Morris wanted comradeship; comradeship where no real comradeship could exist; and for this reason he was not an ideal Socialist.
Later, Morris was torn between the charlatan parliamentary element, which did not want action, and the Anarchist element, which is supposed to be very revolutionary and extreme, but which is lacking in the real genius of revolution as a civil factor. This Anarchist element preacehd violence and bombs and dynamite. IT attracted to its cause police spies. But after all, you do not change imagination and give understanding to people by throwing bombs. We all bring our contribution of guild and we all bring our contribution of commonsense and our contribution of slavery to this intolerable system of society, which makes slaves of us all.
The Anarchist movement meant really respecting nothing, not even its own principles. After all, man is a social problem and his integrity matters to himself, but there is an integrity which balances society and the real society of the future. Morris would not approach the evil thing. He saw that mere violence would lead nowhere. He knew, if he could get the consciousness of the people directed towards a sense of the poetry and the drauma of revolution; if he could get them to understand the poetryt of every home in Europe; if he could get their imagination stimulated until they saw all the past destiny of man, and the present sufferings of the slaves in every attic and in every cellar of slmland, there would arise a people against whose liverties no one would dare conspire, a people who would be no more a mere prostitute civilization. Morris thought that if he could take the people selling their labour- power and show them teh light, slowly let drip into their lives the music of the water of understanding, that would be the beginning of a new education.
Morris went back to the parliamentary party, much to the delight of politician and war-monger, H.M. Hyndman. Rejoicing at this devolution in his "Further Reminiscences," published in 1913, Hyndman says that in 1889 there was-
"An active rivalry, not to say antagonism, between the S.D.F. and the Socialist League similar to that which existed in France between the Marxists and the Possiblists."
Hyndman's suggestion is that the S.D.F. was Marxist and revolutionary, and the Socialist League Possiblist and Reformist. But Hyndman knew, when he penned this suggestion, that the Socialist league was not organized to be less advanced, but to be more advanced than the S.D.F. It was essentially a propagandist organization. To compare Morris' Commonweal with Hyndman's Justice would be to clinch this truism.
I do not pretend to draw any great distinction between the Marxists and the Possibilists, because the Marxists do not ground themselves on the philosophy of Marx, but on his intrigues and