The causes which produced Bolshevism are: first, the accumulation of all the conditions of the historic past of the Russian people; second, their psychic character and their habits; third, the conditions of the present time; and fourth, the general situation of the world—that is to say, the war.

We also note the vague and hesitating policy of the Provisional Government; the lack of political education among the people, ready to follow him who promises the most; small development of civic sentiment; the want of any attachment whatever to the state—that of the Romanov having never given anything to the people and having taken all from them. Czarism took from the miserable peasant his last penny under form of taxes; it took his children from him for war; for the least act of disobedience to authority he was whipped. He wallowed in misery and in ignorance, deprived of every right, human or legal. How could he, this wretched and oppressed peasant develop civic sentiments, a consciousness of his personal dignity? On the other hand, we must take into account the immense weariness caused by the war and by the disorganization which it brought into the whole cycle of existence (to an incomparably greater degree than in western Europe). Such were the causes which had established a favorable scope for Bolshevik propaganda; to introduce their domination they knew how to make use of the shortcomings of the people and the defects of Russian life.

In fine, what is Bolshevism in its essence? It is an experiment, that is either criminal or that proceeds from a terrible thoughtlessness, tried, without their consent, on the living body of the Russian people. Thus some attempt to apply their theories, others wish to measure the height of their personal influence, while still others (and they are found in every movement) seek to profit by the circumstances.

Bolshevism is a phenomenon brought about by force; it is not a natural consequence of the progress of the Russian Revolution. Taken all in all, Bolshevism is not Socialism. The Bolshevist coup d'etat was accomplished contrary to the wish of the majority of the people, who were preparing for the Constituent Assembly.

It was accomplished with the help of armed force, and it is because of this that the Bolshevist regime holds out.

It has against it the whole conscious portion of the peasant and working population and all the Intellectuals.

It has crushed and trampled under foot the liberty that was won by the Russian people.

The Bolsheviki pretend to act in the name of the people. Why, then, have they dissolved the Constituent Assembly elected by the people?

They pretend to have the majority of the people with them. Why, then, this governmental terror that is being used in a manner more cruel even than in the time of Czarism?

They say that, to fight against the bourgeoisie, the use of violence is necessary. But their principal thrusts are directed not against the bourgeoisie, but against the Socialist parties that do not agree with them. And they dare give this caricature the name of Dictatorship of the Proletariat!

Socialism must necessarily be founded on democratic principles. If not, "it cuts off the branch of the tree on which it rests," according to the expression of Kautsky.

Socialism needs constructive elements. It does not limit itself to the destruction of ancient forms of existence; it creates new ones. But Bolshevism has only destructive elements. It does nothing but destroy, always destroy, with a blind hatred, a savage fanaticism.

What has it established? Its "decrees" are only verbal solutions without sense, skeletons of ideas, or simply a revolutionary phraseology containing nothing real (as for example the famous shibboleth, "neither peace nor war").

During the few months of its reign Bolshevism has succeeded in destroying many things; nearly everything that the effort of the Russian people had established. Life, disorganized almost to its foundations, has become almost impossible in Russia. The railroads do not function, or function only with great difficulty; the postal and telegraphic communications are interrupted in several places. The zemstvos—bases of the life of the country—are suppressed (they are "bourgeois" institutions); the schools and hospitals, whose existence is impossible without the zemstvos, are closed. The most complete chaos exists in the food-supply. The Intellectuals, who, in Russia, had suffered so much from the Czarist tyranny and oppression, are declared "enemies of the people" and compelled to lead a clandestine existence; they are dying of hunger. It is the Intellectuals and not the bourgeois (who are hiding) that suffer most from the Bolshevist regime.

The Soviets alone remain. But the Soviets are not only revolutionary organs, they are "guardians of the Revolution," but in no way legislative and administrative organs.

Bolshevism is an experiment tried on the Russian people. The people are going to pay dearly for it. At least let not this experiment be lost, on them, as well as on other peoples! Let the Socialists of western Europe be not unduly elated by words or by far-fetched judgments. Let them look the cruel reality in the face and examine facts to find out the truth.

A tyranny which is supported by bayonets is always repugnant, wherever it comes from, and under whatever name it may strut. It can have nothing in common with Socialism, which is not only a doctrine of economic necessity, but also a doctrine of superior justice and truth.

"All the societies or individuals adhering to the Internationale will know what must be the basis of their conduct toward all men: Truth, Justice, Morality, without Distinction of Color, Creed, or Nationality," said the statutes that were drawn up by the prime founders of our Internationale.

_The Executive Committee of the National Soviet of Peasant Delegates Placing themselves on the Grounds of the Defense of the Constituent Assembly, having had to examine, in its session of February 8, 1918, the violence committed by the Bolsheviki, and to pass in review the persecutions that this organization had to suffer from that party and from the government of the Commissaries of the People, decided to bring the violence committed by the Bolsheviki in the name of Socialism to the knowledge of the Socialists of western Europe and of the International Socialist Bureau through the citizen, E. Roubanovitch, representative of the Revolutionary Socialist party at the International Socialist Bureau and intrusted with International relations by the Executive Committee of the First Soviet of Peasants.

The Executive Committee demands the expulsion, from the Socialist family, of the Bolshevist leaders, as well as of those of the Revolutionary Socialists of the Left, who seized the power by force, held it by violence and compromised Socialism in the eyes of the popular masses.

Let our brothers of western Europe be judges between the Socialist peasants who rose in the defense of the Constituent Assembly and the Bolsheviki, who dispersed them by armed force, thus trampling under foot the will of the Russian people._

INNA RAKITNIKOV,

Vice-President of the Executive Committee of the Soviet of Peasant Delegates, who stand in Defense of the Constituent Assembly.

May 30, 1918.



APPENDIX III

FORMER SOCIALIST PREMIER OF FINLAND ON BOLSHEVISM

The following letter was addressed to Mr. Santeri Nuorteva, who, it will be remembered, was appointed Minister to America by the Revolutionary Government of Finland. The author of the letter, Oskar Tokoi, was the first Socialist Prime Minister in the world. He is a Socialist of long standing, who has always been identified with the radical section of the movement. Mr. Nuorteva, it should be added, is himself a strong supporter of the Bolsheviki, and is their accredited American representative.

ARCHANGEL, September 10, 1918.

SANTERI NUORTEVA,

Fitchburg, Mass.:

DEAR COMRADE,—I deem it my duty to appeal to you and to other comrades in America in order to be able to make clear to you the trend of events here.

The situation here has become particularly critical. We, the Finnish refugees, who, after the unfortunate revolution, had to flee from Finland to Russia, find ourselves to-day in a very tragic situation. A part of the former Red Guardists who fled here have joined the Red Army formed by the Russian Soviet Government; another part has formed itself as a special Finnish legion, allied with the army of the Allied countries; and a third part, which has gone as far as to Siberia, is prowling about there, diffused over many sections of the country, and there have been reports that a part of those Finns have joined the ranks of the Czecho-Slovaks. The Finnish masses, thus divided, may therefore at any time get into fighting each other, which indeed would be the greatest of all misfortunes. It is therefore necessary to take a clear position, and to induce all the Finns to support it, and we hope that you as well, over in America, will support it as much as is in your power.

During these my wanderings I have happened to traverse Russia from one end to another, and I have become deeply convinced that Russia is not able to rise from this state of chaos and confusion by her own strength and of her own accord. The magnificent economic revolution, which the Bolsheviki in Russia are trying now to bring about, is doomed in Russia to complete failure. The economic conditions in Russia have not even approximately reached a stage to make an economic revolution possible, and the low grade of education, as well as the unsteady character of the Russian people, makes it still more impossible.

It is true that magnificent theories and plans have been laid here, but their putting into practice is altogether impossible, principally because of the following reasons: The whole propertied class—which here in Russia, where small property ownership mainly prevails, is very numerous—is opposing and obstructing; technically trained people and specialists necessary in the industries are obstructing; local committees and sub-organs make all systematic action impossible, as they in their respective fields determine things quite autocratically and make everything unsuccessful which should be based on a strong, coherent, and in every respect minutely conceived system as a social production should be based. But even if all these, in themselves unsurmountable obstacles, could be made away with, there remains still the worst one—and that is the workers themselves.

It is already clear that in the face of such economic conditions the whole social order has been upset. Naturally only a small part of the people will remain backing such an order. The whole propertied class belongs to the opponents of the government, including the petty bourgeoisie, the craftsmen, the small merchants, the profiteers. The whole Intellectual class and a great part of the workers are also opposing the government. In comparison with the entire population only a small minority supports the government, and, what is worse to the supporters of the government, are rallying all the hooligans, robbers, and others to whom this period of confusion promises a good chance of individual action. It is also clear that such a regime cannot stay but with the help of a stern terror. But, on the other hand, the longer the terror continues the more disagreeable and hated it becomes. Even a great part of those who from the beginning could stay with the government and who still are sincere Social Democrats, having seen all this chaos, begin to step aside, or to ally themselves with those openly opposing the government. Naturally, as time goes by, there remains only the worst and the most demoralized element. Terror, arbitrary rule, and open brigandage become more and more usual, and the government is not able at all to prevent it. And the outcome is clearly to be foreseen—the unavoidable failure of all this magnificently planned system.

And what will be the outcome of that? My conviction is that as soon as possible we should turn toward the other road—the road of united action. I have seen, and I am convinced that the majority of the Russian people is fundamentally democratic and whole-heartedly detests a reinstitution of autocracy, and that therefore all such elements must, without delay, be made to unite. But it is also clear that at first they, even united, will not be able to bring about order in this country on their own accord. I do not believe that at this time there is in Russia any social force which would be able to organize the conditions in the country. For that reason, to my mind, we should, to begin with, frankly and honestly rely on the help of the Allied Powers. Help from Germany cannot be considered, as Germany, because of her own interests, is compelled to support the Bolshevik rule as long as possible, as Germany from the Bolshevik rule is pressing more and more political and economic advantages, to such an extent even that all of Russia is becoming practically a colony of Germany. Russia thus would serve to compensate Germany for the colonies lost in South Africa.

A question presents itself at once whether the Allied Powers are better. And it must be answered instantly that neither would they establish in Russia any Socialist society. Yet the democratic traditions of these countries are some surety that the social order established by them will be a democratic one. It is clear as day that the policy of the Allied Powers is also imperialistic, but the geographical and economic position of these countries is such that even their own interests demand that Russia should be able to develop somewhat freely. The problem has finally evolved into such a state of affairs where Russia must rely on the help either of the Allies or Germany; we must choose, as the saying goes, "between two evils," and, things being as badly mixed as they are, the lesser evil must be chosen frankly and openly. It does not seem possible to get anywhere by dodging the issue. Russia perhaps would have saved herself some time ago from this unfortunate situation if she had understood immediately after the February Revolution the necessity of a union between the more democratic elements. Bolshevism undoubtedly has brought Russia a big step toward her misfortune, from which she cannot extricate herself on her own accord.

Thus there exists no more any purely Socialist army, and all the fighting forces and all those who have taken to arms are fighting for the interests of the one or the other group of the Great Powers. The question therefore finally is only this—in the interests of which group one wants to fight. The revolutionary struggles in Russia and in Finland, to my mind, have clearly established that a Socialist society cannot be brought about by the force of arms and cannot be supported by the force of arms, but that a Socialist order must be founded on a conscious and living will by an overwhelming majority of the nations, which is able to realize its will without the help of arms.

But now that the nations of the world have actually been thrown into an armed conflict, and the war, which in itself is the greatest crime of the world, still is raging, we must stand it. We must, however, destroy the originator and the cause of the war, the militarism, by its own arms, and on its ruins we must build, in harmony and in peace—not by force, as the Russian Bolsheviki want—a new and a better social order under the guardianship of which the people may develop peacefully and securely.

I have been explaining to you my ideas, expecting that you will publish them. You over in America are not able to imagine how horrible the life in Russia at the present time is. The period after the French Revolution surely must have been as a life in a paradise compared with this. Hunger, brigandage, arrests, and murders are such every-day events that nobody pays any attention to them. Freedom of assemblage, association, free speech, and free press is a far-away ideal which is altogether destroyed at the present time. Arbitrary rule and terror are raging everywhere, and, what is worst of all, not only the terror proclaimed by the government, but individual terror as well.

My greetings to all friends and comrades.

OSKAR TOKOI.

THE END

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Plechanov never formally joined the Menshevik faction, I believe, but his writings showed that he favored that faction and the Mensheviki acknowledged his intellectual leadership.

[2] They had gained one member since the election.

[3] Quoted by Litvinov, The Bolshevik Revolution: Its Rise and Meaning, p. 22. Litvinov, it must be remembered, was the Bolshevik Minister to Great Britain. His authority to speak for the Bolsheviki is not to be questioned.

[4] The date is Russian style—March 12th, our style.

[5] The State in Russia—Old and New, by Leon Trotzky; The Class Struggle, Vol. II, No. 2, pp. 213-221.

[6] This document is printed in full at the end of the volume as Appendix. I

[7] The author of the present study is responsible for the use of italics in this document.

[8] Litvinov, The Bolshevik Revolution: Its Rise and Meaning, p. 30.

[9] Lenine is not quite accurate in his statement of Marx's views nor quite fair in stating the position of the "opportunists." The argument of Marx in The Civil War in France is not that the proletariat must "break down" the governmental machinery, but that it must modify it and adapt it to the class needs. This is something quite different, of course. Moreover, it is the basis of the policy of the "opportunists." The Mensheviki and other moderate Socialists in Russia were trying to modify and adapt the political state.

[10] The reference is to Karl Kautsky, the great German exponent of Marxian theory.

[11] The New International (American Bolshevik organ), June 30, 1917.

[12] The New International, July 23, 1917.

[13] Litvinov, op. cit., p. 31.

[14] The New International, April, 1918.

[15] See, e.g., the article by Lenine, New International, April, 1918, and Litvinov, op. cit.

[16] See my Syndicalism, Industrial Unionism, and Socialism for the I.W.W. philosophy.

[17] Bryant, Six Months in Red Russia, p. 141.

[18] This appeal is published as Appendix I at the end of this volume.

[19] Certain Soviets of Soldiers at the Front had decided that they would stay in their trenches for defensive purposes, but would obey no commands to go forward, no matter what the military situation.

[20] Figures supplied by the Russian Information Bureau.

[21] "It was with a deep and awful sense of the terrible failure before us that I consented to become Premier at that time," Kerensky told the present writer.

[22] The story was reproduced in New Europe (London), September, 1917.

[23] The New International, April, 1918.

[24] See p. 254.

[25] See the letter of E. Roubanovitch, Appendix II, p. 331.

[26] Justice, London, January 31, 1918.

[27] Justice, London, May 16, 1918.

[28] Vide Special Memorandum to the International Socialist Bureau on behalf of the Revolutionary Socialist party of Russia.

[29] See Appendix III.

[30] Pravda, July 5, 1918.

[31] February, 1918, Protest Against Recognition of Bolshevik Representative by British Labor Party Conference.

[32] Proclamation to People of the Northern Province, etc., December, 1918

[33] The New International, April, 1918.

[34] The dates given are according to the Russian calendar.

[35] See the Rakitnikov Memorandum—Appendix.

[36] The New International, April, 1918.

[37] The number of votes was over 36,000,000.

[38] Vide Rakitnikov report.

[39] Twenty-three members of the Executive Committee were arrested and, without any trial, thrown into the Fortress of Peter and Paul.

[40] From a Declaration of Protest by the Executive Committee of the Third National Congress of Peasants' Delegates (anti-Bolshevist), sent to the Bolshevik Congress of Soviets of Workmen, Soldiers, and Peasants, but not permitted to be read to that assembly.

[41] L'Ouorier Russe, May, 1918.

[42] Idem.

[43] Izvestya, July 28, 1918.

[44] Pravda, October 8, 1918 (No. 216).

[45] "Agents-Provocateurs and the Russian Revolution," article in Justice,, August 16, 1916, by J. Tchernoff.

[46] Most of the information in this paragraph is based upon an article in the Swiss newspaper Lausanne Gazette by the well-known Russian journalist, Serge Persky, carefully checked up by Russian Socialist exiles in Paris.

[47] Joseph Martinek, in the Cleveland Press.

[48] Justice (London), January 23, 1919.

[49] Justice, London, January 31, 1918.

[50] Jean Jaures, Studies in Socialism.

[51] F. Engels, 1895, Preface to Marx's Civil War in France.

[52] The reader is referred to my Sidelights on Contemporary Socialism and my Karl Marx: His Life and Works for a fuller account of these struggles.

[53] Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, p. 12.

[54] Editorial entitled "Bolshevik Problems," in The Liberator, April, 1918.

[55] The article by Lenine quoted by Mr. Eastman appeared in The New International, February, 1918.

[56] The Bolsheviks and the Soviets, by Albert Rhys Williams, p. 6.

[57] Ansprache der Centralbehorde an den Bund, vom Marz, 1850: Anhang IX der Enthullerngen ueber den Kommunisten-process Zu Koln, p. 79.

[58] Lenine, The Soviets at Work.

[59] Wilhelm Liebknecht, No Compromise, No Political Trading, p. 30.

[60] Socialism: a Summary and Interpretation of Socialist Principles, by John Spargo, p. 215 (1st edition Macmillan, 1916).

[61] Liebknecht, No Compromise, No Political Trading, p. 16.

[62] Liebknecht, No Compromise, No Political Trading, p. 28.

[63] This subject is treated in the following, among others, of my books:

Socialism: a Summary and Interpretation of Socialist Principles; Applied Socialism; Syndicalism, Industrial Unionism, and Socialism; Elements of Socialism (Spargo and Arner), and Social Democracy Explained.

[64] The New International, July 23, 1917.

[65] Conversation with Trotzky reported by E.A. Ross, Russia in Upheaval, p. 208.

[66] Kautsky, The Social Revolution, p. 137.

[67] Lenine, The Soviets at Work.

[68] Lenine, op. cit.

[69] Lenine, op. cit.

[70] The best expositions of Guild Socialism are Self-Government in Industry, by G.D.H. Cole, and National Guilds, by S.G. Hobson, edited by A.R. Orage.

[71] Lenine, op. cit.

[72] Lenine, op. cit.

[73] Lenine, op. cit.

[74] Lenine, op. cit.

[75] Lenine, op. cit.

[76] Of course, Trotzky's statement to Professor Ross about paying the capitalists "5 or 6 per cent. a year" was frankly a compromise.

[77] E.A. Ross, Russia in Upheaval, pp. 206-207.

[78] Litvinov, The Bolshevik Revolution: Its Rise and Meaning, p. 39.

[79] Marx and Engels speak of the "idiocy of rural life" from which capitalism, through the concentration of agriculture and the abolition of small holdings, would rescue the peasant proprietors (Communist Manifesto). In Capital Marx speaks of the manner in which modern industry "annihilates the peasant, the bulwark of the old society" (Vol. I, p. 513). Liebknecht says that in 1848 it was the city which overthrew the corrupt citizen king and the country which overthrew the new republic, chose Louis Bonaparte and prepared the way for the Empire. "The French peasantry created an empire through their blind fear of proletarian Socialism" (Die Grund und Bodenfrage). Kautsky wrote, "Peasants who feel that they are not proletarians, but true peasants, are not only not to be won over to our cause, but belong to our most dangerous adversaries" (Dat Erfurter Programm und die Land-agitation). It would be easy to compile a volume of such utterances.

[80] Walling, Russia's Message, p. 118. The italics are mine.

[81] "Cabinet lands" are the crown lands, property of the Czar and royal family.

[82] Ross, op. cit., pp. 206-207.

[83] Justice, London, August 1, 1917.

[84] The figures given are quoted by Sack, in The Birth of Russian Democracy, and were originally published by the Bolshevist Commissaire of Commerce.

[85] Parvus et le Parti Socialiste Danois, by P.G. La Chesnais.

[86] La Chesnais, op. cit.

[87] In "L'Humanite," article condensed in Justice, January 31, 1918.

[88] International Notes, Justice, January 3, 1918.

[89] The Disarmament Cry, by N. Lenine, in The Class Struggle, May-June, 1918.

[90] The "Disarmament" Cry, by N. Lenine, The Class Struggle, May-June, 1918.

[91] Most, if not all, dates in this document are given as in the Russian calendar, which is thirteen days behind ours.

[92] This refers, doubtless, to the different basis for voting applied to the peasants and the industrial workers, as provided in the Soviet Constitution.

THE END