Just read an essay by Eric Hobsbawm about the Fabian socialists. It made some pretty interesting points. In the first place, they weren't actually socialists because they believed in private property (according to EJH, although I find that a bit hard to believe). Secondly, they weren't actually very radical. They supported both the British imperial project and war (in the case of WWI). They saw themselves as a sort of counter/alternative to the Marxism that was popular on the British labour left of the time.
The ideas Hobsbawm cites don't actually sound that unreasonable:
1) "a certain conception of what constitutes a becoming livelihood in a given class of society and an income representing that standard."
2) "a life of fascinating interest to the faculty and in the consciousness of service rendered, rather than in accumulating riches for themselves and their descendents."
3) Most famously, the progressive and gradual elimination of poverty in society through education.
Of course, I'm not sure Hobsbawm, who makes the Fabians sound like middle-class moderates, isn't overstating his case to cast aspersions on anti-Marxists. However, since Marxism failed so dramatically and horribly, maybe the Fabians are worth re-reading.