p In condemning the bad example set the proletariat by the bourgeoisie in forcibly abolishing the privileges of the nobility, Considerant believed that as early as the end of the eighteenth century it was feasible in France to project a plan of social reform which would by degrees win over all Frenchmen, irrespective of title, rank or estate. The whole trouble was that no one had devised such a plan. That such plans could be invented followed from 527 the fact that their appearance depended on chance. Indeed, Fourier wrote a whole dissertation on this theme, in which he related how chance had led him to discover the "calculus of attraction" (calcul de 1’attraction). He said that, like Newton, he arrived at h’is brilliant discovery thanks to an apple he ate in a Paris restaurant. Subsequently he even remarked that "there were four famous apples, two of them noted for the trouble they caused (Adam’s apple and the apple of Paris), and the other two for having enriched science”. Fourier went so far as to say that these four famous apples were worthy of a special page in the history of human thought.  [527•*  His artless gratitude to the apple is a good illustration of the fact that Fourier had no idea of man”s knowledge developing in conformity to law. He was convinced that discoveries depend entirely on “chance”. It did not even occur to him that in the history of human thought the action of “chance” itself may be in causal dependence on a course of events in conformity to law. The Utopian socialists not only did not recognise that the course of events determines the progress of ideas; on the contrary, they believed that the development of ideas is the cardinal cause of the historical development of mankind. This was a purely idealist view, borrowed by them from the French Enlighteners of the eighteenth century, who stubbornly maintained that opinion governs the world (c’est 1’ opinion, qui gouverne le monde). Reading the profound utterances of Saint-Simon on the role of the class struggle in the internal history of French society, one might think that he was a man who had completely abandoned the standpoint of historical idealism. In fact, he kept to that standpoint firmly to the end of his days. It may be said that he carried the idealist view of history to the extreme. Not only did he consider the development of ideas as the ultimate cause of the development of social relations, but among ideas he attributed the most important place to scientific ideas—the "scientific system of the world"—from which flowed religious ideas which, in turn, determined man’s moral concepts. At the first glance, it is not easy to understand how Saint-Simon squared his extreme historical idealism with the idea we know he had that the Jaw on property is the basic law of society. But the fact is that, even though Saint-Simon believed that property relations are at the root of every given social system, he nevertheless regarded them as having been brought into being by human sentiment and opinion. Thus to him, just as to the eighteenth-century Enlighteners, the world was governed, in the final analysis, by “opinion”. This idealist outlook was transmitted in its entirety to his pupils. The very same outlook is met with among other 528 utopian socialists. We have already seen how little Fourier was able to link the course of development of human thought with the course of development of human life. His most outstanding pupil, Considerant, wrote: "Ideas are the mothers of facts, and today’s facts are the children of yesterday’s ideas."  [528•*  Considerant did not ask himself where yesterday’s ideas came from. Neither did any of the other Utopian socialists. When they were faced with the question of how the ideas of today—say, the ideas of the SaintSimonist or the Fourierist school—would become the facts of tomorrow, they—again like the eighteenth-century Enlighteners— confined themselves to pointing to the unconquerable force of truth. In upholding this viewpoint, it was natural for them to reject the class struggle and politics as a weapon of that struggle, for once revealed the truth must be equally accessible to all social classes. More than that. The people of the upper classes, having more leisure and a certain education, are more able to assimilate truth. This makes it perfectly clear that the tactics of the Utopian socialists were closely bound up with their historical idealism. I should add here that their political intrigues were also not unconnected with this idealism. Take the example of Fourier. If he did discover the truth by chance, thanks to a chance apple, then any kind of chance circumstance could promote its dissemination. Therefore it is equally useful to knock at all doors, to try to influence all and sundry, and, probably, even in particular those who have much money or much power. And so Fourier obstinately tried to bring influence to bear on the mighty of this world, though of course quite without success.

p While describing their opponents’ systems as Utopian, the socialists of the period under review with complete conviction referred to their own systems as scientific.  [528•**  What did they take as a scientific criterion? Whether the given system corresponded to "the nature of man". But to take as term of reference human nature, that is to say, the nature of man generally, taken independently of particular social relationships, is to abandon the ground of historical reality and to rely on an abstract conception: and this road leads directly to utopia. The more often these writers appeal to human nature, while accusing their opponents of utopianism, the more clearly is revealed the Utopian character of their own theories.

p In taking their conception of human nature as the criterion of scientific construction, the Utopian socialists naturally deemed it possible to devise a perfect social system: the perfect social system being exactly that which conformed fully to the particular reformer’s conception of human nature. This was one of the 529 motives behind the heated arguments that occurred among the Utopian socialists, for example, on the principle of the distribution of products in the future society. They lost sight of the point that the mode of distribution would certainly change with the growth of society’s productive forces.

p Thus, the Utopian is one who endeavours to construct a perfect social system on the basis of some abstract principle. All socialists in the period we are discussing come under this definition. So there is no cause to wonder that we now call them Utopians without in any way being inspired by ill-will towards them. From the viewpoint of science, utopianism is but a phase in the development of socialist thought. This phase came to an end only when the advanced societies of the civilised world had reached a certain level of economic development. Social being is not determined by consciousness, consciousness is determined by social being. -

p We have seen that this ultimate truth remained beyond the grasp of the Utopian socialists. They were convinced that social being was conditioned by “opinion”. Only by taking account of this shall we be able to comprehend how, for example, Saint-Simon could arrive at his “religion”.

p He says that religious ideas flow from the scientific system of the world. It follows that with the change of this system religious ideas must also change. But since the system has changed very much in comparison with what it was in the Middle Ages, the time has now arrived for the emergence of new religious ideas. With this in mind, Saint-Simon invented a "new Christianity". It would be easy to show that he himself was a confirmed unbeliever. So the question arises: why did he create a new religion? The answer to this perplexing question is that Saint-Simon regarded religion from the standpoint of its usefulness: religious ideas determine moral concepts, consequently, whoever wishes to influence the moral conduct of his contemporaries must turn to religion. That is what Saint-Simon did. If my explanation seems improbable to the reader, I would remind him that Saint-Simon looked on this question too through the eyes of the eighteenth century: that is to say, he believed that religions are instituted by wise " legislators" in the interests of social well-being.  [529•* 

p Approximately the same considerations were probably also behind the work of Cabet, Le vrai Christianisme suivant JesusChrist.  [529•**  In inventing his "true Christianity”, Cabet desired to imitate the wise legislators of older days, as the eighteenthcentury philosophers imagined them.

p By saying this, I do not want to assert that all the socialist writers we are interested in here shared the views of the eighteenth century on religion. That would be an unwarranted exaggeration. Not all of them had the same attitude to religion as Saint-Simon and Cabet. First of all, the Romantic reaction against the philosophical ideas of the eighteenth century, which was widespread among French intellectuals, also had its influence among the socialists of the 1830s and 1840s, that is to say, socialists, so to speak, of "the second generation”, and significantly weakened the influence on them of the anti-religious ideas inherited from the philosophy of the Enlightenment. Saint-Simon’s own pupils felt the attraction of the new religion invented by their teacher, not with their heads but with their hearts; with the result that their meetings were sometimes conducted in a spirit of real religious ecstasy. We must remember, too, that when socialism acquired great influence among the then French intelligentsia, it attracted even such people as had never at any time or in any way been subjected to the influence of eighteenth-century philosophy. The most outstanding among these was undoubtedly Jean Lamennais.  [530•* ^^247^^ It was not by chance that George Sand, in her Histoire de ma vie, portrayed Lamennais in such vivid and fascinating colours. He was really a very remarkable man. In him were combined the powerful religious eloquence of the ancient Jewish prophets, the temperament of a revolutionary and a warm sympathy for the people in its miseries. After reading his Paroles d’un croyant (1834) Chateaubriand said: "This priest wants tobuild a revolutionary club in his belfry.” Very likely he did. But while setting about the building of a "revolutionary club”, Lamennais still remained a Catholic priest. Even after he broke with the Church, his ideas did not throw off the yoke of old theological customs; and just because of this his religious views and sentiments cannot be considered as typical of French socialism of those days. The same might well be said of Philippe Buchez,  [530•**  who, after a temporary infatuation with socialism in his youth, soon returned to Catholicism.

“The religious seekings" of the French Utopian socialists of the "second generation" can be characterised only by religions such as those of the Saint-Simonists (but, I repeat, not Saint-Simon), Pierre Leroux, etc. The extent to which these religions were connected with the Romantic reaction against the Enlightenment philosophy of the eighteenth century iriay be seen, by the way, in the fact that many Saint-Simonists read with enthusiasm the works of Joseph de Maistre and other writers of that trend. This 531 important circumstance shows that the romantic reaction affected French Utopian socialism at a time wlienjit itself still had absolutely nothing in common with any kind of aspiration to freedom. Consequently, we are entitled to compare the "religious seekings" of the socialists of that day with their rejection of the class struggle and their endeavours to secure social peace at any price. All this: the “seekings” for a religion, the aversion for the class struggle, and the love of peace which they elevated into a dogma, were nothing else but the result of the disappointment and weariness that followed "the catastrophe of 1793”. In the eyes of the Utopian socialists, the terrifying year of revolutionary struggle was the most convincing evidence in favour of their belief that the class struggle in general was utterly futile. Indeed, some of them said that the futility of the class struggle was best demonstrated by the example of 1793.  [531•*  Being unsympathetic to the revolutionaries of the eighteenth century, they began to pay careful attention to what was said and written by the enemies of the revolution. And though the theoreticians of reaction did not succeed in winning them over, although they continued in part the theoretical work of the eighteenth century, and in part took their own separate and, in a sense, new road, nevertheless the reaction left noticeable traces in their views. If this is not kept in mind, some important aspects of French Utopian socialism will remain incomprehensible. Among these are its "religious seekings" in the form they took in the 1830s and 1840s.