When we get acquainted with the City of Harmony and add to this Péguy's statement that "the social revolution will be moral or there will be no revolution at all," [29] we see how romantic his idea of socialism was. The romantic maximalism of the young Péguy forced him to perceive socialism as a City of Harmony with the priority of the moral principle. This is an extremely important point for Péguy's life and literary conception – the main thing that distinguished Péguy, Baudouin and their circle from other socialists, for example, Jaurès. Not without the influence of Bergson, Péguy asserted that true revolution "boils down mainly to a deeper penetration into the inexhaustible reserves of inner life, so that the greatest men of revolutionary action are those who possess a supremely rich inner life, they are dreamers and contemplatives." [30]

These ideas were very far from the true state of affairs. This is how Rolland describes the congress of the Socialist Party in 1900: "If the enemy camp interrupted the speaker's speech, then the adherents of the latter raised a terrible noise to restore silence; Then a torrent of colorless abuse flooded the entire hall. All day long, from nine in the morning to six in the evening, the hall was like a kennel full of growling dogs: bloodshot faces, threatening fists, outstretched hands, just like those of the "Horatii" and "Curiatii"... to the right and to the left, the corrupt charlatans of the Socialist Party, such as the famous Edward, the director of the Matin newspaper, took off their frock coats to look like workers." [31] Yes, it was least of all like a friendly assembly of like-minded people, "dreamers and contemplatives." It was politics. For Péguy, the revolution was never a political coup. In his mind, it was not a break with tradition; it was a rebirth, an expression of the vitality of tradition, "a path that leads to Christ and not to death." [32] From this it is clear what bitter disappointments Péguy must have experienced when confronted with real historical events, which, if not completely destroyed, at least significantly shook the very foundations of his socialism, a moral, not a political socialism.

The first and deepest disappointment befell Péguy in connection with the events connected with the Dreyfus affair, which became the most important stage of his life.

Péguy was finishing his studies at the École Normale when Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish officer of the French General Staff, was arrested on charges of spying for Germany. The reason for the accusation was an inventory of documents (the so-called "bordereau") about the state of the French artillery, found by a maid, an agent of the French counterintelligence, in the German General Staff and transferred to the French counterintelligence. There was no clear evidence that these documents were drawn up by Dreyfus. Colonel Henri testified against him, but a comparison of the handwriting showed nothing. Nevertheless, Dreyfus was demoted, and in 1894 he was sentenced by a military court to life imprisonment on Devil's Island (Guiana). In 1896, the head of the French counter-intelligence, Colonel Piccard, learned that Major Esterhazy, an officer of the French General Staff, was in constant contact with the officers of the German General Staff, and established his guilt. Dreyfus's brother, Mathieu, also sent a letter to the military authorities arguing for Esterhazy's guilt. In the Chamber of Deputies, inquiries were made by the government, but Esterhazy, who enjoyed the support of the generals, was fully acquitted by the military court, and Colonel Piccard, who continued to fight for the acquittal of Dreyfus, was persecuted and dismissed from military service in 1898. On January 13, 1898, Émile Zola published an open letter to the President of the Republic in the republican-socialist newspaper Aurore - the famous "I accuse". The letter and the subsequent trial of Zola himself were like an exploding bomb. A broad wave of protest arose from the progressive public, demanding a review of the case. France was divided into Dreyfusards and Anti-Dreyfusards. Finally, in 1898, after the flight and confession of Esterhazy and the proof of the forgery fabricated by Colonel Henri, a review of the case becomes inevitable. Dreyfus was asked to file a petition for pardon. In the autumn of 1899, a military court met again in Rennes, which issued a pardon order, which, of course, could not satisfy the Dreyfusards. Only on July 12, 1906, the Court of Cassation issued a verdict on the erroneous conviction of Dreyfus. He was restored in his rights, and he again became an officer of the French army.

The fact of Dreyfus's unjust conviction was the key point around which a major political crisis broke out in France, which put the country on the verge of civil war. The very fact that Dreyfus was condemned at the direct request of monarchists, clerics and anti-Semites made the unfolding struggle for a review of his case a major political event, since under the slogan of "reconsideration" a movement began to unfold directed not only against the reactionary military clique, but also hostile to the whole state. Very soon, after several unsuccessful attempts at an armed coup on the part of the monarchists, the ruling circles tried to reduce the whole affair to a particular question of the fate of Dreyfus himself and, in order to finally eliminate the conflict, agreed not only to pardon Dreyfus, but also to launch a noisy campaign against the Catholic Church.

A passionate Dreyfusard, Péguy participated in the unfolding struggle with fury and passion. He was inspired by the opportunity to fight for justice, to take part in the "battle of the century" in the same formation with his like-minded people. The feeling of friendship and like-mindedness was extremely important for Péguy. Friendship was one of the ties with the world, a path that inevitably had to merge with many others and lead to a common path. The joint struggle filled his life not only with meaning, but with a sense of high purpose. However, as it turned out later, this feeling was not shared by all his friends. And when the government reduced the broad protest movement to disputes in private litigation, it became clear that there was no united front of like-minded people, since their goals, in fact, were different. Péguy was fighting for justice and for the City of Harmony, and his Socialist friends saw a very different goal: they were already dividing ministerial portfolios. This situation was perfectly understood and described by A. V. Lunacharsky: "All the Pegists were pure democratic socialists at that time. But they recoiled in horror from their victorious friends when they saw that most of these comrades-in-arms had fought under the banner of truth only to repel the enemy from the public pie and join him with even more unbridled insolence and with a still more greedy appetite before the eyes of the hungry masses." [33] Péguy, with his characteristic uncompromising attitude, turned his back on his former teachers and idols, including his friend and ideological mentor Lucien Herr, and even Jean Jaurès, whom he admired.

This first encounter of Péguy with politics determined his future position as a man standing outside factions and parties. His accusations against politics will sound somewhat unusual in the future, but comprehensive, because the writer believes that politics is separated from mysticism, the creeping empiricism of politics does not allow it to raise its eyes to heaven, it is devoid of a transcendental principle, politics inevitably leads to a struggle for power. Curiously, Péguy's position can be explained from the point of view of his Russian contemporary, the philosopher of the older generation, Vl. Solovyov.

"Socialism... does not want to be only a historical force... he wants to be the supreme moral force, he has a claim to the realization of unconditional truth in the sphere of social relations...

Socialism sometimes makes a claim to realize Christian morality.In this regard, someone pronounced a certain witticism that between Christianity and socialism in this respect there is only this small difference, that Christianity demands to give up one's own, socialism demands to take what is not theirs." [34]

Пеги жил и мыслил в кругу людей своего времени. Скорее всего он не был знаком с философией Соловьева. Но ему могло быть близко такое понимание морально-этических основ социализма, и, следовательно, он не мог примириться с тем, что делали социалисты в реальности:

«Большинство не могло устоять против соблазна особого рода — оказывать огромное, интенсивное, неодолимое, необоримое влияние на людей, это опьяняло всех… Все, и среди них Жорес, вновь окунулись в привычную политическую деятельность. Они толкнули на этот путь французский социализм», — писал Р. Роллан. [35]

Остановимся подробнее на взаимоотношениях Пеги и Жореса, ибо история их конфликта и разрыва — это одна из самых трагических и мучительных, с нашей точки зрения, страниц в жизни Пеги, для которого со времени его юношеского увлечения социализмом Жорес был кумиром, а позднее стал старшим другом. Быть может, не менее болезненным был их разрыв и для Жореса, который очень ценил эту дружбу. В статье от 8.01.1900 года в Петит Репюблик он с большой добротой, теплом и без всякого намека на уязвленное самолюбие раскрыл разногласия, которые, как он хорошо понимал, все дальше и дальше удаляли от него Пеги. «Я не думаю, — писал он, — несмотря на сокровища таланта и страстной искренности, которые Пеги тратит на защиту своих убеждений… что нам будет достаточно в качестве некоего моралистского анархизма вызвать в индивидуальном сознании, через индивидуальное сознание тождество правды и справедливости. Нужно еще выковать предназначенные для пролетариата инструменты власти и правосудия. Конечно, может оказаться, что первый инструмент, вышедший из кузницы, будет примитивным и неумелым, зачастую не подчиняющимся нашей воле. Но знаете ли Вы сейчас что-либо лучше?». [36] Однако вспомним о бескомпромиссности Пеги, он был непреклонен. Его даже раздражали корректность и мягкость Жореса. «В неискренности этой учтивости мы не знаем, где начинается и где кончается правда», — писал он в 1901 году. [37] Еще в 1900 году, описывая историческую дуэль Геда и Жореса, Пеги отдал должное высоте мысли Жореса, его честности и доброте. Он посвятил Жоресу эссе на 50 страницах, полное восхищения и симпатии. Но оно осталось незаконченным, Пеги остановился на полуслове. Он вдруг понял, что начатый «…портрет перестает быть правдивым… Жорес уже более не моралист, каким был в начале… теперь он придает капитальное значение борьбе классов…». [38]

На самом деле корни конфликта между Пеги и Жоресом лежат в столкновении социализма, отличающегося унитарным мышлением революционного анархизма, с моральным, социальным и даже научным мистицизмом (здесь сказалось и влияние Бергсона) Пеги. Конфликт и полемика длились долго, последней каплей для Пеги стало намерение Жореса вновь ворошить дело Дрейфуса, которое для Пеги было «святая святых». Он понимал, что дело Дрейфуса не доведено до конца и в принципе не возражал против новой борьбы. Но он не допускал, чтобы Жорес взялся за это руками политика.

Разрыв с социалистами, среди которых у Пеги было много друзей, оказался не только мучительным с точки зрения нравственной, но и чрезвычайно затруднительным в материальном смысле. Двери Ревю Сосиалист оказались закрытыми для него. Он очутился в изоляции, его необычайно деятельная натура не находила себе применения. С 1897 года Пеги не дает покоя мысль о создании собственного социалистического издательства и книжной лавки при нем. Будучи стипендиатом университета, он не имел права приобретать недвижимость. На помощь приходит некий Жорж Беллэ, мелкий коммерсант, приятель одного из друзей Пеги. Его именем Пеги и воспользуется, купив на средства жены небольшую книжную лавку на углу улиц Кижас и Виктор-Кузен напротив Сорбонны. На ее же средства и с ее согласия было образовано небольшое издательство. О лавке Беллэ стоит сказать особо. Для ее открытия Пеги выбрал символическую дату — 1 мая 1898 года, и очень скоро современники стали называть ее бастионом дрейфусаров. Лавка походила на клуб, она была местом сбора дрейфусаров, друзей Пеги. Сюда приходили поспорить и обсудить политические новости. Здесь всегда было множество посетителей, но мало клиентов. Что касается издательства, то Пеги решил публиковать только те произведения, которые имели высокие этические достоинства.