistic and socialistic reforms, if not held in check by the more conservative rural population.[12]
But let us ask ourselves this question: If all the members of the communal government had been communists in the ordinary sense of the word, would communism have been necessarily condemned182? I think that another question will help us to answer this. All the members of that government were republicans: was republicanism then necessarily condemned? No one but a rabid tory would think of giving an affirmative answer to this second question. It is at once seen that the republican form of government is not responsible for the conduct of every scoundrel who professes183 republican principles.
It is urged further that communism and socialism would destroy religion and the family institution. The reason of this complaint is evident enough. A number of social reformers have been at the same time atheists and advocates of free love. The questions of atheism184 and free love are, however, totally different from that of even communism, the most radical of all the reforms proposed. There is no necessary connection whatever between them. If it could once be[23] shown that communism were practicable, it would be easy to give many reasons for supposing that in such a society the love between man and wife and parents and children would be freer from selfish and sordid185 motives186 than at present.[13] The clergy are partly to blame for the irreligious attitude of many modern socialists. They have too often made themselves the advocates of conservatism simply as conservatism, regardless of all abuses which it embraced. In countries where Church and State are connected, the clergy have been too often a sort of police, assisting the government to maintain existing institutions, and to oppose change, good or bad. They have favored the higher classes, upon whom their support has depended, and neglected the interests of the poor and down-trodden. I do not write this as an enemy of the Church, but as her friend. Nor do I express myself differently from the best of our clergymen at present. Rev. Dr. Rylance,[24] indeed, has, in his “Lectures on Social Questions,” clothed this same thought in stronger language. In one place he says, “The proper relations of Christianity to the legitimate187 efforts of socialism to improve the condition of the suffering classes will never be understood, or the minds of those now alienated188 from the religion of Christ will never be disabused189 of their antipathy191, till the essential claims of that religion be set in fairer and fuller light; all the perversions192 it has suffered being frankly193 acknowledged, and the wrongs done in its name, as far as possible, atoned194 for. Your Church histories are full of such perversions, while your most expert apologists cannot disguise the wrongs ... Ecclesiasticism[14] has often been a fraud and a tyranny in history. As the Church grew in power and wealth, it allied itself to power and wealth in the hands of civil rulers and their creatures, and the fruits of the alliance have often been wicked and infamous195.”
Dr. Rylance also declares that Christianity is a sort of socialism, and quotes in proof these texts of Scripture196, among others: “As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another.” “If ye fulfil the royal law, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well; but if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin.” “This commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God, love his brother also.”[15]
[25]
“One way of aspersing197 the doctrines of communism,” says another writer,[16] “is to call them anti-Christian. It is forgotten that the Christian idea of equality underlies198 all the reasonings of communism, and communism has succeeded only in so far as it was Christian in principle, having for its fundamental maxim brotherly love. In this, communism is much more Christian than the hankering after privileges of the old aristocracy, or the unbounded avarice199 of the plutocracy.”
There are other false accusations brought against communism and socialism, which it is not necessary to examine now. A well-disposed person will scarcely experience difficulty in separating them from scientific argument.
It behooves200 us to disabuse190 our minds of all prejudice and ill-will. It is only thus that we shall be able to meet and overcome the social dangers which threaten even our own country in a not very distant future. We have never had a permanent laboring class, but[26] with the increase of population one is rapidly developing. If it is now becoming extremely difficult for the laborer to rise, what will the condition of things be when we number two hundred millions? And that time is not so far off. At our present rate of increase, it will come when some of us are still living. It is a laboring class without hope of improvement for themselves or their children which will first test our institutions. But he must be singularly blind or unacquainted with the views of the various social classes who is unable to detect even now, in certain quarters, the formation of habits and modes of thought characteristic of the poorer classes in Europe. The fact of this growth was twice brought home to me forcibly two winters ago. As I was walking by the union League Club-house, in New York city, at the time of its house-warming, while the people were driving up in their fine carriages, one poor fellow stood on the opposite side of the street watching the ladies enter in their luxurious and extravagant201 toilets. He was a good-looking, intelligent-appearing man, but wore no overcoat. It was a cold evening, and he seemed to me to be shivering. He was evidently thinking of the difference between his lot and that of the fashionable people he was observing; and I heard him mutter bitterly to himself, “A revolution will yet come and level that fine building to the ground.” A friend of mine, about the same time, passed a couple of laborers as he was walking by Mr. Vanderbilt’s new houses on Fifth Avenue. Some kind of bronze work, I believe, was being carried in, and he heard one of them remark, savagely202, “The time will come when that will be melted by fire.”
More significant and more ominous203 still is the reception[27] accorded in this country to a man like John Most, who has been expelled from the social-democratic party in Germany on account of his extreme views, particularly respecting assassination204 as a means of progress. He has been travelling about the United States, has been warmly received, and listened to with favor by large bodies of workmen while uttering counsels of war and bloodshed. On the 11th of February, 1883, he lectured in Baltimore. It was a cold, rainy, cheerless day, and the sidewalks were so covered with melting snow as to make it extremely unpleasant to venture out of doors. But Most had a full hall of eager listeners. He told the laborers that he had little hope of their overthrowing205 their oppressors by the use of the ballot206. He believed their emancipation207 would be brought about by violence, as all great reforms in the past had been. He consequently advised them to buy muskets208. He said a musket209 was a good thing to have. If it was not needed now, it could be placed in the corner, and it occupied but little space. The presiding officer, in closing the meeting, emphasized this part of Most’s address particularly. He told the laborers that a piece of paper would never make them free, that a musket was worth a hundred votes, and closed with the lines—
“Nur Pulver und Blei,
Die machen uns frei”—
“lead and powder alone can make us free.” There can be no doubt that a considerable portion of his hearers sympathized with his views. They listened approvingly, and applauded his fiercest remarks most loudly.
Nor is it without significance that in New York[28] alone at least three social democratic newspapers are published. Two of the three use the German language; one of these is a weekly only; the other appears in a daily, a weekly, and a special Sunday edition. The third paper is an English weekly, but it announces the appearance of a daily edition in the near future. The motto of one of these papers—Most’s Freiheit—is “Gegen die Tyrannen sind alle Mittel gesetzlich”—“All measures are legal against tyrants”—i.e., against our employers, against capitalists, against all classes superior to the laboring class.
It is not, however, necessary to take a pessimistic view of our prospects210, for it rests with us to shape the future. If we, as a people, become divided into two great hostile camps—those who possess economic goods and those who do not—the one class devoted211 to luxury and self-indulgence, the other given up to envy and bitterness—then, indeed, dire evils are in store for us; but we have reason to hope better things. The attitude of clergymen like Dr. Howard Crosby[17] and Dr. Rylance, the generosity212 of our philanthropists, unparalleled in past history, and the noble efforts of noble women to relieve every kind of suffering and distress, lead us to trust that, as new evils arise, strength and wisdom will be vouchsafed213 us to conquer them, and that among us the idea of the brotherhood214 of man will ever become more and more a living reality.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
allied
|
|
| adj.协约国的；同盟国的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
radical
|
|
| n.激进份子，原子团，根号；adj.根本的，激进的，彻底的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
accusations
|
|
| n.指责( accusation的名词复数 )；指控；控告；（被告发、控告的）罪名 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
rev
|
|
| v.发动机旋转，加快速度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
labor
|
|
| n.劳动，努力，工作，劳工；分娩；vi.劳动，努力，苦干；vt.详细分析；麻烦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
laboring
|
|
| n.劳动，操劳v.努力争取(for)( labor的现在分词 )；苦干；详细分析；（指引擎）缓慢而困难地运转 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
peculiarities
|
|
| n. 特质, 特性, 怪癖, 古怪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
socialist
|
|
| n.社会主义者；adj.社会主义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
awakened
|
|
| v.（使）醒( awaken的过去式和过去分词 )；（使）觉醒；弄醒；（使）意识到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
democrat
|
|
| n.民主主义者，民主人士；民主党党员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
prominence
|
|
| n.突出；显著；杰出；重要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
agitators
|
|
| n.（尤指政治变革的）鼓动者( agitator的名词复数 )；煽动者；搅拌器；搅拌机 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
coalition
|
|
| n.结合体，同盟，结合，联合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
laborer
|
|
| n.劳动者，劳工 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
laborers
|
|
| n.体力劳动者，工人( laborer的名词复数 )；（熟练工人的）辅助工 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
suffrage
|
|
| n.投票，选举权，参政权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
peculiarity
|
|
| n.独特性，特色；特殊的东西；怪癖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
cosmopolitan
|
|
| adj.世界性的，全世界的，四海为家的，全球的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
sects
|
|
| n.宗派，教派( sect的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
Buddhist
|
|
| adj./n.佛教的，佛教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
monks
|
|
| n.修道士，僧侣( monk的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
speculative
|
|
| adj.思索性的，暝想性的，推理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
disciples
|
|
| n.信徒( disciple的名词复数 )；门徒；耶稣的信徒；（尤指）耶稣十二门徒之一 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
regenerate
|
|
| vt.使恢复，使新生；vi.恢复，再生；adj.恢复的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
speculations
|
|
| n.投机买卖( speculation的名词复数 )；思考；投机活动；推断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
tickled
|
|
| （使）发痒( tickle的过去式和过去分词 )； （使）愉快，逗乐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
craving
|
|
| n.渴望,热望 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
philosophical
|
|
| adj.哲学家的，哲学上的，达观的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
lamenting
|
|
| adj.悲伤的，悲哀的v.（为…）哀悼，痛哭，悲伤( lament的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
foe
|
|
| n.敌人，仇敌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
enjoyment
|
|
| n.乐趣；享有；享用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
subversion
|
|
| n.颠覆，破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
socialists
|
|
| 社会主义者( socialist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
clergy
|
|
| n.[总称]牧师，神职人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
feudal
|
|
| adj.封建的，封地的，领地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
vassals
|
|
| n.奴仆( vassal的名词复数 )；（封建时代）诸侯；从属者；下属 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
mighty
|
|
| adj.强有力的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
guilds
|
|
| 行会，同业公会，协会( guild的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
tact
|
|
| n.机敏，圆滑，得体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
apprentice
|
|
| n.学徒，徒弟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
apprentices
|
|
| 学徒，徒弟( apprentice的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
antagonistic
|
|
| adj.敌对的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
tempted
|
|
| v.怂恿（某人）干不正当的事；冒…的险（tempt的过去分词） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
Oxford
|
|
| n.牛津（英国城市） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
economist
|
|
| n.经济学家，经济专家，节俭的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
economists
|
|
| n.经济学家，经济专家( economist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
aggregate
|
|
| adj.总计的，集合的；n.总数；v.合计；集合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
forefathers
|
|
| n.祖先，先人；祖先，祖宗( forefather的名词复数 )；列祖列宗；前人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
exacting
|
|
| adj.苛求的，要求严格的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
corroboration
|
|
| n.进一步的证实，进一步的证据 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
proprietors
|
|
| n.所有人，业主( proprietor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
manors
|
|
| n.庄园（manor的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
paternal
|
|
| adj.父亲的，像父亲的，父系的，父方的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
well-being
|
|
| n.安康，安乐，幸福 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
obstinate
|
|
| adj.顽固的，倔强的，不易屈服的，较难治愈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
adherence
|
|
| n.信奉，依附，坚持，固着 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
grandeur
|
|
| n.伟大，崇高，宏伟，庄严，豪华 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
corruption
|
|
| n.腐败，堕落，贪污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
epoch
|
|
| n.(新)时代；历元 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
astound
|
|
| v.使震惊，使大吃一惊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
astonishment
|
|
| n.惊奇，惊异 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
posterity
|
|
| n.后裔，子孙，后代 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
emancipated
|
|
| adj.被解放的，不受约束的v.解放某人（尤指摆脱政治、法律或社会的束缚）( emancipate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
nominal
|
|
| adj.名义上的；(金额、租金)微不足道的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
dire
|
|
| adj.可怕的，悲惨的，阴惨的，极端的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
needy
|
|
| adj.贫穷的，贫困的，生活艰苦的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
formerly
|
|
| adv.从前，以前 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
ascend
|
|
| vi.渐渐上升，升高；vt.攀登，登上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
ingenuity
|
|
| n.别出心裁；善于发明创造 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
gulf
|
|
| n.海湾；深渊，鸿沟；分歧，隔阂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
toil
|
|
| vi.辛劳工作，艰难地行动；n.苦工，难事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
countenances
|
|
| n.面容( countenance的名词复数 )；表情；镇静；道义支持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
parvenus
|
|
| n.暴富者( parvenu的名词复数 )；暴发户；新贵；傲慢自负的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
mitigating
|
|
| v.减轻，缓和( mitigate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
lapse
|
|
| n.过失，流逝，失效，抛弃信仰，间隔；vi.堕落，停止，失效，流逝；vt.使失效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
capability
|
|
| n.能力；才能；(pl)可发展的能力或特性等 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
insignificant
|
|
| adj.无关紧要的，可忽略的，无意义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
labored
|
|
| adj.吃力的，谨慎的v.努力争取(for)( labor的过去式和过去分词 )；苦干；详细分析；（指引擎）缓慢而困难地运转 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
imperative
|
|
| n.命令，需要；规则；祈使语气；adj.强制的；紧急的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
luxurious
|
|
| adj.精美而昂贵的；豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
immorality
|
|
| n. 不道德, 无道义 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
conceal
|
|
| v.隐藏，隐瞒，隐蔽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
prey
|
|
| n.被掠食者，牺牲者，掠食；v.捕食，掠夺，折磨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
fascination
|
|
| n.令人着迷的事物，魅力，迷恋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
elegance
|
|
| n.优雅；优美，雅致；精致，巧妙 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
seduce
|
|
| vt.勾引，诱奸，诱惑，引诱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
vengeance
|
|
| n.报复，报仇，复仇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
doctrines
|
|
| n.教条( doctrine的名词复数 )；教义；学说；（政府政策的）正式声明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
usher
|
|
| n.带位员，招待员；vt.引导，护送；vi.做招待，担任引座员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
millennium
|
|
| n.一千年，千禧年；太平盛世 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
beheld
|
|
| v.看，注视( behold的过去式和过去分词 )；瞧；看呀；（叙述中用于引出某人意外的出现）哎哟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
eminent
|
|
| adj.显赫的，杰出的，有名的，优良的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
distress
|
|
| n.苦恼，痛苦，不舒适；不幸；vt.使悲痛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
grievances
|
|
| n.委屈( grievance的名词复数 )；苦衷；不满；牢骚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
machinery
|
|
| n.(总称)机械，机器；机构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
intensified
|
|
| v.（使）增强， （使）加剧( intensify的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
saviours
|
|
| n.救助者( saviour的名词复数 )；救星；救世主；耶稣基督 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
impoverished
|
|
| adj.穷困的，无力的，用尽了的v.使（某人）贫穷( impoverish的过去式和过去分词 )；使（某物）贫瘠或恶化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
aggrieved
|
|
| adj.愤愤不平的，受委屈的；悲痛的；（在合法权利方面）受侵害的v.令委屈，令苦恼，侵害( aggrieve的过去式)；令委屈，令苦恼，侵害( aggrieve的过去式和过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
plutocracy
|
|
| n.富豪统治 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
materialism
|
|
| n.［哲］唯物主义，唯物论；物质至上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
reconstruction
|
|
| n.重建，再现，复原 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
humble
|
|
| adj.谦卑的，恭顺的；地位低下的；v.降低，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
simplicity
|
|
| n.简单，简易；朴素；直率，单纯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
dependence
|
|
| n.依靠，依赖；信任，信赖；隶属 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
benevolence
|
|
| n.慈悲，捐助 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
contented
|
|
| adj.满意的，安心的，知足的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
providence
|
|
| n.深谋远虑，天道，天意；远见；节约；上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
indictment
|
|
| n.起诉；诉状 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
yoke
|
|
| n.轭；支配；v.给...上轭，连接，使成配偶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
capitalism
|
|
| n.资本主义 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
riveted
|
|
| 铆接( rivet的过去式和过去分词 )； 把…固定住； 吸引； 引起某人的注意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
misery
|
|
| n.痛苦，苦恼，苦难；悲惨的境遇，贫苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
yearned
|
|
| 渴望，切盼，向往( yearn的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
kindled
|
|
| （使某物）燃烧，着火( kindle的过去式和过去分词 )； 激起（感情等）； 发亮，放光 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
ramifications
|
|
| n.结果，后果( ramification的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
situated
|
|
| adj.坐落在...的，处于某种境地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
kindly
|
|
| adj.和蔼的，温和的，爽快的；adv.温和地，亲切地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
hatred
|
|
| n.憎恶，憎恨，仇恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
devout
|
|
| adj.虔诚的，虔敬的，衷心的 (n.devoutness) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
apprehended
|
|
| 逮捕，拘押( apprehend的过去式和过去分词 )； 理解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
forfeits
|
|
| 罚物游戏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
epithets
|
|
| n.（表示性质、特征等的）词语( epithet的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
ardor
|
|
| n.热情，狂热 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
enraged
|
|
| 使暴怒( enrage的过去式和过去分词 )； 歜； 激愤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
hideous
|
|
| adj.丑陋的，可憎的，可怕的，恐怖的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
conspirators
|
|
| n.共谋者，阴谋家( conspirator的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
pervades
|
|
| v.遍及，弥漫( pervade的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
agitation
|
|
| n.搅动；搅拌；鼓动，煽动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
shameful
|
|
| adj.可耻的，不道德的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
wilful
|
|
| adj.任性的，故意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
odious
|
|
| adj.可憎的，讨厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
professed
|
|
| 公开声称的，伪称的，已立誓信教的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
followers
|
|
| 追随者( follower的名词复数 )； 用户； 契据的附面； 从动件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
manly
|
|
| adj.有男子气概的；adv.男子般地，果断地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
warfare
|
|
| n.战争(状态)；斗争；冲突 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
fiery
|
|
| adj.燃烧着的，火红的；暴躁的；激烈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
eloquent
|
|
| adj.雄辩的，口才流利的；明白显示出的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
fictitious
|
|
| adj.虚构的，假设的；空头的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
merged
|
|
| （使）混合( merge的过去式和过去分词 )； 相融； 融入； 渐渐消失在某物中 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
auxiliaries
|
|
| n.助动词 ( auxiliary的名词复数 )；辅助工，辅助人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
maxim
|
|
| n.格言，箴言 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
martyr
|
|
| n.烈士，殉难者；vt.杀害，折磨，牺牲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
unripe
|
|
| adj.未成熟的；n.未成熟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
renowned
|
|
| adj.著名的，有名望的，声誉鹊起的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
admiration
|
|
| n.钦佩，赞美，羡慕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
promotion
|
|
| n.提升，晋级；促销，宣传 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
livelihood
|
|
| n.生计，谋生之道 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
agitating
|
|
| 搅动( agitate的现在分词 )； 激怒； 使焦虑不安； （尤指为法律、社会状况的改变而）激烈争论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
preying
|
|
| v.掠食( prey的现在分词 )；掠食；折磨；（人）靠欺诈为生 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
unwilling
|
|
| adj.不情愿的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
earnings
|
|
| n.工资收人；利润，利益，所得 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
Bungler
|
|
| n.笨拙者，经验不够的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
democrats
|
|
| n.民主主义者，民主人士( democrat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
persecuted
|
|
| （尤指宗教或政治信仰的）迫害(~sb. for sth.)( persecute的过去式和过去分词 )； 烦扰，困扰或骚扰某人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
contemptible
|
|
| adj.可鄙的，可轻视的，卑劣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
glibly
|
|
| adv.流利地，流畅地；满口 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
administrative
|
|
| adj.行政的，管理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
communal
|
|
| adj.公有的，公共的，公社的，公社制的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
postponing
|
|
| v.延期，推迟( postpone的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
180
concessions
|
|
| n.（尤指由政府或雇主给予的）特许权( concession的名词复数 )；承认；减价；（在某地的）特许经营权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
181
adherents
|
|
| n.支持者，拥护者( adherent的名词复数 )；党羽；徒子徒孙 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
182
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
183
professes
|
|
| 声称( profess的第三人称单数 )； 宣称； 公开表明； 信奉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
184
atheism
|
|
| n.无神论，不信神 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
185
sordid
|
|
| adj.肮脏的，不干净的，卑鄙的，暗淡的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
186
motives
|
|
| n.动机，目的( motive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
187
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
188
alienated
|
|
| adj.感到孤独的，不合群的v.使疏远( alienate的过去式和过去分词 )；使不友好；转让；让渡（财产等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
189
disabused
|
|
| v.去除…的错误想法( disabuse的过去式和过去分词 )；使醒悟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
190
disabuse
|
|
| v.解惑；矫正 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
191
antipathy
|
|
| n.憎恶；反感，引起反感的人或事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
192
perversions
|
|
| n.歪曲( perversion的名词复数 )；变坏；变态心理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
193
frankly
|
|
| adv.坦白地，直率地；坦率地说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
194
atoned
|
|
| v.补偿，赎（罪）( atone的过去式和过去分词 )；补偿，弥补，赎回 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
195
infamous
|
|
| adj.声名狼藉的，臭名昭著的，邪恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
196
scripture
|
|
| n.经文，圣书，手稿；Scripture:(常用复数)《圣经》，《圣经》中的一段 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
197
aspersing
|
|
| v.毁坏（名誉），中伤，诽谤( asperse的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
198
underlies
|
|
| v.位于或存在于（某物）之下( underlie的第三人称单数 )；构成…的基础（或起因），引起 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
199
avarice
|
|
| n.贪婪；贪心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
200
behooves
|
|
| n.利益，好处( behoof的名词复数 )v.适宜( behoove的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
201
extravagant
|
|
| adj.奢侈的；过分的；(言行等)放肆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
202
savagely
|
|
| adv. 野蛮地，残酷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
203
ominous
|
|
| adj.不祥的，不吉的，预兆的，预示的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
204
assassination
|
|
| n.暗杀；暗杀事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
205
overthrowing
|
|
| v.打倒，推翻( overthrow的现在分词 )；使终止 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
206
ballot
|
|
| n.（不记名）投票，投票总数，投票权；vi.投票 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
207
emancipation
|
|
| n.（从束缚、支配下）解放 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
208
muskets
|
|
| n.火枪，（尤指）滑膛枪( musket的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
209
musket
|
|
| n.滑膛枪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
210
prospects
|
|
| n.希望，前途(恒为复数) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
211
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
212
generosity
|
|
| n.大度，慷慨，慷慨的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
213
vouchsafed
|
|
| v.给予，赐予( vouchsafe的过去式和过去分词 )；允诺 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
214
brotherhood
|
|
| n.兄弟般的关系，手中情谊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |