In view of the fact that so many of our American pacifists have glorified the Bolsheviki, it may be well to remind them, if they have forgotten, or to inform them, if they do not know it, that their admiration is by no means reciprocated. Both Lenine and Trotzky have spoken and written in terms of utter disdain of pacifist movements in general and of the pacifists of England and America in particular. They have insisted that, _in present society_, disarmament is really a reactionary proposal. The inclusion in the Const.i.tution, which they have forced upon Russia by armed might, of _permanent universal compulsory military service_ is not by accident. They believe that only when all nations have become Socialist nations will it be a proper policy for Socialists to favor disarmament. It would be interesting to know how our American admirers and defenders of Bolshevism, who are all anti-conscriptionists and ultra-pacifists, so far as can be discovered, reconcile their position with that of the Bolsheviki who base their state, not as a temporary expedient, _but as a matter of principle_, upon universal, compulsory military service! What, one wonders, do these American Bolsheviki worshipers think of the teaching of these paragraphs from an article by Lenine?[89]
Disarmament is a Socialistic ideal. In Socialist society there will be no more wars, which means that disarmament will have been realized. But he is not a Socialist who expects the realization of Socialism _without_ the social revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat. Dictatorship is a government power, depending directly upon force, and, in the twentieth century, force means, not fists and clubs, but armies. To insert "disarmament" into our program is equivalent to saying, we are opposed to the use of arms. But such a statement would contain not a grain of Marxism, any more than would the equivalent statement, we are opposed to the use of force.
_A suppressed cla.s.s which has no desire to learn the use of arms, and to bear arms, deserves nothing else than to be treated as slaves_. We cannot, unless we wish to transform ourselves into mere bourgeois pacifists, forget that we are living in a society based on cla.s.ses, and that there is no escape from such a society, except by the cla.s.s struggle and the overthrow of the power of the ruling cla.s.s.
In every cla.s.s society, whether it be based on slavery, serfdom, or, as at the present moment, on wage-labor, the cla.s.s of the oppressors is an armed cla.s.s. Not only the standing army of the present day, but also the present-day popular militia--even in the most democratic bourgeois republics, as in Switzerland--means an armament of the bourgeoisie against the proletariat....
How can you, in the face of this fact, ask the revolutionary Social Democracy to set up the "demand" of "disarmament"? _To ask this is to renounce completely the standpoint of the cla.s.s struggle, to give up the very thought of revolution_. Our watchword must be: to arm the proletariat so that it may defeat, expropriate, and disarm the bourgeoisie. This is the only possible policy of the revolutionary cla.s.s, a policy arising directly from the _actual evolution_ of capitalistic militarism, in fact, dictated by the evolution. Only after having disarmed the bourgeoisie can the proletariat, without betraying its historic mission, cast all weapons to the sc.r.a.p-heap; and there is no doubt that the proletariat will do this, but only then, and not by any possibility before then.
How is it possible for our extreme pacifists, with their relentless opposition to military force in all its forms to conscription, to universal military service, to armaments of all kinds, even for defensive purposes, and to voluntarily enlisted armies even, to embrace Bolshevism with enthusiasm, resting as it does upon the basis of the philosophy so frankly stated by Lenine, is a question for which no answer seems wholly adequate.
Of course, what Lenine advocates is cla.s.s armament within the nation, for civil war--the war of the cla.s.ses. But he is not opposed to national armaments, as such, nor willing to support disarmament as a national policy _until the time comes when an entirely socialized humanity finds itself freed from the necessity of arming against anybody_. There is probably not a militarist in America to-day who, however bitterly opposed to disarmament as a present policy, would not agree that if, in some future time, mankind reaches the happy condition of universal Socialism, disarmament will then become practicable and logical. It would not be difficult for General Wood to subscribe to that doctrine, I think. It would not have been difficult for Mr. Roosevelt to subscribe to it.
Not only is Lenine willing to support national armaments, and even to fight for the defense of national rights, whenever an attack on these is also an attack on proletarian rights--which he believes to be the case in the continued war against Germany, he goes much farther than this _and provides a theoretical justification for a Socialist policy of pa.s.sive acceptance of ever-increasing militarism_. He draws a strangely forced parallel between the Socialist att.i.tude toward the trusts and the att.i.tude which ought to be taken toward armaments. We know, he argues, that trusts bring great evils.
Against the evils we struggle, but how? Not by trying to do away with the trusts, for we regard the trusts as steps in progress. We must go onward, through the trust system to Socialism. In a similar way we should not deplore "the militarization of the populations." If the bourgeoisie militarizes all the men, and all the boys, nay, even all the women, why--so much the better! "Never will the women of an oppressed cla.s.s that is really revolutionary be content" to demand disarmament. On the contrary, they will encourage their sons to bear the arms and "learn well the business of war."
Of course, this knowledge they will use, "not in order that they may shoot at their brothers, the workers of other countries, as they are doing in the present war ... but in order that they may struggle against the bourgeoisie in their own country, in order that they may put an end to exploitation, poverty, and war, not by the path of good-natured wishes, but by the path of victory over the bourgeoisie and of disarmament of the bourgeoisie."[90]
Universally the working cla.s.s has taken a position the very opposite of this. Universally we find the organized working cla.s.s favoring disarmament, peace agreements, and covenants in general opposing extensions of what Lenine describes as "the militarization of populations."
For this universality of att.i.tude and action there can only be one adequate explanation--namely, the instinctive cla.s.s consciousness of the workers.
But, according to Lenine, this instinctive cla.s.s consciousness is all wrong; somehow or other it expresses itself in a "bourgeois" policy. The workers ought to welcome the efforts of the ruling cla.s.s to militarize and train in the arts of war not only the men of the nations, but the boys and even the women as well. Some day, if this course be followed, there will be two great armed cla.s.ses in every nation and between these will occur the decisive war which shall establish the supremacy of the most numerous and powerful cla.s.s. Socialism is thus to be won, not by the conquests of reason and of conscience, but by brute force.
Obviously, there is no point of sympathy between this brutal and arrogant gospel of force and the striving of modern democracy for the peaceful organization of the world, for disarmament, a league of nations, and, in general, the supplanting of force of arms by the force of reason and morality. There is a Prussian quality in Lenine"s philosophy. He is the Treitschke of social revolt, brutal, relentless, and unscrupulous, glorying in might, which is, for him, the only right. And that is what characterizes the whole Bolshevik movement: it is the infusion into the cla.s.s strife and struggles of the world the same brutality and the same faith that might is right which made Prussian militarism the menace it was to civilization.
And just as the world of civilized mankind recognized Prussian militarism as its deadly enemy, to be overcome at all costs, so, too, Bolshevism must be overcome. And that can best be done, not by attempting to drown it in blood, but by courageously and consistently setting ourselves to the task of removing the social oppression, the poverty, and the servitude which produce the desperation of soul that drives men to Bolshevism. The remedy for Bolshevism is a sane and far-reaching program of constructive social democracy.
POSTSCRIPTUM: A PERSONAL STATEMENT
This book is the fulfilment of a promise to a friend. Soon after my return from Europe, in November, I spent part of a day in New York discussing Bolshevism with two friends. One of these is a Russian Socialist, who has lived many years in America, a citizen of the United States, and a man whose erudition and fidelity to the working-cla.s.s movement during many years have long commanded my admiration and reverence. The other friend is a native American, also a Socialist. A sincere Christian, he has identified his faith in the religion of Jesus and his faith in democratic Socialism.
The two are not conflicting forces, or even separate ones, but merely different and complementary aspects of the same faith. He is a man who is universally loved and honored for his n.o.bility of character and his generous idealism. While in Europe I had spent much time consulting with Russian friends in Paris, Rome, and other cities, and had collected a considerable amount of authentic material relating to Bolshevism and the Bolsheviki. I had not the slightest intention of using this material to make a book; in fact, my plans contemplated a very different employment of my time. But, in the course of the discussion, my American Socialist friend asked me to "jot down" for him some of the things I had said, and, especially, to write, in a letter, what I believed to be the psychology of Bolshevism. This, in an unguarded moment, I undertook to do.
When I set out, a few days later, to redeem my promise, I found that, in order to make things intelligible, it was absolutely necessary to explain the historical backgrounds of the Russian revolutionary movement, to describe the point of view of various persons and groups with some detail, and to quote quite extensively from the doc.u.mentary material I had gathered. Naturally, the limits of a letter were quickly outgrown and I found that my response to my friend"s innocent request approached the length of a small volume. Even so, it was quite unsatisfactory. It left many things unexplained and much of my own thought obscure. I decided then to rewrite the whole thing and make a book of it, thus making available for what I hope will be a large number of readers what I had at first intended only for a dear friend.
I am very conscious of the imperfections of the book as it stands. It has been written under conditions far from favorable, crowded into a very busy life. My keenest critics will, I am sure, be less conscious of its defects than I am. It is, however, an earnest contribution to a very important discussion, and, I venture to hope, with all its demerits, a useful one. If it aids a single person to a clearer comprehension of the inherent wrongfulness of the Bolshevist philosophy and method, I shall be rewarded.
_So here, my dear Will, is the fulfilment of my promise._
APPENDICES
I. AN APPEAL TO THE PROLETARIAT BY THE PETROGRAD WORKMEN"S AND SOLDIERS" COUNCIL
II. HOW THE RUSSIAN PEASANTS FOUGHT FOR A CONSt.i.tUENT a.s.sEMBLY--A REPORT TO THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST BUREAU
III. FORMER SOCIALIST PREMIER OF FINLAND ON BOLSHEVISM
APPENDIX I
AN APPEAL TO THE PROLETARIAT BY THE PETROGRAD WORKMEN"S AND SOLDIERS"
COUNCIL
COMRADES:
_Proletarians and Working-people of all Countries_:
We, Russian workers and soldiers, united in the Petrograd Workmen"s and Soldiers" Delegate Council, send you our warmest greetings and the news of great events. The democracy of Russia has overthrown the century-old despotism of the Czars and enters your ranks as a rightful member and as a powerful force in the battle for our common liberation. Our victory is a great victory for the freedom and democracy of the world. The princ.i.p.al supporter of reaction in the world, the "gendarme of Europe," no longer exists. May the earth over his grave become a heavy stone! Long live liberty, long live the international solidarity of the proletariat and its battle for the final victory!
Our cause is not yet entirely won. Not all the shadows of the old regime have been scattered and not a few enemies are gathering their forces together against the Russian Revolution. Nevertheless, our conquests are great. The peoples of Russia will express their will in the Const.i.tutional convention which is to be called within a short time upon the basis of universal, equal, direct, and secret suffrage. And now it may already be said with certainty in advance that the democratic republic will triumph in Russia. The Russian people is in possession of complete political liberty.
Now it can say an authoritative word about the internal self-government of the country and about its foreign policy. And in addressing ourselves to all the peoples who are being destroyed and ruined in this terrible war, we declare that the time has come in which the decisive struggle against the attempts at conquest by the governments of all the nations must be begun.
The time has come in which the peoples must take the matter of deciding the questions of war and peace into their own hands.
Conscious of its own revolutionary strength, the democracy of Russia declares that it will fight with all means against the policy of conquest of its ruling cla.s.ses, and it summons the peoples of Europe to united, decisive action for peace. We appeal to our brothers, to the German-Austrian coalition, and above all to the German proletariat. The first day of the war you were made to believe that in raising your weapons against absolutist Russia you were defending European civilization against Asiatic despotism. In this many of you found the justification of the support that was accorded to the war. Now also this justification has vanished. Democratic Russia cannot menace freedom and civilization.
We shall firmly defend our own liberty against all reactionary threats, whether they come from without or within. The Russian Revolution will not retreat before the bayonets of conquerors, and it will not allow itself to be trampled to pieces by outside military force. We call upon you to throw off the yoke of your absolutist regime, as the Russian people has shaken off the autocracy of the Czars. Refuse to serve as the tools of conquest and power in the hands of the kings, Junkers, and bankers, and we shall, with common efforts, put an end to the fearful butchery that dishonors humanity and darkens the great days of the birth of Russian liberty.
Working-men of all countries! In fraternally stretching out our hands to you across the mountains of our brothers" bodies, across the sea of innocent blood and tears, across the smoking ruins of cities and villages, across the destroyed gifts of civilization, we summon you to the work of renewing and solidifying international unity. In that lies the guaranty of our future triumph and of the complete liberation of humanity.
Working-men of all countries, unite!
TCHCHEIDZE, _the President_.
PETROGRAD, _April, 1917_.
APPENDIX II
HOW THE RUSSIAN PEASANTS FOUGHT FOR A CONSt.i.tUENT a.s.sEMBLY[91]
A report to the International Socialist Bureau by Inna Rakitnikov, Vice-President of the Executive Committee of the Soviet of Delegates, placing themselves upon the grounds of the defense of the Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly.
With a letter-preface by the citizen, E. Roubanovitch, member of the International Socialist Bureau.
_To the Executive Committee of the International Socialist Bureau_:
DEAR COMRADES,--The citizen Inna Rakitnikov has lately come from Petrograd to Paris for personal reasons that are peculiarly tragic. At the time of her departure the Executive Committee of the Second Soviet of Peasant Delegates of All-Russia, of which she is one of the vice-presidents, requested her to make to the International Socialist Bureau a detailed report of the fights that this organization had to make against the Bolsheviki in order to realize the convocation of the Const.i.tuent a.s.sembly.