Skip to main content

Full text of "Out of their own mouths; a revelation and an indictment of sovietism. With the collaboration of William English Walling"

See other formats



A Revelation and an Indictment 
of Sovietism 



President of The American Federation of Labor 

Author of "Labor and the Common Welfare," 

"Labor and the Employer," etc. 

With the Collaboration of 

Author of "Sovietism: The A B C of Russian 
Bolshevism According to the Bolshevists". 



Copyright 1921 

All Rifkti RMttnU 

Print** in IA Untltd Stattt of Amcrie* 


I HAVE been under the necessity of observing the Bol- 
shevist movement from close quarters for many years. 
I have had to contend with it almost daily long before 
it seized the power in Russia in the name of Communism 
and Soviet. Trotzky is only one of the Bolshevist leaders 
who long sojourned in this country to plague the Ameri- 
can labor movement. And the few thousands who have 
returned to Soviet Russia represent but a small part of 
the forces of revolutionary mania in America. These 
forces are not strong enough seriously to threaten 
American labor provided they are isolated and under- 
stood. But they must be understood and isolated. 

While the labor movement of the world is gradually 
but steadily shaking itself free of the illusion that the 
Soviets are a workingmen's government the first work- 
ingmen's government conservative powers are begin- 
ning to give them commercial and political support and 
a part of the press is engaged in finding virtuous reasons 
for this policy. The pace was set by the British-Soviet 
trade agreement and by Lloyd George's speech in Par- 
liament in which he contended, with an intentional para- \ 
dox but still quite seriously, that the Bolshevists had sud- 
denly become moderates. The work of labor in repudi- 
ating Bolshevism has thus become more difficult. Certain 
conservatives and reactionaries pretend for motives of 
their own that they no longer have much objection to 


the Soviets. They are willing to trade with cannibals, 
to use an expression of Lloyd George, lint labor cannot 
affiliate or associate with cannibals or with tyrants who 
rule over labor by the Red Terror and the firing squad. 

Whether an anti-labor despotism rules over < 
the greatest peoples of the earth may be a matter of 
indifference to the masters of the British Empire as long 
as that despotism is willing to inert thr Km pi re half 
way and to sign away the title to the territories ami 
natural wealth of the nation. It cannot be a matt- 
indifference to labor. 

Labor's interest in putting forth tin- truth about the 
Soviets is in part altruistic. Labor's regard for the 
fare of tin Kussian workers is deep and genuine. But 
it also knows that if an anti-labor despotism may be 
made to work in one country however inefficiently it 
will encourage the enemies of labor to try the same 
methods elsewhere. Moreover, if thr Sovi< 
a certain permanence and success as "mod, rat. s" b 
aid of certain governments and financiers they will 
tainly continue to represent this success to the labor 
of the world as having come to them from their own 
efforts as "ultra-rcvolutionis; 

The outward success of the Soviets with capitalist 
backing would cost the capitalists tin :< arly in 

nd. But labor would pay, and pay heavily from the 

The Soviets may or may not reach a common under- 
standing of real practical im; nal im- 

! capital] 

sible common ground h< \\\ 
labor. Nor will the proposed economic alii;. 


Bolshevism and Reaction be able to force labor to com- 
promise with the Soviets. In the long run this alliance 
will help to make still more clear to the wage-earners 
the true character of Bolshevism. But its first result is 
to re-inforce the already formidable Bolshevist propa- 

The miserable collapse of the revolution called by the 
Soviets in Germany in March, following upon their 
failure in January and February to capture the labor 
unions of Italy and France, would have spelled the end 
of the Bolshevist menace as far as labor is concerned. 
But then came the British-Soviet trade agreement, the 
laudatory speech of Lloyd George, and a renewed flood 
of pro-Soviet propaganda from capitalist and so-called 
"liberal" quarters. So that the Bolshevist propaganda 
menace, while in a new form, is more threatening than 
ever, and continues to strike at all the foundations of 
our democratic civilization and, in particular at the 
principles that underlie the labor movement. 

The American labor movement has lost no opportunity 
to prove its warm friendship for the Russian people and 
for the Russian Revolution. It has not hesitated to send 
its greetings and offer of support even to Socialists such 
as those associated with Kerensky although American 
labor is not and never has been socialistic. Officials of 
American labor unions have not scrupled for this pur- 
pose to associate themselves with certain Socialists of this 
country who supported the war in a common address 
to the Kerensky government. American labor also, in 
its earnest wish to reach the Russian people after the 
Bolshevist revolution, went so far as to address a mes- 


sage to the Russian nation in rare of the Soviets. Both 
messages are quoted in the Appendix. 

From the early beginnings of tl 
lution in lfln.~i every occasion : 

strat hip. In 1921 the Executive Council of the 

American Federation of Labor once more ; d its 

friendly attitude in the following woi 

It should be understood clearly that het \veeu the 
people of the United States and the pi-eat n the 

people of Russia there has been, is and will eontini. 
be the most 61 cnilsliip. and tha- 

:-le of the United States express no sentiment to 
rary except towards those in Rus>ia who an 
ing the opportunities of the Russian people for .: 
cratic self-government, and who, on the contrary, are 
imposing upon the Russian people a brutal, d 
tyranny. This friendship is the friendship rk- 

ing people and of all the people of our country for a 
great people whose character and aspirations have 

the confidence, respect and friendship of all 
liberty lovinir people, and the earnest hope that the 
nation in Russia may so change that t'reedom. ju^ 
democracy and humanitariani^m may he the pui 
prineiphs of their every day live- iat time and 

opportunity American labor fervently anticipates that 
the true bond of international fraternity may be Wt 
en the toilers of Russia and those 

The present volume endeavors to pive a balanced and 
equ;: to all the mop 

Sovietism. Mut. naturally, I am in a particular 
able situation to disci; , jet attitude towards labor 

'hout the world. The cha: 

dealing with this part of t ! t should be of interest 


not only to labor and its sympathizers but to the entire 

I must take this opportunity to point out that the 
hostility of the Bolshevists to the American Federation 
of Labor is of the same degree of intensity and of the 
same general character as the hostility of a large group 
of reactionary employers a group to be found in all 
countries, but at the present moment far more aggressive 
and powerful in the United States than in any other 
nation of the globe. So closely identical are the anti- 
labor-union policies of the Bolshevists and Reactionaries 
that a number of instances have already arisen of deliber- 
ate co-operation to destroy organized labor. But even 
when there is no definite alliance the similarity of the 
purposes and methods of the two groups bring it about 
that they spread an identical propaganda. The Reac- 
tionary, therefore, does not disguise the delight with 
which he reads of the Bolshevist attacks on organized 
labor, nor do the Bolshevists disguise their joy at the 
victories of Reaction. Nor is this the only way by which 
Reaction aids Bolshevism; in its refusal to grant reason- 
*able economic concessions and to cede to reasonable de- 
mands for political and legislative reforms, the Reaction- 
aries inevitably drive the thoughtless and impatient into 
the arms of Bolshevism. 

I have been obliged to deal continually with Bolshev- 
ism for the past four years. I have utilized in the 
present volume parts of several recent articles from the 
official organ of the American Federation of Labor, The 
American Federationist, of which I am editor, as well as 
certain material in the current report of the Executive 


Council of that organization. Nearly all of it, howr 


Mr. William English Walling, who has collabor;! 
with me, is the author of a number of books dealing with 
the international labor movement and of two volunn 
^ia. He spent several years in that eountry at 
time of tin- origin of the I^.Khev; fol- 

lowed it closely for the past iifi-< n yean, 1 1 is knowledge 
of Russia and the international labor moveimn: 
which I can testify, has proved most helpful. 




America and the Soviets 


SHEVISTS , 1-19 

The Practical Foundation Mendacious Propaganda 





000,000 PEOPLE 20-27 

The Political Foundation War against Democracy 





KIVI; 10 Pta n \i.\i: Tii'. ' lOHM R1 II l'\RTY 


The Reign of Terror 







Slavery and Compulsory Labor 


Persecution of Organized Labor Trade Unions 





Oppression of the Agricultural Population 



ISTS AS -IHI uii ttNEMY 1.' IHB 

Coi !: THE WAR \<;\i\ <;BS 

-iN'sCoVEHiv; PIIKVSI:- 'I'n 

v COM- 
PULSORY Co-- ' C\r- 

1TA: LM P'-I.H'Y - !'! M>\ I IONS 


The Economic Collapse Fictitious Reforms 






World Revolution The Attempt to Overthrow 
Democratic Governments 






The Communist Internationale 




I low SOVIET PK<>P\<,\NI>A Kmu r.i> THK HHITISM 

i -.0-168 

The Red Labor Union Internationale 


.KMY Boi 'i-u- 





European Labor Disillusioned 

WORLD'S SOCIALISTS . . . 188-202 



The Camouflaged Trade Agitation 







American Labor and Russia 


COUNCII .-. I'.'i; 






DIERS' COUNCIL, APRIL 23, 1917 229-230 


1917 230-232 


SEPTEMBER 17, 1917 233-234 

1918 234 

The Soviet Administration of Justice 235-236 


The Turko-Bolshevist Attack on the Labor 

Government of Georgia 237-239 

Lenin's "Conversion" 


THE COMMUNIST PARTY . . . 240-244 



Can the Soviets be Saved by Capital? 





WHITE PAPER.. . 24^-253 




THE American Federation of Labor, at its 1920 con- 
vention, resolved: 

That the American Federation of Labor is not justi- 
fied in taking any action which could be construed as 
an assistance to or approval of, the Soviet Government 
of Russia as long as that government is based upon 
authority which has not been vested in it by a popular 
representative national assemblage of the Russian peo- 
ple ; or so long as it endeavors to create revolutions in 
the well-established, civilized nations of the world; or 
so long as it advocates and applies the militarization 
of labor and prevents the organizing and functioning 
of trade unions and the maintenance of a free press 
and free public assemblage. 

This resolution contains a very conservative state- 
ment of the anti-labor and anti-democratic nature of 
the Soviet dictatorship and the reasons of organized 
labor for repudiating it. 

In response to the overwhelming pressure of public 
opinion, including not only organized labor but all ele- 
ments of the American people, Secretary of State Colby, 


on the tenth of August, 1020, a iY\\ ' .Mowing 

'-.invention, addressed a powerful not.- to the Italian 

Government giving reasons why Am d to 

have anythini: ti do with tie ;ictatorship. 

chief reasons given by Mr. Colliy wen- ( 1 i tin- unr- ; 
sentative and anti-democratic character of ihe so-<-;tllcd 
Soviet rnment and (2) the utter unreliability it 

had shown in all international relations, includi 
inents hy its leading officials that they did not in* 
to he bound by their own pledges to "bourgeois" gov- 

The Bolshevists' answer was to increase their public 
and underground labors in this country. In the Vi 
tea as in all Kuropean countries, as well as < 

la, India. Turke\ . M ,i.-o and even in South 
Aim-rica, Soviet agents have been repeatedly caught 
carryinir vast sums for the purposes of propaganda. 
While Kussian arricultur ncratinjr for the lack 

nf plows and < v< n .if sieklcs and scythes: while the 
laboring cla .rvinir t'l-oin the deuvner 

agriculture; while the rai' ':inr to pieces and 

three-fourths of the children are out of school, the Soviet 
finds ample means fr vast expenditures- not 
propaganda but for military attacks, such as thos. 

ly made on the democratic labor government of 

and her neighbors. T! if ' ...i \ } M been t. 
from Russia's dwindling ir!d nd the few other 

mob: tfl sneli as jrwHs. art ti-. ulatinum 

and . which iniprht h. 

a ba lit and setting up a ciir- 

'stem at such time a- 


Democratic governments, no matter how large and 
powerful, have no propaganda funds. Hence the un- 
deniable and considerable effect of the Bolshevist agita- 
tion in America as well as other countries. Though 
the evidence coming from Russia, consisting in large 
part of Bolshevist documents, is vast and overwhelm- 
ing, it has secured less circulation than the audacious 
falsifications and inventions of the Bolshevists and their 
sympathizers disproven one day only to be repeated 
in some new form on the next. 

The Soviets and their supporters threw themselves 
into the Presidential election campaign last autumn 
with the avowed hope of securing recognition from 
the present Executive and State Departments of the 
United States. But in spite of the huge bulk of the 
pro-Bolshevist matter put out by thousands of pub- 
lications, the practical results achieved were equal to 
zero. The great majority of American people read it, 
pondered upon it and threw it into the waste basket. 

The new administration did not have to hesitate a 
moment in deciding what to do. President Harding 
and Secretary Hughes had not been in office more 
than a few days when, Great Britain having signed 
her trade agreement (on March 18th), the Soviets 
immediately played their long expected card in the 
shape of a note asking that the United States Gov- 
ernment officially receive a so-called trade delega- 
tion from Soviet Russia. Doubtless one consideration 
affecting the new administration in its prompt reply 
was the fact that all such trade delegations throughout 
Europe had been employed by the Soviets for the pur- 
pose of revolutionary agitation to overthrow the gov- 


ernments to which I 'filed. The offer 

:!((' hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars to 
the Lnndun I><ii!i/ llirnld, the willingness of li 
hury semi-Communist organ to accept it a public;. 
\\hidi. unfortunah -ly, is also the duct' organ of 
British Labor Party and the proof given hy tl 
Government that Kanieneff, the trade" 

sary, was privy to the offer, are fresh in the mind of 
the American puhlic. Similar i .1 in 

Germany, Italy, Switzerland and oilier countries. 

Hut the grounds given by Secretary Hughes, in his 
Note refusing to consider the Soviet overt inv. , 
different. AYithout either re-affirming or amending the 
lusive arguments offered by President 'Wilson and 
Secretary Colby, without considering the IK- 

ative character of the Russian (iovernment or its 
instability. Se.-retnry Hugln-s brought forward addi- 
tional considerations which have met the almost unan- 
imous approval of the comni" ..f the American 


Text of Hughes 's Statement Rejecting Soviet's Pro- 
posal for a Governmental Trade Agreement 

(March 'jrnh. l!>21) 

Tl m.-nt of the l"nii< ifh dcc|> 

:>athy and grave concci-n the plight of the people 

i and desires to aid by every appropriate n 
in promoting proper opportunities through which eom- 
IMi"d up.ui a sMiind basis. It is mani- 
fest to this (fovernmcnt that in i mi instances 
n is no a lopment of trad' 

upplies which H "ht now be able to obtain 

would be wholly inade,|u,; r needs, and no 


lasting good can result so long as the present causes of 
progressive impoverishment continue to operate. It is 
only in the productivity of Russia that there is any hope 
for the Russian people and it is idle to expect resump- 
tion of trade until the economic bases of production are 
securely established. Production is conditioned upon 
the safety of life, the recognition by firm guarantees of 
private property, the sanctity of contract and the rights 
of free labor. 

If fundamental changes are contemplated, involving 
due regard for the protection of persons and property 
and the establishment of conditions essential to the main- 
tenance of commerce, this Government will be glad to 
have convincing evidence of the consummation of such 
changes, and until this evidence is supplied this Govern- 
ment is unable to perceive that there is any proper basis 
for considering trade relations. 

A few words have been italicized as indicating either 
features of the Note that were relatively unnoticed or 
features of especial importance in connection with the 
data presented in the present volume. 

Disturbed by the vast pro-Soviet agitation, falsely 
labeled "campaign for the restoration of trade rela- 
tions" which was being carried on in the labor unions 
in spite of Secretary Hughes' Note President Gom- 
pers then addressed a letter to the Secretary asking 
for full information as to the facts in the case. The 
Secretary's answer to this letter, together v/ith his 
Note written a few weeks earlier, when taken together, 
give a clear and positive statement of the American 
policy. (We quote the two letters at length in a later 
chapter in discussing the Russian trade question.) In 
his letter to President Gompers, Mr. Hughes points out 
the impossibility of aiding the Russian people or of 


improving American trade with that country or of 

u r Russian ci so long as tin 

political and economic system continues." Issued at 
that moment, April 18th, 1921, it had a special signiti- 

It indicated that tin- American (loverm 
attached no importance whatever to the so-called 
"reforms" and the pretended abandonment of com- 
munism by the Soviet ( Jovernm< -nt early in March. For 
not only the pro-Bolshevists but numerous groups of 
greedy capitalists and their newspapers as well as a 
number of well meaning but uninformed or superficial 
(ditors and correspondents had swallowed Lenin's 
bait, that is, his pretense that he had reformed and 
had compromised fundamentally with "capitalism." 

In this letter Mr. Hughes did not limit himself to 
pointing out the incapacity of the Soviet Government 
to organize production. Kven should it be able 1- 
80 successfully, he pointed out that "the attitude and 
action of the present authorities of Russia have tended 
to undermine its political and economic relations with 
other countri' 

In the Note above quoted, in refusing to re., 
Soviet trade delegation Mr. Hughes had stated that 
amonjr the fundamental institutions of modern civiliza- 
tion which w-re indispensable if Russian production 
was to be restored was the establishment of "freedom 
of labor. " Kvid'iier ^iveu below will show that the 
avement of labor is indeed th- chief underlying 
^o of the entire collapse of the I'.olsl 
of the frightful suffering it has inflicted not only 
i labor but upon the entire population of the 


America, then, has fully endorsed the stand of the 
American Federation of Labor at its 1920 convention. 
As further evidence of the complete harmony between 
American labor and the rest of the nation upon this , 
subject, we may point to the able statement of that 
eminent representative of labor, former Secretary of 
Labor, William B. Wilson, in his decisions in the Mar- 
tens deportation case. The decision itself is a highly 
important state document. Its principles were more 
briefly summarized in a letter written by Mr. Wilson 
a few weeks later (January 3, 1921) to Charles Recht, 
then Counsellor of the Soviet "Embassy" and now in 
charge of Soviet affairs in this country. In this letter 
Secretary Wilson, basing his statements upon a vast 
number of documents in his hands and upon the testi- 
mony of Mr. Martens, the Soviet "Ambassador," 
reached the following conclusions as to the character 
of the Soviet regime and the American attitude to- 
wards it: 

In the evidence presented to me in the Martens case 
it was clearly shown that a group of men calling them- 
selves Communists had set up a military dictatorship 
in Russia; that they had camouflaged it under the 
name of a dictatorship of the proletariat, seeking to 
convey the impression that it was a dictatorship by 
the proletariat ; that it had by force of arms introduced 
compulsory labor, in other words, slavery, into Russia ; 
that the proletariat were compelled to work at occupa- 
tions selected for them at meager wages and long hours 
imposed under the direction of the military masters. 
Naturally the sympathy of the Administration and of 
the American people, including the workers, goes out 
to the Russian people, under such circumstances, just 


ss our sympathies go out to tho oppressed of all lands 

alter who or what the op] :ay be. . 

Tin- evid - cumulative and conclusive that the 

military dictatorship ;a, calling itsdi' the Soviet 

rnment. was appropriating large sums of m 
to stir up insurrection by 1'orce of arms against 
I'ni' ivernmcnt. It is a novel principle in 

international law and one that is not likely to !> 
erally accepted, that a newly established milita 

,ip in one country may eapitali/.e the traditional 
idslrip of another country for its people by ma 
a pretense of wanting to establish friendly relations 
with the government at the same time that it is seeking 
to destroy it by stirring up insurrection. 

Finally we may quote a few words from Mr. 11 
Hoover, Secretary of Commerce, the world's hit' 
authority on European relief. Mr. Hoover believes that 
nothing of any consequence can be done for the Rus- 
sian people as long as the Bolshevists remain on their 
necks and these are the reasons li for this posi- 

tion (in his letter of March 2Kt. 1!1M): 

So long as Kuxxia is- controlled />?/ the Bo Ishcr iki. . . . 

the question of trade is far more political than economic. 

There are no >mmodilies in Russia worth con- 

>cept gold, platinum and jewelry in the 

is of the Bolsheviki (iovernment. The people are 

Starving, cold, under-Had. If they had any consumable 

commodities they would havr n-rd them Ion 

Tin-re liax In prohibition on trade. Th< 

: -;ade has been the failure of 1l:> produce 

anything to trade with. 

Trading for this parcel of gold would not effect this 
would t! -btained hy the Bolsheviki 

hir production. Thai n|Uires {he almndon- 
vinit of tin- present economic system. 


On the day of the issuance of Mr. Hughes' Note 
(March 25th) Mr. Hoover further declared: 

Secretary Hughes 's statement on the Russian trade 
situation this afternoon shows the complete agreement 
in the views of the whole administration. 

The first thing to be determined about Russia is if, 
and when, they change their economic system. (Our 

If they so change its basis as to accept the right of 
private property, freedom of labor, provide for the safety 
of human life, there is hope of their recovery from 
the miseries of famine. There is hope also of a slow 
recovery in production and the upbuilding of trade. 

Nothing is more important to the whole commercial 
world than the recovery of productivity in Russia. 

These very explicit and positive statements of Messrs. 
Hughes and Hoover might well have disposed of the 
question of the American Government's position. But 
so powerful is the pro-Soviet propaganda and so strong 
is the purpose to befriend the Bolshevist Government 
at any cost that a widespread effort was made to explain 
away the Note as being friendly to the Soviets! The 
Hearst papers and their Universal Press Service boldly 
claimed that "not one word of the statement was directed 
at the Russian Government, and no objection to the 
form of the Soviet Government was voiced" (!) They 
then declared, on the very day of the note, that "it is 
recognized that some of the guarantees demanded by 
this Government as a preliminary to the establishment 
of trade relations already have been announced by 
Lenin. " 


The n. uspapers mention. 

the Soviets. i>ut certain mon- conservative orgi 
wholly opposed to Bolshevism, also found some ' 
to take a position favorable to the Soviets. One of 
the leading Democratic newspapers of the country, 

rsiiiLT \\<.< . I y the aliove n, 

journals that the Hughes Note was to be pra 
because it was friendly to the Soviets, argued that it 
to be blamed beeause it was too hostile. Wilson and 
Colby were hostile enough; Harding and Hughes go too 
far when they are more hostile still: 

Insisting that "production is conditioned upon the 
safety of life, the recognition by firm guarante. 

ate property, the sanctity of contract and the rights 
of free labor/' they, Harding and Huu'hcs. demand in 
effect an economic revolution in Russia, and it 
demand that cannot very well he substantia 1 ' !>asis 

for commerce. 

This conservative paper then proceeded to endorse 
the entire argument upon which the pro-Bolshtf 
now stake their agitation: Lenin, it appears, lias sur- 
lemlered to "peasant individualism." 
munist autocracy has had to yield 1o rural public 
(pinion backed by the physical power of the peasant. 
What was called in 1 ning a necessary but 

temporary dictatorship of the proletariat ran i 1 
much more quickly than in the I-Yem-h Revolution." 
What truth then is in all this- if any- -we shall show 
in later chapters. Undoubtedly som. -thinir of this '; 
may happen if the Soviets are not furilxr /</>/. 
up by political recognition and financial ai<l from 


other countries. But nothing could delay the desirable 
event more effectively than to assume it has occurred 
when it has not. This newspaper continues : 

Now Lenin " solves" the peasant problem, as he is 
said to be solving the problem of capitalism by giving 
it up. In what is incomparably the largest field of 
Russian industry, he drops Communism. 

Again the time element is all important. If it is 
wholly misleading to assume a momentous event that 
has not yet taken place, it is equally misleading to 
date in the present an event that has occurred long 
ago and so to attribute it to present causes in this 
instance the yielding of the Soviets to the pressure 
of the peasants or of foreign capitalists. We shall 
show that the impossibility of applying communism 
to agriculture, far from being in Bolshevist minds (as 
it would be in the minds of the rest of humanity) an 
argument for abolishing the communist dictatorship, is 
precisely the one reason they have given from the first 
for establishing that dictatorship and the one reason 
why they urge that in the face of rising peasant dis- 
2ontent it is more than ever essential for them to 
maintain it now. 

Such views as those just quoted are not confined 
to the conservative organs of the opposition party. One 
of the leading Republican papers, which had favored 
the trade agreement, continued to insist editorially that 
the question was whether " Lenin and Trotzky mean 
it when they say Bolshevism is dead" though this 
.imaginary statement is the very reverse of everything 

12 OUT OF Til KIi; OWN Mul 

Trot/.ky and Lenin have been saying. The Wasliington 
correspondent of another leading Republican organ 
declared that "the Russian I'.olsheviki are ready to 
abandon the last vestiges of their program ami to 
return to capitalism in industry a- 
a statement for which he could produce no substantia- 
tion whatever from any quart 

Several Republican and Democratic Sena 
quoted in the press to similar effect. One well-known 
Senator is reported as having said: 

The danger that existed of political propaganda in- 
spired and paid for by the Russian (iovernment, had 
practically disappeared. I think it may he said that the 
Lenin-Trotzky Government has abandoned the effort to 
convert the world and is modifying its own < Jovrnmont 
into a much more conservative form than it started with. 

The word "conservative" as well as the 

"moderate" is thus bring freely applied to those ad- 
vanced extremists and revolutionaries who are a shade 
or two less red than others in a scale of violent revolu- 
tion that now shows half a hundred varieties! The 
statement here made that Lenin and Trot: i>an 

cloning their propaganda for world revolt, as we shall 
show, is negatived by the entire struetui une- 

tioning of the Communist-Soviet machine. In the m< 
while we may quote at this point as fairly coneli; 
cvidenc. the official Soviet wireless reply to the I hi-. 
Note, which contains also a smashing rejoinder to the 
gratuitous newspaper assumptions we ha\. 1 to: 

D Consul in Reval has given our pleni- 
utiary reprcst illative the reply sent by his Govern- 


ment to the last communication of the All-Russian 
Central Executive Committee. The Note of the Ameri- 
can Government points out that trade between Russia 
and America can only be resumed when the former 
recognizes private property, guarantees "free labor" 
and personal inviolability and has a market large 
enough for the export of stores of raw material. At 
the same time the American press states that hopes 
of trade with Russia are not lost, as Lenin will rapidly 
change from Communism to capitalism and all the hopes 
of the Americans will speedily be brought about by the 
Bolsheviks themselves. The shortsightedness of the 
tools of world capital is extraordinary. . . . 

The hopes of world capital in the fall of Communism 
have not been fulfilled. And now that we have reverted 
to peaceful reconstruction and are introducing a prac- 
tical policy in order to alleviate conditions for the 
peasants who have suffered from failure of the harvest, 
they regard this as a sign that we are reverting from 
Communism to capitalism. It goes without saying that 
all the hopes of the capitalists are doomed to failure. 

Later the official organ of the Moscow Government, 
Izvestia, made still more clear the underlying idea of 
all Bolshevistic diplomatic negotiations, namely that the 
world of capitalistic governments is being forced to 
recognize and to compromise with Communism as em- 
bodied in the government of Soviet Russia. The mouth- 
piece of the Soviets repudiates as pure nonsense the 
supposition that they are surrendering any Communist 
principles whatever. At the same time it may be noted 
that the Soviets have reached a perfectly clear compre- 
hension of the nature of the American reply even if a 
number of American newspapers have attempted to dis- 
guise it. The Izvestia declares: 


Tho es^ ;he Washington answer is that the re- 

sumption of commerce with Russia will ho possible 
after we have returned to a bourgeois regime. Tl 
])uro nonsense. The English bourgeoisie who have signed 
a trade agreement with us did not consider this eh, 

ssary. We did not propose to the Amer 
eliange their capitalistic regime for a communistic o: 

1'iit neither this provocative response nor anything 
the r.olshevists can say or do no matter how a^ 
sively revolutionary can put a stop to the claims made 
almost daily by their diplomatic agents, foreign propa- 
gandists and "liberal" admirers that they have reformed. 
Each minor change in their policy is held to demon- 
state once more that now at last they have not only 
thrown the entire Bolshevist system overboard hut 
have become "moderates" and adopted capitalism and 
democracy. During recent months hardly a day has 
passed without some Russian dispatch that the final step 
has been taken and Communism abandoned. II. 
the crux of a typical dispatch (dated Riga, May i\ 

Following the restoration of free trade to coopera- 
tive societies, the est a hi ish im -nt of a system of taxation 
in kind, and other recent coi the d eision to 

restore the coinage of silver marks, is accordim 

:it arrivals from Moscow. Premier Lenin's final 
admission of the impossibility of the original Com- 
munistic theories at this time. 

Now the original theory of the Russian Commun 
Bolshevist Party was precisely that it is impossible to 

Communism to the dominating industry of Russia 


(agriculture) at the present time. This theory is not 
only the one reason for the dictatorship of the pro- 
letariat, as we have pointed out, but it is also the sole 
reason for the establishment of the Soviet form of 
government as opposed to the democratic Constitutional 

The advocates of friendly relations with the Soviets, 
approaching or actually amounting to their official 
recognition, have not been satisfied with hailing every 
petty advance of Bolshevism in the direction of more 
practical methods of oppression as a final abandonment 
of Communism. They have also seized upon every new 
theoretical formulation by Lenin as a surrender to capi- 
talism in spite of the fact that new encyclicals by the 
Bolshevist high priest have been handed down to his 
disciples several times each year ever since 1917. No 
close or persistent student of these pronouncements has 
missed or could miss the fact that all the essential foun- 
dations of Soviet rule, as interpreted by Lenin, remain 
now what they were in 1917. But journalists and others 
who are either totally ignorant of the Soviet leader's 
thought or know it only at second hand easily find in 
each new formulation phrases with which they are un- 
familiar or expressions they do not understand. This 
is why it happens so frequently that some theory which 
is the strongest possible reaffirmation of Bolshevism is 
interpreted as a compromise or surrender. 

An excellent illustration is the long article in the 
Pravda of May 3d, in which Lenin explains to his fol- 
lowers the theoretical foundation of those widely dis- 
cussed tactical changes made by the Bolshevists for the 
purpose of strengthening their despotic power at the 


time of the Communist Party Congress held i; 

L'-nin says in this article that it is 1101 

changes as "a renunciation of tin- prolet;. 
torship" and proves liis point. 1 '. . 
continue to insist upon the contrary intcrp 
caught by Lenin's use of the expression "state cap 
ism" as applied to th Soviet policy. Now ; 

erate Socialists have always referred to this interi: 
ate phase hctwecn ca])italisin and socialism hy t! 
getic term "state socialism," while ultra-revolutionists 
have known this identical thing under the derisive ' 

-capitalism." To the latter this expression is 
derogatory, though non-socialists take it to represent a 
policy more friendly to capitalism, nun Me than 

"cialism," and a totally different thing. To 
every Bolshevist the eKprarion, "state capital, 
means that the present policy, revolutionary and 
treme as it may still seem to the rest of the world, is 
hut the merest hrginning of the thoroughgoing commu- 
nism they have in view and is introduced solely as a 
means to further steps in the communist direction. Yet 
Lenin's clear statement on this point is interpreted hy 
certain con-c- pmidcnts as a cnnccssion to capitalism. 

i's jirtic!- red to is quoted hy Michael 

Farhman in the New York World as follows: 

"The way to Slate-socialism." lie s ;i ys. "lies through 

'italism. --apitalis: V, , are 

iinnhle and long will Ite unahle to sii|.|)ly the peasants 

with all they need. This will he P.^M!,],- only after 

i-ification of the whole country ( !i ha.s hceii accom- 


"At the present stage we must choose from two alter- 
natives. Either we must prohibit every kind of private 
exchange of goods, otherwise capitalism. Such a policy 
is idiotic and would mean suicide for the party attempt- 
ing to introduce it, for such policy is economically im- 
possible. The other alternative is to aid the development 
of capitalism in Russia, while we are trying to transform 
it into state capitalism. This is economically possible 
and does not contradict the proletarian dictatorship. On 
the contrary state capitalism is one stage in the advance 
of free capitalism." 

The pessimism prevailing in Communist circles Lenine 
explains by the mistake in comparing how much state 
capitalism is behind Socialism. One should compare how 
much state capitalism is in advance of petty bourgeois 
economy. "Only then," concludes the dictator, "will 
we see how great the progress is we have made. The 
chief problem now is to find the proper methods of how 
to turn the inevitable growth of capitalism in Russia into 
the form of state capitalism now and assist in securing 
speedy conversion of state capitalism into Socialism." 

Another passage from the same speech (taken from 
the Bolshevist organ, Pravda, and reproduced in the 
German Socialist Press) explains even more clearly 
Lenin's motive in advocating the policy of state capital- 
ism. As Lenin said, "the Communists did not need to 
fear the development of state capitalism as they can fix 
limits for it to suit themselves. Capitalism under the 
control of a state in which the proletariat held all the 
power in its hands, was not contradictory to the ideas 
of Communism." 

Changes are taking place in Soviet Russia. But 
what is the nature of these changes? That is the ques- 
tion. It cannot be answered either by the Bolshevists 


or by thi'ir friends and ap< Only a careful 

:iination of their own publications can afford 
answer. Fortunately these arc now at hand -in abun- 
dancc. They bring tin- whole movement into the light, 
and ai Me question. 

In addition to the vast accumulation of docu- 
mentary evidence from Russia ami the weighty 
cisions of two American administrations, we have 
had adverse comment on Soviet Ku.vsia from practi- 
cally every labor delegation that has visited that 
country in the last twelve months from Germany, 
Italy, Sweden. Spain and other countries. Only 
British report was ambiguous on certain points, but 
a large part of the delegation, including Turner. Shaw, 
Mrs. Snowden, Dr. Guest and Bertraml Hussell, who 
accompanied the delegation, was overwhelmingly ad- 
e after having seen the Bolshevist regime with 
their own eyes. Influenced by the reports of Dittmann 
and Crispien, both of them radical Socialists, the ' 
man labor union movement is now lined up almost 
solidly against the Sov: 

What has been th- f this avalanche of evi 

and testimony on the pro-Bolshevist agitation in this 
country? Practically none at all. In May, 1D-1. the 
propaganda of falsification continues unabated. The 

ion of the writers and speakers who ar 
in this campaign is similar to that of the American 
Socialist Party, which still remains with one foot in 
and one foot out of the Third Internationale. The 
utive Commit tee of that body reports that the 
ialist Party of America has always given its un- 
wavering support to t \ eminent of 


while the resolution carried by the convention in Sep- 
tember, 1920, and later by referendum reads in part 
as follows: 

Socialism is in complete control of the great country 
of Russia. ... It should be the task of the Socialist 
Internationale to aid our comrades in Russia to main- 
tain and fortify their political control. 

So also the pro-Bolshevist "liberals" in America, as 
well as their counterparts in Europe, and all the Social- 
ist parties belonging to the Second Internationale, 
including the British Labor Party, have done every- 
thing in their power to aid the Soviet Government and 
recognize the Bolshevists either as "comrades" or 
in the case of the so-called liberals as democrats de- 
serving support. 

The American Socialist Party refuses to accept the 
principle of "the dictatorship of the Proletariat in the 
form of Soviets." It also refuses to conduct a revolu- 
tion through orders issued from Moscow, but it has 
done and pledged itself to do everything in its power 
to aid that regime in Russia and in so doing, it also 
aids the Soviet Government and the Third Interna- 
tionale in their agitation in all countries except the 
United States. So also the European Socialists in many 
countries of Europe are aiding the Soviet agitation in 
all countries except their own. Not only this but these 
same organizations, while refusing to accept Moscow 
rule, are supporting the Soviet agitation in their own 
countries in many points. 



Tin; Bolshevists have frequently declared that the 
foundation of their whole movement is propaganda. 
This, in itself, is an amazing confession, but more amaz- 
in still is their frank avowal of the character of this 
propaganda. The ninth Communist Congress (March- 
April, 1920) says on this subjeet : 

The first condition of the success of the Soviet Re- 
public in all departments, including the economic 
chiefly systematic printed agitation. 

As to the nature of the propaganda, we have the 
following historic utterance of the UolshrvUt high 
priest himself in regard to the methods to be used in 
order to destroy the labor unions : 

We must know how to apply at n<T<]. knavrry. deceit, 
illegal methods, hiding truth ly sili-m-r. in order to 
t to the very In-art of tin- trade union- 

and to accomplish theiv the ( 'miiiminist 
Lenin, in "Radicalism, the Infantile Malady of 

It must not be supposed for one moment that the 
childlike stupidity involved in this public pronounce- 
ment of the intent ; vc is exceptional for the 



great Bolshevist "master mind." In his letter of last 
November to British labor he shows the same mixture 
of simplicity and arrogance. The substance of that 
letter was summed up last November by the pro-Soviet 
London Daily News as follows: 

The true British Communist is told that it is his duty 
to cooperate with Mr. Henderson, Mr. Snowden and 
other degraded ' * bourgeois, ' ' in order to return members 
to Parliament pledged to destroy from within that 
institution, and incidentally to expose and ruin Mr. 
Henderson, Mr. Snowden and the colleagues who are 
to assist unwittingly in the operation. And this is said 
openly in the hearing of the intended victims and of the 
millions who are yet unconverted to the Gospel of Com- 
munist * * hate. ' ' No one that we remember, except some 
of the German war lords towards the end of the great 
struggle, has ever thought aloud in public in this semi- 
insane manner. The parallel is ominous. 

This letter was such an exhibition of incredible 
ignorance regarding Great Britain, combined with in- 
capacity for the simplest logical reasoning, that even the 
friendly British Labor Party lost its patience while The 
Daily News, unable to restrain its wrath, thus character- 
ized the Bolshevist "Czar": 

Mad Kings, Tzars and Kaisers ruin, as a rule, only 
themselves and their subjects; a mad demagogue pro- 
vides every half-witted enemy of liberty with a moral 
to his servile tale. . . . 

Bolshevism has many enemies, but it has none so 
formidable as its foremost figure. We can imagine a 
man thinking in the sort of way in which Lenin talks 
to his British Communist "Comrades" in the extracts 
from his new book printed elsewhere in our columns 


lay. We can imagine a man unfolding to like-minded 
Mils in the privacy of his own house some such ]lan 
ampak'n as ! kfl to them. But that an; 

having conc . lesion should proceed t< I 

claim it from the housetops is a thing almost incredible. 

It argues an arrogant contempt for all possihlc oppo- 
M which, to those who know the real strength of 

"Communism" in this country, seems not far removal 

from insanity. 

The workings of the mind of this half -cra/ed and 
inflated fanatic are important not only as largely domi- 
nating the movement hut because they are typical of 
his even less gifted Bolshevists. Perhaps the ^n , 
oratorical effort of his life was at the Second Con-/ 
of the Communist Internationale held at Moscow in .July. 
1920. There, in rapid succession, he made a whole string 
>f utterly ignorant or consciously false statements about 

My, America, Japan and France making t 
propositions the very foundation of the world policy of 
the Internationale and foreign policy of the Sov 

are a few of his remarks : 

You know that the Versailles Treaty forced Oerrnany 
and a whole ' conquered States, into conditions 

'.solute impossibility of economic existence, into 
ditions of complete <ihs< ncr <>f ritfhls. f nllcr hiniiilin- 
tion. . . . Am-rica. which profited all from the 

war, being convert r,l into a rich country from a country 
that had a mass of det.ts. . . . Japan, which profited much 
remaininir outside the actual conflict, sri/ing the 
>utin< nt. . . . 

iiree and one .piarler hillions, 
while her liabilities are ten and a half; tliat 

the country which has lived 


as a progressive civilized country because its savings 
(colonial thefts, called savings), made it possible for 
her to lend billions to other countries, and particularly 
to Russia. 

No more false, boastful, or deluded utterance was ever 
recorded from the lips of Kaiser or Czar than the fol- 
lowing from Lenin's much advertised but little read 
"moderate" speech at the Congress of the Russian Com- 
munist Party in March, 1921 ; nor could any citation 
better illustrate the great hallucination upon which all 
present Bolshevist calculations are built: 

Certainly the Communist International which at the 
time of last year's Congress existed only in the form of 
proclamations has now begun to act as an independent 
body in every country, and as more than merely a van- 
guard party. Communism has become the central ques- 
tion of the whole labor movement. In Germany, France, 
and Italy, the Communist International has become the 
center not only of the labor movement, but of the whole 
political life of the country. It was impossible to pick 
up a German or a French newspaper last autumn with- 
out seeing discussions on Moscow and the Bolsheviks, and 
how the twenty-one conditions of entry into the Third 
International had become the central question of the 
political life of those countries. This is our gain of 
which no one can deprive us. (Russian Press Review, 
March 15th, 1921.) 

The complete falsity of the entire Bolshevist propa- 
ganda may be best understood by Americans from a 
few quotations suggesting the picture that is presented 
to the Russian people of America and of the rest of 
the world. As the Bolshevists have a monopoly of 
the press and even of the paper of the country, thus 


effectively precluding the xpivssimi of nou-Molsh. 
opinion, they arc able to a considerable ! iin- 

BtOfea upon the mind 
ami to shape their attitude to America and otl: 

- accordingly. According to M >. >;iowden and 
other recent visitors, tin- Russian people have INCH 
suaded by such methods to believe that Mulsh- 
spreading all the world over and that many conn 
are on tho vorp< h.-vist iwolutio- 

frequently in tho Bolshevist press also statements like 
tho following: "If we compare the conditions o; 
in Russia with the conditions of life in the \\ 
have to state that our situation is a brilliant n 
(From Boyevaya Pravda, May 19, 1920.) 

Here are a few statements illustrating Aiiieri. 
as it appears in the Soviet win ; 

Russian workmen, emigrants who have just returned 
from America and are now in Sormo-. ihat the 

Russians in America are suffering great hards! 
They experience there all the horrors of prison life. 
Workmen are arrest. d f,.p participation in party 

ices; torture is resorted to when they ;n-e 1 
cross-examined. Many unions are obliged to work in 
v < Prom HOMO* v- 1921 , 

The workers say that the work of tin- American I'.ol 
k parly is pmeredinu' suercssfully and that in \>ir 
!h<r< iir i :nii,(iir ..'///. 

iff wireless message, via London. Jam, 

American Oovcrnment has as 
sent to allow 100,000 Russians ' 

h rough licr ten-i' nerican (Jo\ 

' intejids to de))ort these Russians in the near 
future. (From Moscow wit >bruary 7, 1921.) 


The head of the All Russian Soviet of Trade Unions, 
Tomsky, thus pictures the position of the President of 
the American Federation of Labor: 

Gompers, when he starts out for conferences, sur- 
rounds himself with five experienced boxers. (From 
Izvestia, October 19, 1920.) 

The Soviet regime is keeping a number of Americans 
as hostages in the hope that it will be able to use them 
to compel recognition by the American Government 
a method which undoubtedly had considerable effect 
in Great Britain. Among these hostages is the well- 
known Red Cross worker, Kilpatrick. When first 
captured by the famous Bolshevist cavalry General, 
Budenny,. Kilpatrick reported that the chief intel- 
ligence officer insisted "that the American working 
classes were starving and the whole country on the 
verge of revolution." This was at the end of 1920! 
Yet, the Russian intelligence officer could have reached 
no other conclusion from the Bolshevist press. 

If a government appeals to its own people largely 
on the basis of such falsehoods, we can imagine how 
much reliance is to be placed upon Soviet statements 
about their own performances especially issued for con- 
sumption abroad. 

The character of the Soviet regime in Russia and 
of the Communist Internationale based upon it can 
be understood only if we grasp firmly and keep steadily 
in mind the utter and wholesale mendacity of the Bol- 
shevist propaganda. Practically every statement that 
comes directly or indirectly from Bolshevist sources 
is vitiated, while statements emanating from the pro- 


Bolshevists who, in addition to bring indoctrii. 
with this Bolshevist contempt for truth arc, almost with- 
out exception, wofully ignorant of Russia, are often still 
more fanciful. 

It is the vast extent and persistence of this propa- 
ganda smoke-screen that has obscured S issia 
from our eyes, and not the lack of well authenticated 
facts or any incomprehensible mystery in Soviet H'- 
or iii Bolshevism. 

The enormous role played by mendacious propaganda 
in the Bolshevist political system arises only in part from 
the character of the propaganda and in part from the 
monopoly they have established in the control of edu- 
cation and the press (including the monopoly of paper) 
together with their prohibition of free speech and assem- 
blage for all opposition par 

It may be doubted if any State Socialist writer has 
hitherto even conceived an Utopian system under which 
all printed matter whatever is controlled by the State. 
Not only have the Communists set up such a s 
trol but they have established at the same time a con 
trol over the state by the very small group which domi- 
nates the Communist Party, as we show in following 
chapters. We read in a remit despatch : 

All payments for newspapers, books, magazii 
:>hlets and pictuivs is bofifhsd in a d tin- 

gle's Cominissari'-s. I'rintrd matter may he distrib- 
uted among organizations an. I institutions, hut not sold 
to the public. 

In other words a small group has undertaken t.. 

lish a compete monopoly Offer tlir intrllrrtiinl output of 


the country. This group has practically attempted to 
direct the entire intellectual intake of a hundred million 
people! Now let us recall once more the character of 
the Communist intellectual output as already sketched 
and we can begin to realize how monstrous is the crime 
that is being attempted against the soul and mind of the 
Russian people. 

But this is only one aspect though the most funda- 
mental of Bolshevist rule. We shall now take up some 



BOLSHEVISM arose as a repudiation of democracy, 
when Lenin employed a company of armed sailor 
disperse the Constitutional Assembly which hud 1 
deliberately and fairly elected hy the entire Un- 
people. The Bolshevists have never held one election 
under universal suffrage in Russia sinee that day. Far 
from apologi/iu^, they have boasted of their adion 
in overthrowing the constituent assembly. Their print- 
ing presses have been occupied not with apolo^h s. 'hut 
with seeking plausible phrases with which to O 
their reactionary despotism, such as "dictatorship of 
the proletariat," "Soviets." "the rule of the workmen 
and peasants.*' 

At first Lenin endeavored also to distort and twist 
the word "democracy" to his purposes, hut the Soviet 
regime was M.adily becoming more and more anti- 
democratic and the effort was soon abandoned. It has 
i widely claimed that at the Soviet in 
'mber, 1920, and in the Communist Parly Con- 
i;i March, I'.iLM.the Bolshevists abandoned a large part 
of their practices and doctrines, threw communism 

bo;ird and adopted capitalism. The fuel is tha: 
steady and ceaseless change in the I position has 

been to get farther and further away from democracy 



and nearer and nearer to the absolute dictatorship of 
Lenin and those about him. 

At the outset Lenin made a strained effort to claim 
that the Bolshevist regime was democratic. In order 
to do this he made use of the favorite Bolshevist propa- 
ganda trick of employing a word to mean the very 
opposite of what it does mean. Nevertheless at that 
time he did wish the world to believe that the Bolshevists, 
in some sense, represented the Russian people. 

The Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Delegates con- 
stitutes the form of government by the workers, and 
represents the interest of all the poorest of our people, 
of nine-tenths of the population, aiming to secure peace, 
bread and liberty. . . . (Nicolai Lenin in a book entitled 
"The Proletarian Revolution in Russia," edited by 
Louis C. Fraina, pp. 24-25). 

In the Die Kommunistische Internationale in 1919 
Lenin similarly wrote: 

So Soviet or proletarian democracy has its birthplace 
in Russia. It represents another stage in evolution fol- 
lowing upon the Paris Commune. . . . For the first time 
in the history of the world a Soviet or proletarian 
democracy has created a democracy of the masses of 
the working people, of the laborers and the small 

Never before in history has there been a government 
truly representing the majority of the people and render- 
ing effective the actual power of this majority except 
the Soviet. 

So anxious was the Bolshevist dictator to claim that 
he had the support of the Russian people and so con- 


fidont was he of his capacity to win that support that 

ven had the courage to make democracy fundamental 

in the Communist doc-trine as he formulated it at that 

time. Tliis may be seen in his report to the Communist 

Congress in March, 1919 a r pled, like all of 

M'S, by the Congress. In this report, reproduced in 

the Petrograd Pravda of March 8, 1919, we read : 

That which definitely distinguishes a dictatorship of 
the proletariat from a dictatorship of other classes, from 
a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie in all the civil 
capitalist countries, is that the dictatorship of the land- 
lords and of the bourgeoisie was the forcible su; 
of the resistance of the overwhelming ma.i the 

population, namely, the toilers. On the other hand, the 
dictatorship of the proletariat is the forcible sup; 
of tl. nice of the exploiters, that is. of an insigniti- 

eant minority of the population of landlord! and 

It therefore follows that a dictatorship of the pro- 
letariat must necessarily carry with it not only ch.v 
in the form and institutions of dcmncraey. speakii 
g.-neral terms, hut specifically such a change a.s would 
tension such as has iv D seen in the 

history of the world of the actual us,- of democratism 
by the toiling da 

And in aetual fact the form of dictatorship of the 
proletariat which has already been worked out in ; 
thfl Soviet authority in 
rmany. the shop stewards' commit 

other similar Soviet institutions in other countries, .-ill 
p'pn-s.'Mt and reali/e for the toiling classes, tl: 

overwhelming ma. ; n. this actual 

possibility to use democratic rights and freedoms, which 
pOBsibili' d. ev-n approximately, in tin- 

best and most democratic bourgeois republics. 


Of course, there was never any foundation in fact 
for these statements any more than there is any truth 
in most of the other assertions of this Communist Marx. 
The Reign of Terror and the dictatorship of the Com- 
munist Party held in Soviet Russia then as now. More- 
over Lenin himself was forced to state repeatedly that 
in using the word "democracy" he did not mean to 
suggest anything at all similar to any democracy that 
had ever existed anywhere in the world before, until, 
finally, he was forced to give such strange interpreta- 
tions to the word as to make it mean its very opposite. 

On the 8th of April, 1920, he said at the Russian 
Labor Union Congress that no state had shown such 
a democratic spirit as Soviet Russia and proceeded to 
show what he meant by democracy by demanding that 
the policy be continued of "making the laboring masses 
participate in politics under the direction of the Com- 
munist Party." 

During the course of 1920 the anti-democratic course 
of the Soviet regime became more and more marked and 
its support among the population became narrower and 
narrower. In the opening speech of the Congress of 
the Communist Internationale, Zinoviev declared: 

The idea of democracy has faded away before our 
very eyes. When the American bourgeoisie before the 
eyes of the whole world suspended constitutional guaran- 
tees, when this much-praised democracy violated all the 
principles established by it by this it itself determined 
its place. On this question there should not be two 
opinions. In noting the victory over the II Interna- 
tionale it is necessary to emphasize the much-debated 
point, and finish once for all with democratic tendencies. 

32 OUT OF THEIR OWN Morn is 

A very clear statement of tho steady Intel :i of 

the war against democracy that has IK-CM ^ointf on cease- 

:i made by Isaac A. H<>ur- 

\vi.-h, recently legal adviser for the Russian Soviet 
Bureau in America: 

All movements heretofore have been movements of 
minorities or in the interests of minorities. The 
Marian movement is an independent inovcincnt of 
enormous majority." From tho Communist Mani: 
of Karl Marx and Fred< : els. . . , 

The Bolshevik revolution dealt a heavy blow t 
theory. In Russia the proletariat is only a min- 
this fact is not disputed by either the Bolshcviki or 
the anti-Bolshcviki, and it is this minority that s< 
the political power and established a dictatorship of 
the proletariat. . . . This is the essence of tho diet.. 
ship of the proletariat. 

The Communist Parties of all countries and even the 
Socialist Center [i.e., the M id other orth 

Marxists] have accepted the new formula the dicta- 
torship of the proletariat through the B 
renounced "democracy" in the sense in which 
term had been understood in all socialist platform* 
prior to the Bolshevik revolution. At times the old 
word "democracy" is still used, but a i iin^ 

:d into it. In th< ion of the 1_M points i, 

communist leaders have outspokenly declared a^;. 
democracy and in favor of dictatorship. 

The truth is th;; has demons' the 

communists that even in the most highly d< 
capitalistic conn' t, perhaj 

proletariat is as yet not the m. ' the adult pnpu- 

fore. th. prnlrtariat is as 
lish socialism through the machinery of 
iat is according!} M ith 

the alternative of j ig the establishment of 


socialism until the course of capitalistic development 
will raise it to a majority of the population or of seiz- 
ing the powers of government by an uprising of an 
armed minority, and establishing a dictatorship which 
does not need the support of the majority of the voters. 

This quotation is from the Socialist Review, April, 

Indeed a thoroughly anti-democratic conception ruled 
Soviet Russia from the beginning. Without quoting 
at length from the Soviet constitution on this point, 
we can with equal effect and more brevity cite the fol- 
lowing from a resolution of the Eighth Communist 
Congress, held March 18-23, 1919 : 

The Russian Communist Party, developing the con- 
crete aims of the dictatorship of the proletariat with 
reference to Russia, the chief characteristic of which 
is that the majority of the population consists of petty 
bourgeoisie, defines these aims as follows: 

The urban proletariat . . . played the part of leader 
in the revolution. . . . Our Soviet constitution reflects 
that in certain privileges it confers upon the industrial 
proletariat in comparison with the more scattered 
petty-bourgeois mass in the village [i.e. the bulk of 
the agriculturists]. 

By the spring of 1920 Lenin had already thrown over 
the democratic idea, together with all hope of gaining 
the support of the peasants within the next twenty-five 
or fifty years, for he said at the Trade Union Congress 
in April: 

The peasantry remained, in their production, as 
property owners and are creating new capitalistic rela- 
tions. These are the fundamental traits of our economic 


situation, and honco originates tlir unwwfam of fke 
tnlk of . frcnlnnt who 

do not understand the actual situation. (From Soviet 
vto, December 25, 1920.) 

So all the fraudulent pretenses of "democracy," 
i in the most strained interpretation of the word, 
have been abandoned. Let us now examine the 
tense that there has been instituted a government of 
"Soviets. " In Russian the word "Soviets" means 
simply "councils." And so it is used, even in P.ol- 
shevist Russia, in senses that vary almost from 
to day. It is true they have a Soviet constitution hut 
it is subject to unlimited interpretation and adminis- 
tration by the Communist Party who constructed it, 
in the first place. Tor their own purposes. If, 1 
we turn to the Soviet constitution, on the momei. 
supposition that it means in practice what it says on 
paper, we find it full of anti-democratic clauses. K 
in the very friendly report of the P.ritish Labor 1' 
it is pointed out that clause 23 of the const it i, 
reads : 

In the general interest of the working-class, the Rus- 
sian Soviet Republic deprives individuals and sect i 
of the community of any privileges which may be used 
to the detriment of the Socialist Revolution. 

The Briti Labor Party report also points out that 

peasants have on! W oi < 1 pita 

of the town electors, that the system of voting is always 

. there I r ballot, and that the elections 

are s -1 that the handful of M sars 


are in complete control, being only "theoretically" 
responsible to the Soviets. 

Just as they have abandoned the pretense of 
democracy, so the Bolshevists have now given up the 
pretense of a "Soviet" government, whatever that may 
mean. Let us note the following from the proceedings 
of the Communist Internationale, July, 1920. 

"All the Russian delegates," says Comrade Trotsky, 
"when they return from the Congress will have to 
face a whole series of questions ; for example, the pro- 
posal of the Polish Government to conclude peace. 
Where shall we decide this question? In the trade 
unions? Of course, not there. It is true, we have a 
Soviet of People's Commissaries, but the Soviet of 
People's Commissaries also requires political control 
and definite political direction. We shall give it this 
political direction on the basis of the work of the party 
and the political control can be carried out only by 
the Communist Party." 

In spite of the wholly despotic nature of their rule, 
the Bolshevists hold so-called Soviet elections and send 
broadcast over the world accounts of electoral victories 
as proof of the fact that they are a civilized and orderly 
government with popular support. It may be doubted 
if such "elections" have occurred in any country for a 
century or more. An excellent account of the latest Bol- 
shevist electoral victory was given in the German Social- 
ist Press in April, 1920, by the foreign delegation of the 
Socialist Democratic Labor Party of Russia. 

The brilliant victory at elections to the Moscow Soviet 
as announced by the Communists will probably be able 
to deceive nobody either in Russia or abroad. After 


recent events in Russia the whole world knows vrha 

true State of niiiul of tin- Russian ina-ses ai.d what, 
kind of electoral freedom . e Socialistic 

Soviet Republic of Russia. Tl follows: 

A complete suppression of all freedom . 
assemblage for all inhabitants except ( \miinui. ists. 

The absolute prohibition of all other parties to conduct 
any kind of an electoral campaign. 

illegal Social Revolutionists are not permit ted to 
go to the polls at all, so that this strong party cannot 
possess a single Soviet delegate (among tens of thou- 
sands) in all Russia. 

The Socialist Democratic party is formally legal but 
in fact illegal since regularly before each elcetinn ' 
are mass arrests, the victims of which are only allowed 
their liberty again after the elections. 

Public voting by the reason of hands in the election 
of all officials. 

Election geometry as follows: of 1100 delegates in 
Moscow, 600 were assigned to the army, moreover 200 
were appointed by the executive staffs of the red labor 
unions. [We shall show below that these executives were 
in turn generally appointed by the choice of the Com- 
munist party.] 

The above facts are taken from the official declaration 
of the electoral regulations. 

, In Bolshevist Russia, then, we do not have a dn 
racy or a Soviet regime but a so-called "proletarian 
dictatorship." Is it a Labor State? Arguing ag.v 
Trotzky at a meeting called to discuss the trade unions 
end of 1920, Lenin said : 

If we in 1!'17 [befON the holsli-\ 

'" about a Labor State that was quite clear, hut 
at present, if we Bay: "Why and auainst whom is 
labor class to be protected, as there is no l>ourg 


as the state is a labor state?'* we must say "not quite 
a labor state." This is peculiar inasmuch as many of 
Trotsky's mistakes are based upon this point. In fact 
we have not a labor state, but a labor-peasant's state, 
first of all. Many things may be explained on this 
account. Already our party program shows that we 
have a labor state with burocratic perversions. That 
is the reality of the transitory period. Can you tell me 
whether in such a burocratic state, etc. 

Also at the meeting of the Congress of Soviets, as 
reported in the Petrograd Pravda of December 23, 1920, 
Lenin made it clear that he was aware that the non- 
Communists the Communist Party including only 
600,000 members did not support the leading policies 
of his government: 

Are the members of the trades unions and most of 
the non-partisan elements convinced of the necessity 
of our new methods, of our great tasks of economic 
construction? Are they convinced of the necessity of 
giving everything for war, of sacrificing everything for 
a victory on the military front? 

The answer is undoubtedly, No ! They are not suffi- 
ciently convinced of that. 

In Russia to-day we have neither a democracy, a 
Soviet regime nor a Labor State, but the dictatorship 
of the Communist Party. The only phrases by which 
the Communists now insist in disguising their rule are 
"the dictatorship of the proletariat" and the "Republic 
of the Workmen and Peasants." The fact that they 
continue to use these expressions while at the same 
time they confess it is the Communist Party that 
governs indicates the brazen deception that permeates 
their entire propaganda. 


The official confession that the Communist Party 
rules may be seen in the resolution proposed by that 
Party at the 1920 Congress of the Communist I: 
nationale and accepted unanimously by that body. We 
quote only a few of the most important expressions from 
this very interesting document. The meaning is so clear 
that comments are not called for. 

The Communist Party is a part of the working class, 
precisely its most advanced, most conscious, and t! 
fore most revolutionary part. The Communist P. 
springs into being through a natural Beta the 

best, the most conscious, the most self-sacrificing, and 
far-seeing workmen. The Communist Party has no 
interests different from the interests of the working 
class. . . . 

The Communist Party is that lever of political 
organization by means of which the most -. 
part of the working class directs the mass of the 
proletariat and semi-proletariat along the right road. 

As long as the government*] authority has not ! 
conquered by the proletariat, as long as the proletariat 
has not established its rub- once for all and has not 
guaranteed the working class from the possibility of 
'urgeois restoration, so long will the Communist 
Tarty by ri^ht have in its . .Us only the 

minority of the work men. Cp to the time of 1 1 

overnimntal authority and during 1 ! of 

transition the Communist Party may. in favorabl. 
eumstanees. political 

inflm nee upon all the proletarian and s- mi-prolet;: 
:ta of a population, but it can not brin^ then 
^ther in its ranks in an <ri:ani/. d manner. Only ; 
the i;iu dictatorship will have : the 

bourgeois of su-h powerful in- 

fluence as the press, the school, the parliament, the 


church, the administrative apparatus, etc., only after 
the final defeat of the bourgeois social order will have 
become evident for everybody, only then will all or 
practically all the workmen begin to enter the ranks 
of the Communist Party. . . . 

In Germany the Eight Independents, whenever they 
make their halfway steps, allege that they represent the 
desires of the masses, not realizing that a party exists 
precisely for the purpose of marching in front of the 
mass and of showing the mass the road it is to follow. 

The Proletarian Revolution, in Russia, has brought 
to the foreground the basic form of labor dictatorship, 
viz., the Soviet. In the very near future the following 
division will establish itself: First, the party; second, 
the Soviets ; and third, the productive unions. But the 
work both in the Soviets and in the revolutionized 
productive unions must be invariably and systematically 
directed by the party of the proletariat, i.e., the Com- 
munist Party. The organized vanguard of the labor 
class, the Communist Party, serves equally the interests 
of the economical, the political, and the cultural strug- 
gle of the working class as a whole. The Communist 
Party must be the soul of the productive unions, of , 
the Soviets of Workmen's Deputies, and of all the other ; 
forms of proletarian organization. 

The appearance of the Soviets as the chief form of 
the dictatorship of the proletariat furnished by the 
history does not in any way diminish the directing role 
of the Communist Party in the Proletarian Revolution. 

Again the monopoly of all governmental functions, 
and of nearly all the most vital economic functions, by 
the Communist Party was briefly stated by Lenin on 
November 5th, 1920 (before the Political Education 
Conference quoted by Soviet Russia, April 30th, 
1921). In this speech Lenin referred to that party 
as necessarily controlling "the mighty state apparatus" 


and as "determining everything." His nK> 
:icrs were the following: 

We must openly recognize the predominance of the 

iinist J'arhj hi our polhij. 

. 'party may : In- inter- ass more 

or less, may pass through alterations of one kind >r 
another, but we do not yet know of a better form: 
no other form has as yet been found in any country. 
The entire juristic and practical constitution of 
Soviet Republic is built upon the fact that ; 
party that i'x improving and determining everything, 
reconstructing everything according to a single prin- 
ciple, in order that the Communist element s in close 
contact with the proletariat may permeate it with their 
spirit and liberate it from the heritage of capitalism, 
which we are so ardently striving to overcon 

y propagandist belongs to the party, which ix 
guiding and directing the < ntin state, the world stru 
of Soviet Russia against capitalism. This propagandist 
is a representative of the lighting class and party that 
controls and necessarily must control this mighty xtutc 

What now is this Communist Party which claims to 
t the proletariat by divine right, not only in 
Russia but throughout the whole world and by r- 
senting the world proletariat, proposes to take pss, 
<>f the earth and all it contains! 

Ibre are the official Soviet statistics <>f the Party 
membership of some 604,000 (we omit a few unimpor- 
tant figures) : 

Government or town officials. 318,000: < 'ent. 

Officers and Soldiers 102,00027 " 

.mployees M.OOO 6 " " 

AVorkingmcn 70,00011 " 


But while the Communist Party represents a little 
more than one per cent, of the adult population of 
Russia, Zinoviev, in opening the congress of the Soviets 
last December (see Pravda, December 29, 1920) boast- 
fully asserted that the percentage of Communists in 
the provincial executive commissions was ninety-nine! 
From these figures, we may see that in Soviet Russia 
each Communist counts for as much as ten thousand 
non-party members. 

Yet the Soviet chiefs continue to make the most 
preposterous claims on behalf of the party. For 
example Lenin declared in his closing speech at the 
Tenth Congress of the Communist Party (see Moscow 
Wireless of March 20, 1921) that "there is no other 
power except the Communist Party that is capable of 
uniting millions of widely distributed small farmers." 
In view of the fact shown in the above statistics that 
the agriculturists do not include more than two or 
three per cent, of the membership of the Communist 
Party although they outnumber that party by more 
than fifty to one, we can get some notion of the extreme 
degree of untruthfulness which the Bolshevists, by 
long and strenuous practice, have finally attained. But 
all this flood of falsehood is proving useless for Bol- 
shevist purposes, since the discussion within the Com- 
munist ranks itself is now disclosing the full truth. 
Late in 1920 Trotzky complained in the Pravda: 

The people are now maintaining the same attitude 
toward the Soviet Regeme which they maintained 
against capitalism, as a force exploiting it and robbing 
it of its toil. Our problem is to regain the support 
of the workers. 


Ossinsky, a prominent Communist, sums up the anti- 
democratic retrogression of the Bolshevist regime in 
Pravda, December 20, 1920, as follows: 

For three years the Soviet Government has seriously 
turned aside from the principles of proletarian d 
racy, and from the spirit of the Soviet Constitution. < Mi 
the one hand, there have been created two legislative 
bodies, not provided by our constitution the Council of 
Defense and the Military Revolutionary Couneil; on the 
other, all constitution organs (legislative as well as exec- 
utive) have virtually disappeared. 

The eclipse of the Central K \ecutive Committee is 
generally known. But even the Council of Peop 
Commissars and the Council of Defense, which ! 

sibly replaced the Central Executive Committee, 
have been, in their turn, eclipsed by still another body. 

In reality the centre of political leadership has I 
shifted to the Central Committee of the Communist 
party, and vm here to a smaller body, the "Political 
Bureau" of this commit 1 

irislative measures, diplomatic acts, and military 
plans decided by this " Politik-Bureau " an formally 
sanctioned and issued in the name cither of the P. op 
Commissars or the Council of DetVnsc. Diplomatic 
notes and military plans do not need even such formal 
sanction of any of the existing legislative or 69 
organs of the State. 

In describing the steady reactionary trend toward 
the dictatorship of a smaller and smaller number of 
m. n, we cannot stop with the assertion that it is the 
Communist Party that controls, for the question an 
who controls the Communist Party? This is easily 
answered. At a spci;il meeting of the Soviet Economic 
Conference in January, 1920, Lenin said: 


No matter what domain of Soviet activity we turn 
to, we see a small portion of the conscious proletariat, 
a still greater number of the less conscious, and then 
at the very foundation, an enormous mass of peasants 
who have all retained their individual economic habits 
of free commerce and speculation. Such are the con- 
ditions under which we must act and which determine 
appropriate methods of action. . . . 

In the autocracy of the chiefs of communism and the 
communist domination of the people lies the pledge of 
our success. 

What we really have in Soviet Russia is the rule 
of the chiefs of the Bolshevist Party, the congresses 
of that organization being cut and dried affairs. We 
must not forget that the Commissars in control of the 
Bolshevist Government are able to apply their dicta- 
torial power over Communist party members, using not 
only rewards and punishments for their purposes but 
also the frightful "Extraordinary Commission for Com- 
bating Counter-Revolution. " Furthermore the Execu- 
tive of the Party reserves the right of purging it from 
time to time of unsatisfactory members and thousands 
>*upon thousands have been put out in this way. At 
the same time entrance is made extremely difficult and 
is controlled by the central committee. The excuse 
for all this centralization within the Party is, of course, 
the necessities of the revolutionary civil war that is 
still raging and, as we show below, is expected to 
continue to rage for the next twenty-five or fifty years. 

The following paragraphs from the long resolution 
of the Second Congress of the Communist Internation- 
ale already quoted sufficiently indicate the power 


placed in the hands of the Communist bosses by the 
constitution of their organization: 

The 2nd Congress of the Communist Internationale 
should not only affirm the historic mission of the Com- 
munist Party in general, but should indicate to the 
International Proletariat, at least in its fundamental 
features, precisely what kind of a Communist Party 
we needL 

The Communist Internationale considers that the 
Communist Party should be built up on the basis of 
iron proletarian centralism particularly in t! 
of the dictatorship of the proletariat. In order i 
able to direct successfully the activities of the working 
class in the long and persistent civil war which im- 
pends, the Communist Party itself must operate within 
its own ranks iron military order. 

Under the "military order" of an "iron proletarian 
centralism" any practical person may easily grasp the 
futility of such reforms as are now proposed for "the 
ending of the dictatorship of the people's commissars" 
and "the taking over of actual control of the ai 
of state by the Central Kxecntive Committee of the 
Soviets." (Resolution of the 1920 Soviet Congress.) 
"Where is there any authority honestly ; out 

this proposed change outside of the Communist Party? 
Tin- resolution on February 9, 1921. by which the Cen- 
tral Kxecutive Committee ordered the local 
voked and given "full power." was also m iage. 

As these local governing bodies consist to the extent of 
ninety-nine per cent (see /inoviev's figures above 
quoted) of Communists under the dictatorial pow 
the Soviet Commissars as chiefs of the Party, what 
change has taken place f 


But is this a merely transitional party dictatorship 
while the foreign wars continue and while the victory 
of the Communists is not yet assured? Not at all. In 
his speech before the Communist Internationale, as 
quoted in the Moscow Pravda, December 3, 1920, Zino- 
viev declared: " After the victory the role of the party 
does not decline but on the contrary increases." We 
have already quoted the resolution of that Congress 
referring to "the long and persistent civil war which 
impends." Again Lenin says in his "Theses," which 
were adopted by the Congress: 

The conquest of political power by the proletariat 
does not bring about the cessation of class struggle 
against the bourgeoisie, but on the contrary, makes 
this struggle especially wide, sharp, and pitiless. 

What before the victory of the proletariat appears 
theoretically as merely a difference of opinion on the 
question of "democracy," after the proletarian victory 
becomes inevitably a question to be decided by force 
of arms. 

On January 30, 1921, Lenin said to the visiting 
delegation of Spanish Socialists: 

We never speak about liberty. We practice the 
proletariat's dictatorship in the name of the minority 
because the peasant class has not yet become proletariat 
and are not with us. It will continue until they subject 
themselves. Presumably the dictatorship will last about 
forty years. 

Similarly Lenin declared to Serrati, the Italian 
revolutionary leader, a few months earlier, that the 


dictatorship would last twenty-five years to fifty 
years. The Second Communist Internationale eoncl 
its discussion of the dictatorial role of the Communist 
Party (above quoted) as follows: 

The aim of a political party of the proletariat dis- 
appears only with the compl- 
in the process of achieving this final victory of Com- 
munism it is possible that the specific gravity of the 
three fundamental proletarian organizations of our 
time, the party, the Soviet, and the productive uiii 
will undergo changes, and that eventually a tin- 
type of labor organization will heroine erysialli/.ed. Hut 
the Communist Party will become dissolved completely 
in the working class at the time when Communism will 
cease to be the aim of the struggle, and when the v 
working class will become communistic. 

The fact that the dictatorship of the proletariat is not 
regarded as a rapidly passing phase was again brought 
out by Lenin at the Congress of the Communist Party 
in March, 1920 when the Bolshevist leader said: 

We must base our activities with regard i> < l.i 
tions in our country and in nthtr count, 
retain the dictatorship of the proletariat for a j>ro1nnged 
period and to cxtri<-at- ouaelvefl it' "ii!y gradually from 
the misfortunes and .ich have conn- upon us. 

Not only do the Bolshevists promulgate for all 

< a long period of dictatorship similar to \\ ha 
now see in Russia, hut they helieve that this will be 
a period of civil war justifying all manner of term 
violence and extreme u As the resolution 

above cited frequently says, a long period of civil war 


is before us. During this civil war no other parties 
have a right to represent the proletariat, no matter 
what their numerical support, except the Communist 
Party. The attitude of the Communists toward other 
political organizations of labor is shown by the follow- 
ing remarks of Lenin: 

We see in practice that the unity of the proletariat 
during a social revolution may be achieved only by 
the extreme revolutionary party of Marxism, and only 
by means of a ruthless struggle against other parties 
(Lenin at Transport Workers' Congress Economic Life, 
December 3, 1920). 

The Social Revolutionaries, the Menshevists and the 
Kerenskys? . . . Everyone who is at present acting 
against the Soviet Government and calls himself a non- 
party member lies (Lenin at meeting of Central Ex- 
excutive Committee, Moscow Wireless, March 23, 1921 ) . 

Not only are all other labor parties and non-party' 
members declared to be non-labor or bourgeois, but, 
whenever they assume any importance, they are defi- 
nitely excluded from the Soviets, as we see from the 
following decree: 

(All-Russian Central Executive Committee, June 14 , 
(1), 1918.) 

Whereas, The presence in the Soviet organization of 
representatives of parties that clearly strive to dis- 
credit and overthrow the authority of the Soviets is 
absolutely inadmissible : 

Therefore, the All-Russian Central Executive' Com- 
mittee of Soviets resolves to exclude from its member- 
ship representatives of the parties of Socialist-Revolu- 
tionaries (Right and Center), Russian Social-Demo- 


cratic Workmen's Party (Mensh.-vists), and also to 
propose to all Soviets of Workmen's, Soldiers', Peas- 
ants' and Cossacks' Deputies to remove th< r 
tatives of these fractions from their mi 


Y. JS 1 ^ 
Secretary V. Avanesov. 

Not only are leaders of all opposition parti 
eluded from the Soviet whenever they become pow-r- 
ful, but they are regarded as traitors and 
accordingly. The only opposition tolerated is obliged 
to call itself "non-partisan," and even the non-partisans 
are "suspect" and subject to sudden punishment. 

[Lenin's speech above quoted is only one of many 
evidences of this attitude.] 



As early as September, 1918, Mr. Wilson, then Presi- 
dent, made an effective appeal to the civilized world 
against the crimes, the "barbarism," the "mass terror- 
ism" and the "indiscriminate slaughter" of the Bol- 
shevists. He called for all civilized nations to with- 
draw their official representatives from Soviet Russia, 
and every civilized nation without exception responded 
to his call. 

The reign of terror continues and in many respects 
has grown worse. Again and again the Bolshevist 
chiefs and assemblies have re-endorsed terrorism. At 
the second congress of the Communist Internationale, 
in the summer of 1920, Lenin declared that "no dicta- 
torship of the proletariat is to be thought of without 
terror and violence against the bitter foes of the pro- 
letariat and the laboring masses." Let us remember 
that this international meeting is the highest Com- 
munist authority and the principles accepted there are 
binding until the next annual meeting, and that Lenin 
and his immediate associates reserve to themselves the 
right to define just who are to be regarded as "the 
bitter foes of the proletariat and the laboring masses." 

Anybody Lenin and Trotzky desire to destroy they 
first label "bourgeois," but they are just as ready to 
apply this term to laboring men or their elected leaders 



or to laboring agriculturists as they arc to apply it 
to former employers. On October 5, 1920, Tro 

The bourgeoisie must be torn off, cut off. The Red 
Terror is an instrument used against a class doomed 
to go under and which does not want to go under. 

An even stronger expression was used at the h. Bin- 
ning of the Bolshevist rule by Latsis, one of tin c: 
of the Extraordinary Commission, which is charged 
with putting the Red Terror into effect. In the organ 
called the Red Terror (November 1, 1918) Latsis wr 

We are no longer waging war against separate in- 
dividuals. We are exterminating the bourgeoisie as a 

Do not seek in the dossier of the accused for proofs 
as to whether he opposed the So\i. : Gforernmanl 
word or deed. The first question that should be put 
is to what class he belongs, of what extract ion, what 
education and profession. These questions should 
ide the fate of the accused. Herein lies the mean- 
ing and the essence of the Red Terror. 

This description gives a good picture of th> methods 
of the Red Terror, but the list of classes which v 
to be exterminated was soon extended to embrace all 
anti-Bolshevists, no matter whether they themselves 
were wage earners and no matter how many thousands 
or ton thousands of wage earners they represented. Tn 
a speech made on ApH the railway 

workers in Moscow Lenin stated that "the bourgeois 
class does not exist any more in Russia." and boasted 


that it Had been " completely destroyed " by the Bol- 
shevists. We may point out that this is merely a ter- 
rible boast, for it is well known that after slaughtering 
the " bourgeoisie" for a year or more Lenin publicly 
acknowledged that he not only needed the experts in 
this class but was ready to retain them at very high 
salaries. But in view of their previous treatment and 
the treatment of their relatives and friends we can be 
assured that these bourgeois, far from being good Bol- 
shevists, maintain their former views and are waiting 
for a chance at revenge. 

Trotzky has tried to justify mass terror (from signed 
article in Izvestia of January 10, 1919, under title 
" Military Specialists and the Red Army") : 

By its terror against saboteurs the proletariat does 
not at all say: "I shall wipe out all of you and get 
along without specialists." Such a program would be 
a program of hopelessness and ruin. While dispersing, 
arresting and shooting saboteurs and conspirators, the 
proletariat says: "I shall break your will, because my 
will is stronger than yours, and I shall force you to 
serve me." . . . Terror as the demonstration of the 
will and strength of the working class, is historically 
justified, precisely because the proletariat was able 
thereby to break the political will of the intelligentsia, 
pacify the professional men of various categories and 
work, and gradually subordinate them to its own aims 
within the fields of their specialties. 

The conspirators referred to in this paragraph are 
all those who stand for the right of the Russian people 
to elect their own representative government in the place 
of the tyranny that is now imposed upon them; the 


"saboteurs" are the pr< .1 men and exi< 

whose wills could not In- successfully for* 

In a letter to 1 ii it ish labor dated May 30, 1'JiM. I 
after denouncing the democracy of the British Labor 
Party, their pacifism, etc., says of its leaders: "The 
soon slum- the late of Kerensky. the V 

sheviks and Social Revolutionists in Russia" the better. 
What this fate was we shall see below. Leuin then 
continues : 

Some of tho members of your delegation have as' 
me with surprise concerning Red Terror, about the lack 
of the freedom of the Press, about the lac lom 

of assembly, about our persecution of Mensheviks and 
Mriish'-vik workers, etc. . . . Our Red Terror is a de- 
fense of the working class apainst the exploiter- 
is the suppression of 1he resistance of the explo'r 
with whom the Social Revolutionists, the Meiishe 
and an insignificant number of M. nshevik wor 
align themselves. . . . The same "leaders" of wori 
who duetinp a non-communist policy are !>!' 

f the hniirp T. of 


n definite official statement by the Bols 
chief that a regularly elected labor leader may be re- 
garded as 99 per cent, bourgeois and h- n so 
regarded for purposes of imprisonment ir < vnition. 

The Bolshevist Czar recently issued a ukase n 
that prisoners belonging to all active anti-Bolshe 

ips would be held as all bound together as hostages 

of the Bolshevist chiefs referring back 

to the butchery of hundreds of such hostages after the 

assassination of the bloody Uritzky and the attack 


on Lenin in 1918. Here are the words of the decree 
as carried in the official Izvestia on November 30, 1920 : 

Confident of its impregnability, the Soviet Govern- 
ment is nevertheless very far from offering an oppor- 
tunity to these counter-revolutionists and agents of the 
Allies for resuming again the methods of struggle used 
by them in 1918 and resulting in a stern lesson in Red 
Terror in retaliation. 

The Workers' and Peasants' Government has in its 
hands quite a sufficient number of prominent and 
responsible counter-revolutionary leaders from the 
camp of all the above-mentioned groups, especially 
from among the Wrangel officers. Regarding all of 
them as ~bound together in a mutual pledge to relentless 
struggle against the authority of the workers and 
peasants, the Soviet Government declares the Socialists 
Revolutionists of Savinkov's and Chernov's groups, the 
White Guards of the National and Tactical Centre, and 
WrangePs officers hostages. In the event of an at- 
tempt on the lives of the leaders of Soviet Russia the 
responsible partisans (literally in the Russian text 
those who think likewise) of the organizers of an 
attempt will be exterminated without mercy. 

In order fully to realize what this means let us quote 
from the appeal to the Socialists of the world by Mar- 
toff, leader of the Russian Social Democratic Labor 
p ar ty an appeal that has been endorsed by the well- 
known syndicalist Merrheim, head of the French Metal 
Workers and one of the leaders of the Confederation 
Generate du Travail. Referring to the above ukase, 
Martoff, who is well and favorably known by the entire 
labor movement of Europe, writes: 

Let all who would take this warning lightly remem- 
ber the fatal experiment which has already been made 


in Soviet Russia, in September, IIMS. after the mi; 

of Uritzky, Chief of tin- lYtrograd police, and th- 
tempt to shoot Lenin, the S< 

mti-Bol$keviki to be hostages in it of 

thef ass; MS. and at the same time, as a 

isal for the acts of terrorism already committed. 
ordered a number of osta^es" in several i 

to be shot. 

It is impossible to estimate the number of men and 
women killed at that time. The gnn-i-al public , 
motion forced the Government to conceal the tru- 
tent of the hideous mass r the publi. 

the first lists of victims. Hut from tln-se lists it is 
known that in Petrograd 512 people were shot 
in Penza, 41 in Nijni-Xovgorod, 30 in Smolensk. 1>!) in 
Moscow, 6 in Mojaisk, 4 in Morshansk. 7 in Nijni- 
Lvoff, and 7 in Schemlara. The last echo of tins mad- 
ness was the proclamation of the IVtro/avodsk 
Northern Hi \ti-aordinary Commission that it 

shot 14 bourgeois hostages as a revenge for the murder 

m burp and Karl Liebknecht ! 

Just after the above-mentioned attempts on the i : 
Of Lenin and Other Holsheviks. the Social-Revolutionary 
party stated officially that it had nothing to do with 
these assassinations; but this statement did not prevent 
the P.olshevik'H shooting down like dops member 
the Social-Revolutionary party. The f(rr<>risl >m/</ 
of the Bolsheviks, once let loose, ignored th< a 
In twccn the diff< r< nt *-ti<ts of ih< ir jmliticnl <>]>. 
In lYtrograd they shot the metal worker Krako\ 
a member of the Scial-l)-mo-ratic Labor Tar' 
members of the same party in Ribinsl, 

fRami' .ifT and and in 

N'i.jni-Novgorod t 'he local party com- 

mittee, Comrade Ridnik. 

L r reat majority of tl '-meed to tlm 

(?cois class, and were not mixi-d nj> with p.ilr' 
they were arrested, not because of some crime com 


mitted, but as ' ' suspicious persons ' ' whom it was neces- 
sary to isolate. Men and women, boys and aged people 
all were shot because two men, political fanatics, had 
plotted the murder of two leaders of the Communist 

The official execution and wholesale butchery of hos- 
tages referred to by Martoff is boastfully avowed in 
the official Soviet pamphlet by which the Bolshevists 
have sought to sum up and popularize the Red Terror 
and the Extraordinary Commission. This pamphlet, 
written by Latsis, is printed by the Soviet Printing 
Office in Moscow, 1920. As to the 1918 butchery, Lat- 
sis in Chapter 5 of the pamphlet declares: 

But the murderess, the hysterical Kaplan, missed her 
aim. The Extraordinary Commission exacted costly 
retribution for these murders. In Petrograd alone as 
many as 500 persons were slwt as an answer to the shots 
fired at Comrades Lenin and Uritzky. 

Those who dreamed of killing the revolution by 
murdering the leaders severely wounded themselves, 
and the damages inflicted by the proletariat were a 
whole year in healing. 

The Bolshevist remedy for insufficient productivity 
on the part of labor, known as sabotage, is thus sum- 
marized in Chapter 3 of this illuminating document : 

Those who were practicing sabotage were (either) 
shot to death or imprisoned by us, but nevertheless up 
to this time they have eluded us in large numbers and 
destroyed our apparatus and transports. Such work 
is nothing else than the same counter-revolution. It 
was so regarded by the Extraordinary Commission, 


and those guilty of sabotage we without 

mercy. The Extraordinary Commission threw its best 

tight against this n , 

is. There is but 

one way to get rid of this pestilence burn H mil 
a hot iron. And that is what the Extraordinary Com- 
mission is doing. 

We now come to another class punished 

by 1 or any other process of law, 

viz., the crime of affiliation with the s< nd labor 

parties which think they have a right to a 

government in proportion to their numerical I 
port. This is not the Bolshevist view. And the punish- 
etTort to institute cither a democratic or 
a non-Bolshe i a list government >f any chara 

is i; b. We quote the following from 

Chapter 4 of the above mentioned oflirial pamphlet : 

there is still another kind of connter-revolu- 

se who are such !> 1<> not think. 

who not seldom the triumph 

Me working class, but do not understand how this 

is to beaernniplished. This is the whole So. 

class, the bourgeois 

parties among us; s ta of the Night. 

Sori of the L 

re in tl working 

.' lad therefore l--sir.- to trade with their class 

is a 

war no/ f,, r life but to the death; a war in which prisoners 
art not taken and no compromises made, but oppoi 
art killed. As there 

ion ]>d-., 
bourgeoisie and : >u may beat the 


as you will but he will still remain savage; so the 
bourgeoisie does not change his nature. 

We must recall in this connection that the civil war 
is looked upon by the Bolshevists as likely to last a 
generation or more and that all non-Bolshevist work- 
ing men are labelled ' 'bourgeois." 

Without counting irregular executions, assassina- 
tions, massacres and military killings of many different 
kinds, the Extraordinary Commission, in the pamphlet 
quoted, confesses that it executed 2,024 persons for the 
sole fact of belonging to an anti-Bolshevist organization 
such organizations, as we have said, being always 
labelled for Bolshevist purposes as counter-revolution- 
ary or bourgeoisie. This does not include 3,082 persons 
executed for insurrection and 455 for inciting insurrec- 
tion. The immense scope of the Extraordinary Com- 
mission and the use of the death penalty for offenses 
for which it has not been used in civilized countries 
for centuries, is shown in Chapter 2 of the pamphlet 
quoted : 

The sphere of the labors of the Extraordinary Com- 
mission was determined by the activities of the counter- 
revolutionary elements; but, as there was no domain 
of life into which the counter-revolutionists had not 
intruded themselves, and where their destructive work 
was not manifested, the Extraordinary Commission 
often had to enter quite positively into all phases of 
life: stores, transportation, Red army, navy, militia, 
schools, consulates, industry, assessments, etc. 

But the Extraordinary Commission had to interest 
itself not only in direct counter-revolutionary work. 
There are acts committed by no means intended cer- 


tainly to injure the Soviet authority, but simply for 
personal advantage \vir 

are spe<- erimei i (in 

banditry, and cl 

ta do no less ha >oviet 

auti ;ii the open roiuM- 

ollowed up in the same manner 
as t! 

For the sake of a ittfanflating and 

mastering all the (details of tin- immense w 

rdinary Commiss 

we present it to \\w n-.-id. r in i!i- same category wt 
in tli.' main was jmrsin-d in tin- course of 1: 

:i the same order in which it developed, 

1. Sabotage. 

2. ' revolution, 

( Yimes in office. 
5. Banditry. 

of the rich peasants (land-grabbrn^. 
7. Desertion. 

IM expression "rich peasant " ; 
men' p.-asant who 

called l.y them for th ].urposes of exrcuiioi: 

- needless to say that I m. H.-li or ireH-1 

peasants in Russia after all t: lie de^, 

of the past ' *, and < 

years of Bolshevist persecMti(n and attack on all 
peasants who were \v. ll enough oiT to muster up 
effective resistance. 

Bolshevist ! 


passage from an order directed against the Cossacks a 
name applied to the agriculturists of a certain section : 

To institute a mass terror against the well-to-do 
Cossacks and peasants, exterminating them wholesale, 
and to institute a ruthless mass terror against those 
Cossacks in general who have any direct or indirect 
part in the struggle against the Soviet power. 

The Central Committee of the Russian Com- 
munist Party. 

Chief of the Chancellery of the Political Sec- 
tion of the Southern Front. 

(Signed) Cherniak, 

Secretary of the Political Section of the 8th 

Steklov, in the Moscow Izvestia, declares that civil 
war will continue until the Social Revolutionaries and 
the "koulaks" (the better-off agriculturists) who are 
hampering the work of construction, particularly that 
of revictualling, are completely exterminated. 

Here is another example. The peasants have in many 
places organized armies for self-defense which cannot 
by any stretch of the imagination be called "Whites. 
These so-called " Green Armies" are defending the vil- 
lages from the foraging and punishment expeditions 
of the Red armies. This is how a recent decree of the 
Extraordinary Commission in Southern Russia pro- 
poses to deal with them: 

The majority of the Greens who are now in the moun- 
tains have their relatives in the villages. These have all 
been registered, and in case of an attack by these bands 
all adult relatives of those who are fighting against 


us will be shot. \\-\.\ minor relatives will be 

In the event of a mass risinir of any villa*:.-, stanitza 

\ve shall apply mass terror against these lo 
ties; for every S- '.ill he killed 

hundreds of inhabitants oi illages and stanitzas 

will have to suff- 

liolshevist remedy for any and all opponents is 
to find some opprobrious to apply in- 

dicating treason to Bolsh* .sh tli.-m 

with the Red Terror. This method is evidently to be 
used even against tin- valiant KV<1 Anny. The peasants 
who ;it. of the Army arc bring 

demobilized. 'naindrr. said to be sonir hundred 

i sand men, an- < it In -r i y foreigners. ( 'hiuese, 

Hungarian, Letts, ete.. nnd r the name of tli 

>nal M army, or communist fanatics. The first 

persecution of the rank ,'*nd fil- 
Red Army was to deprive them of all rights. 1 
Trot/ky in his Order of the K.-volutionary Military 
Council, No. 296, dated November 10, 1920, d < l.i 

The country is in danger. The false notion that the 
Umy Kill any civic n^hls threatens tlie existenee of 

free Russian people and the Revoluti 

It may be r : 'hat the r.olshevists came into 

power by standing for the rights of soldi n to 

point of the right to rl.-rt tli-ir own officers. Hut 

now, having deprived the peasant soldiers of all rights. 

in is appar. ntly upon the | turning tlie I\. d 

To a meeting of the railway 


workers in Moscow, reported in the Bolshevist Wireless 
of April 3 (1921) he said: 

The soldiers do not wish to go back to cultivate their 
land and become peaceful workers. The demobilized 
soldiers are our greatest enemies. They have been 
accustomed to rob and pillage and murder. They have 
been accustomed to satisfy only their own needs and 

It is evident that a despot who feels he has the power 
to wage war against the personnel of his own army 
is liable to proceed against any other element of his 

The use of the Extraordinary Commission and of 
terroristic methods against labor is shown in the fol- 
lowing passages from the report drawn up on February 
1 by the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party: 

In Mohilev the entire membership of both the Rus- 
sion Social-Democratic Labor Party and the Bund were 
arrested during the night of the 1st of November. The 
Extraordinary Commission gave the following motives 
for the arrest: "guilty of pernicious criticism of the 
Soviet power and its activities, thereby affecting very 
badly various measures taken by said power, and, since 
it occurred in the war zone it affects detrimentally 
the gallant Red Army." Among those sentenced (to 
forced labor in various concentration camps until the 
end of the civil war) were. . . . 

Towards the close of the year the "verdict" (ad- 
ministrative order without trial) was handed down. 
Astrov, Korobkov, Grossmann, Babin, Tkatchenko, 
Kuchin-Oransky and others were sentenced "for be- 
longing to the right wing of the Russian Social-Demo- 
cratic Labor Party" to confinement in a concentration 
camp throughout the duration of the civil war. 


In V i't to take pnrt in the 

election \vjis punished by the 

*t of the local Committee of our Party (comrades 
Kttatchko, Ossovsky and others < r with 

tber of the Central Com 1). Dalin and 6 

worl 1 actory. At the home 

v N. Sukhanov a domiciliary search was made. A 
month latT the prisoners 

from Moscow, as tin- purpose of i ts had ! 

accomplished, the elections to the Soviet having been 
most "successful" for the Bo 

In Tula the outrageous behavior of the factory Com- 
missary caus rnong the WOK the 
Arms Fa ; iich spr ; other cstablishm* 
in that city. The protest took at fir -rm of a 
strike, but following 

form of so-called " aient," 

workmen and their wives compiled th- Holsi 
arrest them, thus expressing their solidarity with 
prisoners. In this way several thousand work' 
arrested in those days. Ti als were sev 

wholesale deportations to th d to 

and, as a climax, 12 of the strikers were tun 
to a field court martial and hard labor 

tempt made by the 
Social-Democratic group of the local Soviet to 

Me s. ttlcd peaceably, the group was . 
X its session. 

Social Democrat i. I have 

also brought bef< labor world a full i 

the per* m printers and of other 

Soviet at i gainst lal 

party finally m>: <mg api> 

I>abor prompted by the fact that ti ibor 

delegation to Russia had issued a report that was in 


part mildly critical or ambiguous, but, on the whole, 
was distinctly friendly to the Bolshevist regime. In- 
dividual members of the delegation practically half 
of it, including Tom Shaw, Ben Turner, Mrs. Philip 
Snowden, Dr. Haden Guest, as well as Bertrand Rus- 
sell, who accompanied the delegation had issued the 
strongest adverse statements. But the report, as a 
whole, was friendly, doubtless owing to domestic 
politics and to diplomatic motives which do not appear. 
This was all the more shocking to the Russian Socialists 
and Trade Unionists since all other foreign labor 
delegations Germans, Italians, Swedish and Spanish, 
had had the courage of their convictions. (See Chapter 
XII.) The Social Democratic appeal is therefore 
doubly important, serving not only as a picture of 
Russian labor persecution but as an indictment of the 
inexcusable failure of the British delegation even to 
touch on these vital matters in its one-sided report 
from which was excluded also the valuable individual 
testimony of Mrs. Snowden and other delegates, while 
the pro-Bolshevist material of the extremists, Robert 
Williams, Purcell, and Margaret Bondfield, was repro- 

The Social Democratic appeal secured the following 
endorsement from Merrheim, Secretary of the largest 
French labor union, the Metal Workers, a leader of 
the French Confederation of Labor, and an ultra- 
pacifist and syndicalist himself: 

Such are the facts. . . . There should arise the 
vehement and indignant protest of all trade union mem- 
bers and socialists (throughout the world) who still 
have a sense of dignity and independence. 


The 1 paragraphs of thin appeal arc as fol- 

1 nrti 

To the British Workmen and to the Members of the 
Labor Delegates to Russia 


We,' rsigned, Russi haverer 

from Russia the information stating that the visit of 

sh labour delegation to Russia 

resu :>risals and peraeeationfl for all the 

socialists who were bold enough t the 

sdme and the acti n 


Well-known leaders of the labour movement in K 
who for many years fought m- ariam, n 

long and weary year ml who 

hold prominent positions in tin- Russian trade union 
movement, have OIK y seiiti-i. 

1 and exi ient 

We wish to repeat here a few facts mention.*.! in the 
above circulars: 

1. Comrji .in. n member of th- e.-ntrnl com- 

c of the Russian socialist-democratic labour party, 
and one of the oldest members of the party, has 

om Moscow to Perm. 
\vo members of the emtral committee of the 

:y (Men 
Dalin and Troyanovsky, ji boo in Moscow. 

tubers of utive committee of the 

MONCOW ; union. ide I > 

arrested; the printers' unio: 

<>test against such actions of the soviet go\ 

her of the ei-ntrHl commit- 
tee of the social: nary party, spoke at tho 


printers 1 meeting in Moscow in the presence of several 
members of the British labour delegates; he was, how- 
ever obliged to hide after this speech, as it has made 
the Extraordinary Commission (Cheka) very angry, 
and they wanted to arrest him. They could not find 
him, and arrested instead his wife and daughters, aged 
10 and 17 years. 

5. Comrade Abramovich, member of the central com- 
mittee of the socialist-democratic party, welcomed the 
British labour delegation at a meeting of the Moscow 
Soviet. In his speech he pointed out the actual con- 
dition of the Russian labour classes under the bolshevik 
yoke, and was in consequence, through intrigues and 
pressure from the Russian communist party, expelled 
from the soviet. 

We are in possession of many other similar facts, 
but it would take too long to state them all here. We 
think that the above facts are quite sufficient proof 
that there is no freedom in soviet Russia, and that even 
the socialist parties can not propagate their ideas 
legally and unrestrictedly. 

We feel we must put the following questions to the 
British workmen and to you, members of the British 
labour delegation. Do you know these facts? // you 
do, what do you intend to do in order to alleviate the 
sufferings of these Russian socialists who were bold 
enough to tell you the entire truth about Russia f Don't 
you consider that you are also responsible for their mis- 
fortunes and sufferings? 

We, the adherents of the socialists who are being so 
severely persecuted by the Russian communist party 
ruling in Russia under the disguise of the soviet gov- 
ernment, think you can not and must not be indifferent 
to the actual results of your policy. 

We are deeply convinced that in protesting against 
the blockade and intervention the British proletariat was 
prompted by noble motives the British workmen meant 
to support the cause of the Russian democracy, the cause 


he great Russian revolution. If they did mean so, 
they must understand that the struggle against the 
world's reactionaries must go hand in hand with the 
r the principles of the Russian d 

You denounce the blockade, the intervention and the 
counter-revolution. But you must also denounce the 
slavery that has been introduced into Russia by the I 
sian communist party. Or Hussion u-- 

ing classes consider you their real friends. . . . 

You have interfered ;in domestic affairs by 

your struggle against the blockade, against support of 
the counter-revolution, and for the recognition of the 
soviet government. Your intervention was and is one- 
ided. You supported the soviet government, but 
did not support the Russian proletariat and peasantry 
who fought against the despotism of the soviet govern- 
ment during all these terrible years. . . . 

Some thirty days after this original appeal was issued 
the Social Democratic Party followed it up with a seem id 
appeal showing that the persecutions, instead of becom- 
ing milder, had become worse, especially under the Soviet 
Government set up by Moscow in the Ukrain.- i 
leadership of Lenin's right bower, Rakovsky. This 
Ukraine persecution seems to have been aimed mainly 
and almost exclusively at the labor unions. The Social 
Democratic Labor Party portrays it in the following 
agraphs : 

the obj- ion of the soeial-demo- 

c labor party, the b< la new 

weapon, which was used for the first time by II V 
Rakovsky. The so-called Ukrainian ^ovenum nt ..,; 
the exile to the Georgian bord out any trial, of 

social-democratic labor party in the Ukrain ngst 


them are the members of the central Ukrainian com- 
mittees of the social-democratic party comrades I. Bar 
(former editor of the internationalist journal, "Golos," 
in Paris during the war) , Zorohovitch, Shtern, A. Roubt- 
zoff (a well-known leader of the trade union movement 
amongst the metal workers), Schoulpin (leader of the 
Miners' trade union), and a member of the Kharkoff 
party committee, Boris Malkin. Ten other comrades 
were sentenced at the same time, also without any trial, 
to forced kbor in the concentration camps, until "the 
end of the civil war" (i.e., indefinitely). Among them 
are the well-known social- democratic leader and trade 
unionist, Astroff, the trade unionist, Korobkoff from 
Odessa, members of the Kieff party committee, Tchijev- 
sky and Kouchin-Oransky (the latter, a well-known 
socialist author, had voluntarily joined the ranks of the 
"Red" army as an officer at the beginning of the Polish 
war), and the distinguished leaders of the Kharkoff shop 
assistants' union of Babin and Grossman. 

Most of the above mentioned comrades were arrested 
in Kharkoff on August 19, during the provincial con- 
ference of the Russian social-democratic labor party. 

Several social-democrats, leaders of the trade union 
movement in Kremenchug, were also exiled to Georgia. 
The boards elected by the Kremenchug trade unions have 
been dissolved and replaced by persons appointed by 
local organizations of the communist party. 

By such measures H. T. Rakovsky, who plays the 
hideous part of a menshevist renegade, hopes to destroy 
the influence of the well-organized social-democrats upon 
the Ukrainian working classes. 

The fate of the other popular party (the Social-Revolu- 
tionists) has been even more horrible for they composed 
the majority of the constitutional assembly which the 
Bolshevists dispersed by bayonets and are the sole party 
which can make any legitimate claim to represent the 


of the Russian peasants. The Social K< volu'ion- 
ary Party has also addressed to world labor a vigorous 
protest o '.cmcnt of physical and moral 

ires introduced under Lenin through that revival of 
the Spanish inqu >r<iimiry Commission 

for Fighting the Counter Revolut r by 

the world famed inquisitor and butcher, Djc -r/insky. 
The social revolutionists state that the wife of one 
he prisoners, A. T. Kuznetzov, was flogged by the 
Bolshevist authorities for refusing to divulge- her hus- 
band's whereabouts; that not only \vre the wife and 
daughters of Chcrnoff, Likhatch and the other leading 
volutionary prisoners arrested but that in some 
eases, their distant relatives were held as hostages; that 
II proposes to the wives of prisoners to enter 
into its services as spies, promising to free their hus- 
bands in return. 

Here are the conditions of Russia's "political prison- 
ers" and "conscientious objectors" as defined by the 
executive committee oi i's largest political organ- 

ization. The protest is addressed in the first instance 
to the Soviet authorities: 

The refined cruelty of the all-Russian and provincial 

tor<ii nary Commissions has reached such a i 
as to drive insane some of the arrested s- 
revolutionists who can not endure the regime 
confinement in the city of Van.slav, in the so-called 
"so\ .^Q of d -ance of 

" is flaunting a si KM n-ading: "Rus- 
sian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic' and above 
h sign there is the old Tzarist inscription : "1 
Central i nany 

tried and true champions of the workers' cause among 


these persons to whom the March Revolution at last 
opened the doors of their prisons, only to find the bars, 
after a brief period of liberty, again closed on them, 
this time, however, by your hands. 

The prison regime to which our comrades have been 
subjected in the Yaroslav soviet house of detention has 
outdone the regime of the Tzarist central prison, and 
even during the walks of the prisoners for their airings 
they have been forbidden on pain .of the severest penal- 
ties to exchange ordinary greetings with each other. 
Confined to damp, cold solitary cells, left for a long time 
already without necessary, repairs, with broken-down 
heating, water and drainage systems, the prisoners have 
been deprived of sunshine, light and air, and compelled 
to live amidst filth and pestilential stench ; and if some 
of them dared approach a window for a moment, the 
prison guards would open fire at the window, acting 
in accordance with instructions given them. 

But if the outrages and brutalities, the denial of light 
and air, and the shooting at the windows only repeat 
and, perhaps, augment the methods used by the Tzarist 
jailkeepers, torture by hunger is a new invention of the 
"socialistic" prison regime. 

The form of feeding the prisoners at Yaroslav falls 
even far below the rations officially acknowledged by 
you as hunger rations. The prisoners receive one pound 
of raw, half-baked bread, and soup with some beet leaves 
or herring bones for dinner, and three or four spoonfuls 
of gruel for supper. But then, this gruel is no longer 
given, and they are trying to make the dinner soup last 
for both dinner and supper. This is all the nourishment 
there is. Suck is tine regime of gradual death by starva- 
tion established by you for your prisoners. 

You will perhaps point to the critical food situation 
all over soviet Russia, and you might say that the food 
committees are not in a position to allot from their sup- 
plies any more for the feeding of socialists languishing 
in communist prisons. 


not for tho food shortage of s.-.viot Russia 
that slav hunger torture can be explained away. 

MO case, the organs of your political ]> 
would n< ith the food assistance that we are 

willing to P 

.s efforts and immense sacrifices 

rebu have organized food assistance 

to be BCI> prison. But ; vrifts 

has been hedged in b\ -ial section of your extra- 

nary commission with all kinds of conditions which 

made it impossible during two months to send more than 

An attempt was ma<l<> to supply 

prisoners with money, so as to enaMe them to order 

some products permitted in thr op< a market, hut tlu 

prison authorities accepted only a certain amount which 

per to confiscate ri^ht there and th.-n 

in i t tho damage caused to the prison depart- 

st rat ion of the p 

prison. (Although it was proved that. 
none of these prisoners had participated in that outhreak 

Under these circumstances all efforts to fight the 

r torture havo proved futile. 
Now, what is your ohj- < t in this? 
Do not excuse yonrx. If hy claiming ignorance. You 
know, you can not help knowing, what is ^oiiik' OB 

idory of your in Yaroslav. It has be* n dis- 

cussed with -incii .f ; -om- 

missaries, Lenin i ith tin- rhuirman of the 

tral executive committee, Kalinin, and with many otln-rs 
of you. 

By the hands hmen, in your communistic 

'ire-chamt><'r of tho Ynrosla- , .ni want 

manage to Q th.- tortur- 

death by starvation you v, il these old champions 

of socialism and the revolution' 


What is the cause of all these persecutions? The 
answer is simple : the continued strength and popularity 
of the Social-Democratic Party and labor unionists in 
the citieg and of the Social Revolutionary Party of the 
country. At a recent conference in Moscow, the Soviets' 
leading authority, Rykov, according to the Krasnaya 
Gazeta, made the following declaration : 

The workers are discontented with power, for they 
are hungry and lack clothing. In many of the large 
factories there are no communists. There results a 
political weakening of Bolshevism, notwithstanding its 
strategic successes. It is -not possible to create a single 
economic plan when 80 per cent of the population are 
peasants who will not allow themselves to be regulated. 

The Social-Democrats elected a majority in the Soviets 
in many parts of the country and recently secured two- 
thirds in certain elections in Petrograd. It was this that 
led Lenin to an even stronger expression than Rykov, 
when (early in this month of February), he declared, 
in the Petrograd Pravda, that "the fight between the 
labor unionists and the Soviets for supremacy will break 
up the bolshevist state system unless a settlement is soon 
reached." The offense of the labor unionists is very 
clear. They are fundamentally opposed to the so-called 
government set up by Lenin and his handful of associate 
dictators. Lenin declares, "they are out for material 
benefit for themselves at the expense of the general wel- 
fare of the communist state." Lenin is the sole inter- 
preter of the welfare of this " proletarian " state; the 
organized proletariat has no voice. 


WORKING men and their or^an. r not only 

i the lack of any form of representative government 

or freedom of press or assemblage, and not only from 

the persecutions of the Extraordinary Commission, but 

also from Soviet legislation aimed directly at Labor. 

After a year of syndicalism, factory Soviets and an- 
archyduring which production was reduced to 
than ono-sovonth of its previous level the Soviet "Gov- 
nt" in 1919 reversed its industrial policy and began 
to have recourse to one form after another of labor com- 
pulsion or enslavement. Compulsion has never, through- 
out history, produced the same degree of cfiiciency as 
freedom, but some of the most extreme disorder was 
cured and the Bolshevists gave figures to prove that th<> 
output of Russian industry had now " though 

in a few cases only, to as high as two-thirds of its pre- 
war level a level which was very low indeed in com- 
parison to that of more advanced countries. 

The first completed plan of labor compulsion was that 
devised by the "Code of Labor Laws." Some of tho 

1 clauses of this slave code, as it was puhli 
in the official orgu Soviet "Embassy" in America, 

called Soviet Russia, on February 21, 1920, were as 



The assignment of wage earners to work shall be 
carried out through the Departments of Labor Distribu- 

In case of urgent public work the District Depart- 
ment of Labor may, in agreement with the respective 
professional unions and with the approval of the Peo- 
ple's Commissariat of Labor, order the transfer of a 
whole group of wage earners from the organization where 
they are employed to another situated in the same or 
in a different locality, provided a sufficient number of 
volunteers for such work cannot be found. 

The production standards of output adopted by 
the valuation commission must be approved by the 
proper Department of Labor jointly with the Council 
of National Economy. 

The Supreme Council of National Economy jointly 
with the People's Commissariat of Labor may direct 
a general increase or decrease of the standards of 
efficiency and output for all wage earners and for all 
enterprises, establishments and institutions of a given 

The Ninth Congress of the Russian Communist Party, 
the real Soviet Government, which took place a few 
weeks later (in April, 1920), attempted to give reasons 
for the new coercion plans. The chief arguments used 
were these: 

The Ninth Congress approves of the Central Com- 
mittee of the Russian Communist Party on the mobiliza- 
tion of industrial proletariat, compulsory labour service, 
militarisation of production and the application of mili- 
tary detachments to economic needs. 

In connection with the above, the Congress decrees 
that the Party organisation should in every way assist 
the Trade Unions and the Labour Sections in registering 


all skilled workers with a view of employing them in 
the various branches of the production with the same 
consist ci mess as was done, and is being 

carried out to the present time, with regard to the com- 
manding staff for army nct<:- . . 

y social system, whether based on slavery. tVudal- 
i. had its ways and means of labour 
pulsion and labour education in the interests of 

Soviet system is faced with the task of developing 
its own methods of labour compulsion to attain nn inn 

and wholesomeness of labour; this 
method is to be based on the socialisation of public 
economy in the interests of the whole nn? 

In addition to the propaganda by which tho ; 
are to be influenced and the repressions which at 
be a- all idlers, p.-! .nd disorpanisers who 

public zeal tin- principal method 
increase of production will become the introdue- 
iie system of labour. . . . 

Owing to the fact that a eonsid- f tho 

workers, of beti< <>ndition 

often for purposes of speculation, voluntarily lea\v their 
places of employment or chani?.> from pi 

.bly harms production and deteriorates the 
general position of the working class, the Congi 
aiders one of tli- 

Gove and of the Trade Union organisation to be 

established is the firm, systematic, and insistent stru 
with labour d> The way to liirht this is to pnl 

t of desertion fines, the crc Labour D.-ia.-h 

t of Deserters under fine, and, finally, inUrm. 
in concentration camps. 

A resolution was also adopted which still more- elearly 
defined the nature ,.f the new enslavement and poii 
out the "necessity'* for using the same punishments for 


labor desertion as those employed in cases of military 
desertion : 

The organisations of the Party must assist in every 
way the Trade Unions and labour departments in 
registering skilled workers for the purpose of employing 
them in productive labour on the same principles and 
with the same severity as are adopted with regard to 
officers mobilized for the requirements of the army. 

The officers' families, it may be recalled, are held as 
hostages for their good behavior. 

If we wish to get a picture of how this industrial 
mobilization or militarisation works out in practice we 
can refer to the report presented to the International 
Federation of Trade Unions late in 1920 by represen- 
tatives of the Russian Metal Workers Union. 

Militarisation means a complete and absolute subjec- 
tion of the workmen to the work's management. It em- 
bodies a number of stern measures, also restriction of 
leaves and cruel suppression of strikes. 

In order to show to what extent militarisation is car- 
ried out in the metal industry we quote below an extract 
from an article, which appeared in the XIII issue of 
the journal "Metallist" in August, 1920, and was con- 
tributed by a Communist worker, Khronin: " Absolute 
submission to the director has been introduced at these 
works (Plow works of Kostroma) ; neither interference 
nor contradiction on the part of the workmen are 
tolerated. The instructions given by the works com- 
mittee are in accordance with the instructions of the 
Works' Management. At our works absence without 
permission of the foreman means suspension of the extra 
ration. Refusal to work overtime also means suspension 
of ration. Whereas an obstinate refusal means arrest. 


For beinff late at work a tin. weeks' wagt 


When the Bolsheviks came into power they abol 
time work in all branches of indnsUy, Bui H 

at was .: in alarming way and as many 

ed worku liases the S<> 

L920, reintrodo 

work. At first it was optional, lut in the 
summer "f this year it was announced that overtime is 

At a secret meeting <>n the <.f September. 1D120. the 

nt !' tin- IVtrograd Labour Orgnr 
adop f.'llou -ing resolution: "Never bei 

!ely as now ; the worst 

is that more than 80% of the overtime is com- 
ry ant! any n-fusal on tlic part of (he workmen 
is severely piinisi.. 

Ov rfiine work is reinuneratod as follows: for the first 
two hours double pay; for the second two hours tiim 1 
and a half. 

The normal working day is 8 hours and 44 hoin 
week, but owing to compulsory overtime the Russian 

works now 12 hours a day, and 72 lion 
week. Sometimes compulsory work is performed on 
Sundays, which makes SO hours p-r week. 

workmen, far from being pleased with theso 

a result a wave of si i 
passed all over Soviet Russia in l:iv 

Th.Te is little known in about th- 
'he measures taken to suppn-ss them, as the Bols! 
Ooverni h Controls all papers and journals, does 

allow this information to appear in tlir press. But 
official d' tin- following information 

(Central Committee of Statistics of the Commissariat of 

During the first six months of 1920: 

rikes have been called in 77% of the large and 
sized works. 


2. In nationalized undertakings strikes are continuous 
and 90% of them are called at such factories and works. 

As a part of the system of Labor compulsion absolute 
dictators have been placed over the factories with the 
power of life and death. Schliapnikoff, Chief Commissar 
of Labor, printed the following explanation in the Rus- 
sian Bolshevist press on November 13, 1919 : 

All those circumstances (a total absence of order and 
discipline in the factories) put together have compelled 
us to abolish the Working Men's Councils and to place 
at the head of the most important concerns special 
" dictators, " with unlimited powers and entitled to dis- 
pose of the life and death of the workmen. 

The ' ' Code of Labor Laws ' ' was by no means the last 
experiment in methods of enslavement, Trotzky follow- 
ing this up with the plan for utilizing the thousands 
of conscripts of the Red Army for purposes of labor, 
thus going back to the military slavery of ancient Egypt 
and Peru. 

Lenin and Trotzky have freely expended their rhetor- 
ical and propaganda talents to justify the new slavery, 
not as a temporary expedient but as resting upon the 
permanent principles of Sovietism. In his booklet ' ' The 
State and the Revolution*' (pages 51 and 67) Lenin 

We want the Socialist revolution with human nature 
as it is now; human nature itself cannot do without 
subordination. There must be submission to the armed 
vanguard of the proletariat. 

Until people grow accustomed to observing the elemen- 
tary conditions of social existence without force and 


without subjection there mast be suppression, and it is 
suppression tl ' also be 

nee and there cannot be liberty or dcmoer,. 

This reasoning on the surface means that no peoples 
are ready for liberty or democracy, and as th< 
be some form of dictatorship, why not the dictatorship 
of Lenin and his Party? Hut under the surface is also 
the shrewd calculation, evident throughout the S 
leader's statements, th. issian masses, being a^ 

tomed to merciless repression and subjection will finally 
give up hope of self-government and submit to the 
Soviet's rule if the Bolshevists can remain a few years 
longer in the saddle. 

In his official report to the Soviet Economic Confer- 
ence in January, 1920, Lenin frankly justified the rule 
of a minority of tin- eity workers, which he calls the 
conscious "vanguard," over the majority of the city 
workers as well as the peasants v 
cent of the population and it is to be an arbitrary 
personal rule like that of the army. Here is what he 

In tl n of the army wo have passed from 

of command by committee to the direct 
We must do the same in the 
OFgai . !,ninit and indn-' 

commit?. ; and its d< ut we 

y, but it does not give that 

p' >rk whi. i by the situation. 

In the auto* -tie chiefs of Communism and the 

Communist domination of the people lies the pledge of 
on nwotm 


So in speaking of the new compulsory labor armies 
under military discipline Trotzky said at the same con- 

This is but the beginning of our work. There will 
be many drawbacks at first, much will have to be altered, 
but the basis itself cannot be unsound, as it is the same 
as that on which our entire Soviet structure is founded 
(i.e., this is not a temporary military expedient). 

As to the workmen, Trotzky said: 

All artisans will be sent into the works and trans- 
ferred from one place to another, according to the in- 
dications of the Government. We will have no pity 
for the peasants; we will make labor armies of them, 
with military discipline and Communists as their chiefs. 
These armies will go forth among the peasants to gather 
corn, meat and fish that the work of the workmen may 
^be assured. 

The Soviet scheme of compulsory labor is being ap- 
plied on such a broad scale and is so boldly presented 
as a "proletarian" scheme that it constitutes the gravest 
danger that has confronted labor for centuries. It is 
undoubtedly destined to become historic. It is therefore 
well worth while to present at somewhat greater length 
the extraordinary reasoning by which Trotzky and 
Lenin seek to defend it. The first full justification was 
presented by Trotzky to the Communist Party Congress 
in March, 1920, and was published in the official Soviet 
organ of Moscow on the 21st. Its most important points 
are perhaps the following: 

At the present time the militarization of labor is all 
the more needed in that we have now come to the 


mobilization of peasants as the means of solving the 
problems requiring mass action. We arc mohili/ing the 
peasants and forming them into labor dt -tadnm-ii 1 
very closely resemble mi lit 

Some of our comrades say, however, that even though 
in the case of the working power of mobilized peasa: 
I necessary to apply militarization, a military 
paratus need not be created when the question in\ 
^killed labor and industry because there we have pro 
sional (labor) unions performing the function of or- 
ganizing labor. This opinion, howe\ rotieOQS, 

We have in the most important branches of our in- 
dustry more than a million workmen on the lists, but 

ui right hundred thousand of them 
;ally working, and where are the remainder? They 
have gone to the villages or to other divisions of indus- 
uto speculation. Among soldiers this is called 
desertion, and, in one form or another, the men- 
used to e- s to do their duty should be applied 

in the ti<-hl of labor. 

Under a unified system of economy the masses of 

workmen should be moved about, ordered and s-nt fn-m 

plaer to phi.-.- iii exactly the same manner as soldiers. 

he foundation of the militari/ation of labor, and 

we are unable to sp< any 

orga- :.dustry on a new basis in the conditions 

of Stni \isting today. 

In the period of transition in the or >M of labor 

uKion plays a very important part. The statement 
that employed labor, prod 

m labor under compn 1 ly when 

applied to feudalist ic and bourgeois orders of soc 

Later in the year in an article n-pnhlished l>y the 
official Bolshevist organ in America, Soviet 

at length that compulsory labor is the 
of Soviet communism. According to Trotzky 


Russia is in a period of transition to communist socialism 
which must last many years. He says : 

The transition to socialism means the transition from 
a rudimentary distribution of labor power (by the play 
of purchase and sale, by movement of market and labor 
wages) to a planful distribution of workers through the 
economic organs of the district, of. the province, of the 
entire country. Such a planful distribution presupposes 
the subordination of those to be distributed to the 
economic plan of the state. This is the essence of labor 
duty, which unquestionably is contained as a fundamen- 
tal element in the program of the socialist organization 
of labor. 

The carrying out of obligatory labor is inconceivable 
without an application of the methods of the militariza- 
tion of labor in greater or less measure. 

Why do we speak of a militarization? Of course this 
is only an analogy. But it is a very pregnant analogy. 
No other social organization, with the exception of the 
army, has ever considered itself justified to subordinate 
citizens to such an extent, to develop them on all sides 
by the application of its will as the state of the pro- 
letarian dictatorship is doing and considers itself jus- 
tified in doing. 

Trotzky asserts that compulsory labor is the very 
foundation of the Soviet State and that it will have to 
remain the basis until the coming generation through 
compulsion, terror, and the Bolshevist press and school 
monopoly (which Trotzky calls education) has converted 
the population into communism. This is the view ex- 
pressed in the " theses" which he presented to the Eco- 
nomic Congress on January 24, 1920. One of these 
"theses" is the following: 


In building up a of a, very 

i'd and <1 
a systematic basis is i without tin- app 

relating to tin- backward 
he peasantry and working class. The means 
of compulsion at the disposal of the state form its mili- 
tary power. Con ; , tin- oi>raiii/ation of work on 
a military basis, in some form or other, is an uncondi- 
;il necessity for every society which is built upon 
the principle of compulsory labor. 

Compulsory measures will be less and less needed as 
the system of socialization of industry develops, and the 
conditions of labor become more favorable, and as the 
educational level of the coming generation is raised. 

Noteworthy in tl. ," is the fart that any alt- 

it of the working class which the communists may 
; leased to designate as " backward" is to be treated 
same as the Russian agriculturists or peasants, i.e., 
the same as the outlawed "bom 

By such arguments Trotzky defends also the introduc- 
tion of the Taylor system, bonuses, < 

-refer wages for labor." ho continues, "both in 
the form of money and in that of commodities, must lv 
made to coincide as far as possible with the product 

"f ti dual laborer. Under capitalism, pi work 

agreements for a of the Taylor 

had the object of increasing the exploitn- 

tin workers by KM out a surplus pn.tit. 

: work, premiums, 

have the object of increasing the social production 
with it also the gen. ral w 

Yet one of the slogans by which the Bolshevists tricked 
Itbor into that measure of support tl d to got 


themselves into power was precisely the abolition of the 
bonus system. In November, 1917, Lenin said: "The 
bonus system is a heritage of the capitalistic regime and 
we repudiate it." And now we see the bonus system 
not only restored but established in places where it did 
not exist before. 

Another promise to labor by which the Bolshevists 
were helped into power was a shorter working day. Now 
they have made long hours and Sunday work compul- 

Our workday lasts twelve hours. We are compelled 
to work in two shifts in the paper department of our 
factory, and we are forced to work both Saturdays and 
Sundays. No exception is made with regard to women. 
Since August 15, overtime work has become compulsory. 
(Resolution of Petrograd government printing office 
workers. ) 

No leave of absence is to be granted to the workers. 
Failure to do overtime work is punishable, the first time 
by forfeiture of food allowance, and the second time by 
court action. Lateness of ten minutes on the job will 
be fined with loss of a day's pay. (From an order of 
the Petrograd government printing office, signed by 
Manager Forst, August, 1920.) 

A report at the Russian Trade Union Congress of 
1920 declared that the flight to the villages was so great 
that the proletariat was disappearing, melting away. 
Surely a rather serious state of affairs under the * ' dicta- 
torship of the proletariat!" The official representative 
of the Petrograd labor unions in one of their resolutions 
declared : 


We feel as it we were hard labo? rery- 

thing lut our feeding has been made subjrr- 

s. We have become lost as human beings, and have 
been turned into slaves. (Resolution of Petrograd 
workers of September 5, 1920.) 

It must not be supposed that the argun Lenin 

differ from those of Tn.t/.ky <>n this fundamental point. 
The American organ Soviet Russia declares that 
Soviet Russia is "the property of the producers" and 
ry worker belongs to Soviet Kuxsia." No more ab- 
solute abandonment of individual liberty has ever 1 
seen in print. Soviet Russia then proceeds to justify 
itself by reproducing the following article from the 
i. who differs from Trotzky only in the pro; 
tion that methods of compulsion will have to be con- 
>d not for one but for many gene ratio i 

Communist labor, in the strictest sense of the word, 
unitary labor of future so< formed with- 

out pay, not as a definite duty, not in order to obtain 
the right to a share of production, and not according 
to rigid rules. It is labor performed freely, hound by 
ule, without regard to compensation, and not with 
an eye t- vard. It is labor performed as a, 

'he common good, and with the jvali/atimi of 
necessity (which will also lirmme a habit), in order to f.,r the needs of society 

'. e, and this means our 

oci' advance very far indeed In-fore labor of 

1 in our so.-ial .rd.-r. 
i- disripline. : forms 

Of iicthods of drawing jM-(.pl 

to work this is a task of many g is. It is 

supreme task. 


To succeed in great things, we must begin in little 
things. And even after the " great" thing the over- 
throw of the state, whereby capitalism is destroyed and 
power is transferred to the proletariat the formation 
of industrial life on a new basis must start with the 
little things. Communist Saturdays, industrial armies, 
compulsory labor these are various forms of the prac- 
tical working out of Socialist labor. 

A radical American Socialist, Albert Boni (formerly 
of the publishing firm of Boni and Liveright) who has 
just returned from several months in Soviet Russia has 
given us, in the New York Globe, a pro-Soviet news- 
paper, the following unforgettable picture of the new 

The industrial collapse of Russia brings not merely 
a problem of technical reorganization, replacement of 
machinery and supplying raw materials and motive 
power. The Communist party is facing a situation in 
which the laboring classes, in whose behalf, supposedly, 
the Communist party is working, are proving themselves 
not only unwilling, but unable to endure the hardships 
and suffering that industrial disorganization has imposed 
upon them. In the face of impossible living conditions, 
the workers are abandoning the cities for the country 
and its more certain existence. 

To meet the dearth of man-power, the Russian govern- 
ment decreed that every male over sixteen years of age 
must labor at such tasks as the state may assign. Labor 
books, showing that this obligation is being fulfilled, have 
been issued to all citizens, replacing passports and all 
other identification papers. 

Wherever plans of the central government meet with 
opposition they have one resort that never fails military 
force and the terror imposed by the extraordinary com- 
mission. But the peasants are already in a state of too 


great restlessness to pormit of foreihle measures over 
wide stretches of t, r n\it n 

consequences. Conscription of labor is going forv 

slowly, and only where ih Communist forces are 
gathered in such strength that resistance is rendered 

The Russian laborer is held tied to his shop as c 
a* any feudal serf was bound to the land of hi* I 
Transfer of employees from one factory to anoth. 
possible only with the consent of the shop dii 
Travel beyond a radius of twenty-five miles is pos 

with the consent of the local representatives of the 
aordinary commission, whieh permission is granted 
upon the request of the factory . \mitive. I). 

:a factories is punishable by reduction 
ration, and, if repeated, by arrest and internment in 
cone n camps. Some of the most important pi 

are being operated like military enenmpmcnts, won 

'cd upon the grounds. T 

niployeesare held under armed guards and re. { 
special passes to enter and to leave. 

Military discipline has been introduced in all works. 
H aro imposed for workers arriving late, heavy 
punishments t''d from those failing to apj 

unless satisfactory justification of their -rt li- 

es are again placed under individual 
vith dictatorial power in dii hands 

f work. Overtime is demand* 
Piece work, premiums, the Taylor sys 
peas; hods are introduced to speed up the 

ted work<r In each factory n 
the extraordinary con reporting all case 

dealt with sevc r 

k-es are absolutely forbidden, and nin/ attempts to 
organize the workers to resist the imposition of 
demands are catted counter-revolutionary activities 
whick long-term imprisonment is the lightest possible 


As far as is possible under that ruthless tyranny the 
organized labor of Russia is everywhere in a state of 
full revolt. The organized workers are doing what they 
can to reach the hearts and minds of laboring humanity 
in all countries, but they are working against overwhelm- 
ing obstacles the refusal of the bread card, which means 
immediate starvation for their families, the firing squad, 
death by torture in prisons. It is difficult for them 
even to speak, and a decree especially forbidding speeches 
at labor union meetings has been issued. Martoff,- the 
world-renowned leader of the Social-Democratic Party, 
has described a special decree prohibiting under 
threat of the revolutionary tribunal speeches at work- 
men's meetings without special permission from the Mos- 
cow authorities. Martoff says that since the decree was 
issued not a single social-democrat has obtained this per- 
mission. Another decree calls for the compulsory at- 
tendance of workmen at meetings at which the benefits 
of Soviet rule are expounded, time being paid for attend- 



IN Soviet Russia the Bolslu -vists are using many words 
with a new meaning. It has been shown how they 
sometimes employ the word "democracy" to mean the 
reverse of what all civilized peoples and all the labor 
movements of the world have hitherto meant by tho 
word. So also, after abolishing all the rights of labor 
and labor organizations and of cooperatives the Bol- 
shevists, nevertheless, continue to apply the tern. 

us" and "cooperatives" to tho empty shells that 

In Soviet Russia (April 2, 1921) we read: "Tho 
trad- > have been practically transformed into 

organs of the Soviet (iovenmient. Membership in tho 
trade unions is now compulsory for Russian work- 
Never before has the term "trade union" l>em applied 
to a compulsory state opgani/atin. We shall show !> 
that even the Bolshevists themselves are divided as to 
they shall now .ill the seven million 

mental and ngrieiiltural \\ honi 

they seek to classify as the "proletariat " as heing mem- 
bers of the trade unions or not. It i 1 that a 
large part of these people do not hat they are 
members of trade unions and do not even pay dues. In 
fact, the dues seem to be paid by the Government, as we 


may see from the following Moscow wireless sent out 
in December, 1920, to trade union officials throughout 
Russia : 

In compliance with the decision of the 8th Congress 
financial accounts must be rendered every month. The 
majority of Government Trade Union Soviets at present 
do not render any such accounts. The Central Soviet 
of Trade Unions begs to inform all Government Soviets 
of trade unions that unless they send in monthly 
accounts dating from October 30th in compliance with 
regulations, they will receive no funds. The decision 
of the People's Commissariat. 

Also these "trade unions" do not have the right to 
strike or to propose a change in the form of government. 
They may elect their own officials if the officials elected 
meet the approval of the Communist Party, otherwise 
the officials are "appointed." 

In his report to the party printed (See Krasnaya 
Gazeta) January 11, 1921, Zinoviev declared: 

At the present moment we have 24 trade unions, 
counting in their ranks 6,970,000 members. But the 
larger portion of these members have been ascribed to 
the unions mechanically. 

Only a minority, at the very best, half a million, are 
members of the party. 

If we recall the fact that only 70,000 industrial 
workers are listed by the Communist Party itself as 
party members, we see that Zinoviev 's estimate of com- 
munist trade unionists is indeed high as he confesses. 
The British Labor Delegation to Soviet Russia reports 


an entirely different number <i "mechanically 

ascribed" so-callt They say : 

It was put to us that the Communist Party, number- 
ing 600,000 members, could be likened to a small cop- 
wheel whi.-h turns a larger cog-wheel representing the 
Trade Union nt numbering 4,500,000 members. 

.it wheel of Russia's indus- 
and agricultural system. 

Whether the number of workers labeled "trade union- 
ists" v, i-miH nt is 4,500,000 or 7,000,000, 
whether the number of party members among them is 
100,000 or 500,000, it may !., seen that the proportion 
of Communists is not higher than one-ninth, and prob- 
ably very much leas. 

According to Zorin's official report, on June 1, 1920, 
out of the 29,000 railroad workers of the IVtrograd 

895 were Communists, while of 5,000 
ployed in the water, gas and electric works only 145 
were Communists that is three p.-r emt in each instance. 

The decisions of the Communist Party do not 1- 
any doubt about the plaee of t ; llled "trade 

MS" in the Soviet State. The party congress in 
1, 1920, was very explicit on the subject, as wo may 
see from the following decisions : 

The Trade Unions and the Soviet State. 

The Soviet State is the widest imairinable form of 
Labour Orgiu which is actually ivalisintf the 

Btruction of Comnui! .tiractin^ to this 

K masses of n 'he other 

hand, the Soviet State represents Labour Organisation 
which has at its disposal all the material means of com- 


pulsion. In the present form of Proletarian Dictator- 
ship, the Soviet State is the lever of the economic coup 
d'etat. There is, therefore, no question of opposing the 
organs of the Soviet Government. 

Politics may be said to be the most concentrated 
expression of the generalisation and completion of 
economics. Therefore, any antagonism of the economic 
organisation of the working-class known as the Trade 
Unions towards its political organisation i.e., the Soviets 
is an absurdity and is deviating from Marxism to- 
wards bourgeois ideas and particularly towards bourgeois 
Trade Union prejudices. This kind of antagonism is 
still more harmful and absurd during the epoch of 
Proletarian Dictatorship when all the struggle of the 
proletariat and the whole of its political and economical 
activity should more than ever be concentrated, united 
and directed by one single will and bound by an iron 

The Trade Unions and the Communist Party. 

The Communist Party is the leading organisation of 
the working-class, the guide of the Proletarian Move- 
ment and of the struggle for the establishment of the 
Communist system. 

It is therefore necessary that every Trade Union 
should possess a strictly disciplined organised fraction 
of the Communist Party. Every fraction of the Party 
represents a section of the local organisation which is 
under the control of the Party Committee, whilst frac- 
tions of the All-Russian Central Council of Trade Unions 
are under the control of the Central Committee of the 
Russian Communist Party. 

Under such a regulation it was natural that even the 
hollow shells of "trade unions" should almost cease to 
exist, and it seems that an accusation to this effect was 
actually made by Trotzky at a meeting reported in 


Igvestia January 1, 1921, as we may see from the follow- 
ing remarks by Zimn 

Many people say that the Professional Unions just 
at present are raftering a grave crisis, and even that 
Unions arc on the brink of ruin. Comrade Trot/ky 
began with this point. No one can say that our l"i 

satisfying shape. On the contrary the apparatus 
of t! y weak, and will remain weak ax 

long ;us their financial support is as small as at present. 

And is it true in fact, what comrade Trot/ky said: 
"Where are tli-- Professional Unions, they are doing 
nothing, they have no foundation." The Professional 
Unions are weak owing to tin civil war and to lack 
of attention, but is it really true, that they do not exist T 

For such "trade unions" to strike is not only against 
the law; it is regarded as treason or desertion, and it 
may be punished as such. 1 pie. the Moscow 

Soviet, as reported in Izvestia of July 2, 1918, resolved : 

As from now, the organised forces of the proletariat, 

trades unions (professional associations) will bo 

r the management of the Council of National 

Economy, which will organise the management and 

production of industrial enterprises. I'nder these new 

methods of mana^r-mmi, tin- workers will see. to dis- 

eipl -he increase of productivity, and will end 

'ion. Tiider >nditions 

y stoppage of work and all strikes will bo an act 

of treason to the proletarian revolution. 

^tnro of the practical workings of this kind of 
"trade unionism" wa to the British Labor Dele- 

gation in Moscow by one of the of -he Prin 

Union, A. Kefali, on May 23, 1920. We quote a few 


sentences only from this extremely interesting and im- 
portant speech which the printers assert led to the 
imprisonment of all the chief officers of the union: 

One may exhibit a sitting of the Moscow Soviet, con- 
sisting exclusively of Communists; one may show a sit- 
ting of the Russian Central Board of Trade Unions, 
consisting exclusively of Communists, but one cannot 
show a single free workmen's meeting that will have a 
Communist majority. 

Here are thousands of Moscow printers, behind whom 
stand scores of thousands of Moscow and other Russian 
workmen who, at the epoch of the Russian Revolution, 
under a government that calls itself a workmen's govern- 
ment a government realising its socialistic programme, 
a government calling Socialism to life, a government 
annihilating the parasitic classes those thousands of 
Moscow printers, I say, and behind them scores and 
hundreds of thousands of Russian workmen, have all of 
them under this government no right to vote, no right 
to assemble, no right to print. As in the time of the 
Czar's government, the printers are forced to print, not 
their own thoughts, but calumnies against themselves. 

Communists sometimes use menaces of arrests against 
the workers to oblige them to leave their posts in the 
board of the Union voluntarily, and in practice this 
often happens. Sometimes they do it otherwise; they 
say that if a Communist is not elected to the Board or 
Factory Workers' Committee, they, the Communists, 
will arrange things so that their workers will receive 
less food and other necessary things. And sometimes 
this produces its effect. This affirmation can be verified 
in a series of factories in Moscow. 

When such means have no result, the Communists let 
the local Soviets or the Central Council of Trade Unions 
dissolve the Board of the Trade Unions; such was the 
case with the first Central Board of the Printers' Union. 


militarization and coercion of labor has proceeded 
80 far as to lead to a in M within 

these go, MS" and within the ( 

nun volt began as a 

against the extreme violence of the head of the K'.-d 
ky. We take the following from the friendly 
New Statesman of London; it is amply supported by 
t documents: 

1 known that early in 1920 Trotsky made an 
ipr to militarise industry by transforming a few 
of the Red armies into labor battali 

At first these "Labor armies" aroused much hope and 
were greatly advertised by the Communists as the last 
word in -ruction crusade, but they soon proved 

an utter failure. 

Only 20-24 per cent, of the soldiers actually did any 
work and that in a wasteful and grossly unprodu 
way. The rest were occupied in supplying them 
in preserving the military character of the institution. 
After a short period of enthusiasm and exaltation, the 
experiment was recognized as a wasteful delusion. 
the Polish attack made an end of it before its folly 
became too obvious. 

-ky, however, did not give up the idea of apply- 
ing military methods to industry. As the Acting ( 

;ir for Transport, in the absence of Kra 
introduced military discipline on the railu 

Commissars, revolutionary tribunals, political intelli- 
gence and supervision replaced onli: hods of 

id under pn 
whi< other ui npletely 

1, all officers M being 

pointed i,y the Chief Commissar. 

All this could be t. during the war. 

railways d a par 1 war 


machine, but with the war over, the railwaymen began 
to protest against military management. 

Other unions, too, raised their voice against the per- 
manent militarization of the railways. 

At the beginning of November (1920) the Conference 
of Trade Unions passed a resolution which recommended 
"the most energetic and systematic struggle against cen- 
tralism, militarization, bureaucratism as well as auto- 
cratic and minute tutelage of the workers ' unions. ' ' 

The conference expressed also its conviction that "it 
is high time for the Railway Union to abolish military 
methods and return to ordinary proletarian democracy 
within the union." 

But Trotsky the head of the union ignored the 
decision of the conference. Pointing out the manifest 
improvement of the transport under his management, 
he started a campaign for the adoption of military 
methods all round as the basis for a new efficiency in 

Far from denying his action in appointing the chiefs 
of the railway unions, Trotzky defended it at the con- 
gress of the transport workers. His speech is quoted in 
the New York Call of January 14, 1921, as follows : 

Now as to the question of appointees. Is it right, as 
the State has said, that it was necessary to change the 
head official of the union? Rightly or wrongly we have 
intervened. . . . 

The union was not suited to the revolutionary demands 
of the working-class, and our faction waged a merciless 
internal struggle and put its own men everywhere. . . . 

And so the working-class, in the persons of its political 
representatives, says: Here we interfere; we are going 
to narrow this period of struggle between the two 
groups ; we economize ; we diminish ; we order. To deny 
the principle of intervention is to deny that we live in 

a workers' state. 



lie congress of 

Trotzky - : " It will be necessary to reorp;; 

-us without delay, that is 

personnel of the more responsible positions." In otht -r 
words, he proposed to apply gem rally the q 
app- of labor union oflicials by tin- Communist 

Party which he had nstituted on tin- railways, 

name he gave to this policy was: "democracy in 

production." Even Lenin himself at 
meeting made fun of this stranire : uage 

although it is entirely typical of the usual Bolshevist 
s in the use of words. Lenin declared that, 
Trotzky 's plan was merely an increase of "hu: 
i-'roin report of the All-Russian Confer. 
of Professional or Labor Unions, Pravda, January 

Lenin accused Trot/ky of lack of tact in disc 
these matters in public. Lenin's own methods aiv more 
secretive. He believes that the all-powerful Communist 
Party, aided by the Red 'I \traordn 

Com: . ,in nOim the "election" of "trade union" 

als by the methods hitherto employed. What l 
met bods are we can see from a passage already <|u< 

We must know bow to apply, at need, k; 

illegal methods, hiding truth by silenee. in ord. 

ry h. -art .f the Iradr unions, to remain 
and to accomplish there the Commui, 
(Lenin, in "Radicalism, the Infantile Malady of (' 

inkm" pmu'ram, as hr .1 
above m- : the unions should be u ] 


suaded" to institute tribunals in order to increase 
production for the Soviet Government and punish 
" labor desertion.*' (See the previous chapter.) 

Of course, the ' * trade union ' ' revolt could not amount 
to much under the Bolshevist rule. Two factions, how- 
ever, offered a very vigorous resistance and under the 
Soviet tyranny it is significant that they did manage, 
after all, to obtain a certain number of votes. This 
opposition is divided between the faction which proposed 
to restore the Soviet rule and a so-called Syndicalist 
faction. Neither of them suggests any concession what- 
ever to the peasant majority of Russia, but both seem 
fairly strongly opposed to a continuation of the present 
Communist Party rule. The New Statesman correctly 
sums up the opposition of these factions as follows : 

If we consider Trotzky's militarist-bureaucratic pro- 
posals as the extreme left, then the extreme right is 
taken up by the group of the ''Labor Opposition,' 7 
headed by Shliapnikov chairman of the Metal Workers' 
Union the strongest Russian union. 

The "Labor Opposition" demands that the entire 
economy of the Republic should be taken over by a 
congress of producers, organized in producers' unions. 
This is a consistent syndicalist conception, based on the 
belief that economic matters should be left entirely to 
labor organizations. 

Bitterly criticizing the bureaucratic tutelage over the 
unions by the Communist party, the "Labor Opposi- 
tion" advocates complete self-government in the fac- 

Another faction, headed by Ossinsky and Sapronov, 
calls itself the group of ' ' Democratic Centralism. ' ' This 
group is one with the "Labor Opposition" in demanding 
democratic reforms and active participation of the 


: n the management of industry, but 
against the syml. ;..n of the M. 

icmand is for the re-establish: 
of the Soviet Constitution. 

The official Lenin resolution r< at the 

conference, Trotzky's resolution f>o, and that of the Labor 
Opposition 18. 

What was the result of this conference? Far 
bringing any relaxation of the Communist dictatorship 
suited in putting at the IK ad of the railroads the 
one man in Russia who is noted as more violent than 
Trot/.ky himself, nann n *s right arm, Djerjinsky, 

:' of tin- frightful Extraordinary Commission. Such 
is labor reform and "democratization" in Soviet \l\i 
AB we read in a dispatch of April 19, 1920: 

President Djerjinsky of the All Russian Kxtraordinarv 
Commission of the People's Commissary of tin- Interior, 
who is also Chairman of tin- i:\ti-aordinary Commi^ 

the Improvement of Conditions of Life of the 
Workers, Chairman of the Extraordinary Commi- 
for the Care of Children and of several other 
ry commissions, has been appointed IVopb 
misBary of Transport and Communi<-at ions. The present 
Commissary, M. EmshanoiT, 1 
The decree of the Ce 1 fccntive Committ. 

will maintain all his 

I, thus becoming still more j.owerful. I 

recent anim.v n of the position of 

.y was K for 

due'm k r m ilitnr>* methods into the ma' it of 


miasary - i to the 

ia) methods of management only to give \\ 


few weeks to Djerjinsky, who will introduce on the 
railways the methods of the Extraordinary Commission. 

No better illustration of the Bolshevist policy towards 
labor unions could be offered than the picture given in 
the appeal to the labor world sent out towards the end 
of 1920 by the Moscow Printers' Union. We reproduce 
it here in full, with the exception of a few irrelevant 
sentences : 

Appeal of Moscow Printers' Union 

The Printers' Union of Moscow is the last trade union 
organization that has remained faithful to the principles 
of the independence of the trade unions and their 
separate existence as a class organization. 

The Moscow Printers' Union defends these principles 
because a trade union organization can neither subject 
itself to nor permit itself to be absorbed by the organs 
of the government under the conditions now existing 
when private property is not abolished, when the state 
is the largest if not the only entrepreneur, when the 
purchase and sale of labor power is completely conserved 
in a word, when labor's independent and free organs 
of defense and protection from the pressure of the other 
classes are indispensable. 

In the domain of labor policy the practice of the 
Soviet government during the three years of its existence 
presents a striking example of this idea. 

The Moscow Printers' Union believes that it is ab- 
solutely necessary to carry on a campaign of discussion 
amongst the proletariat against the political, economic, 
and administrative monstrosities practiced by the party 
in power. 

For taking this position, for conducting this battle 
of principles, the Communists hate the printers in a 
manner surpassing even their hatred for the bourgeoisie 
and the landlords, at present non-existent in Russia, 


Commui "lie hand to such counter- 

as Broussiloff and Gout or, the 

Czar i with the other hand, loaded 

all sorts of c laws against the ocialitta, 

oppress with all their power a group of proletarians 
whose sole crime they have had the hanlii 

he Communist maxn nted 

le I iy the party in po\\vr. 
ss of this group of proletariat 
i-portablr point for tl < Mie situation 

'i the represe of the Knglish workers came 

to Russia. On this occasion the printers organi/. 
meeting in which hymns of praise in 1 the Com- 

mui 'v not heard luit where, on ti 

hand, the truth n'S|M- ( -tinir actual conditions in S... 
ia was openly proelait; 

< 'oinmunists, outraged by this meeting, imme- 
diately began to e printers. Tln-y shrank 
DO lie and no calumny in the attainment of their 
purpose, which was to manufacture a fake public opinion 
preparatory to the vigorous punishment they had de- 

f) inflict on the Printers' I'nion. 
It was not difiicult for the Communists to admi 
this punishi: the printers, like all the other 

Russian workers, are deprived of the possibility <>f print- 
ing everything that displeases the Communist ^. Kor 
having printed tin- resolution adopted by the mass n 
ing in honor of 'I Mi comrades. Comrade 7.:\\- 

>ff was arrested. The Printers' I'nion was inter- 
"d from printing the stenographic report of tho 
meeting. The independent unions were also dej,r 
of their own papers. 

Commir punish the printers 

severely, especially because it was impossible for them 
to Oppose the opinion of the workers in other industrial 
''lies to the of M by tlie print ft, The party 

in power would without doubt h, with d 

in a free assembly where the two points of view that 


of the Communists and that of the opposition were 
given a fair field of contest. It was for this reason that 
the party in power was compelled to have recourse to 
meetings under the auspices of dissimilar organizations 
which were nothing but self-styled representatives of 
the proletariat; real representation has not existed in 
Russia for a long time. At these meetings the speakers 
fulminated against the printers. In this manner the 
" General conference" of the printers of Petrograd was 
organized and " unanimously" adopted a withering 
resolution against the Muscovite printers. 

The value of the "unanimity" of the organized 
conferences, during which, under the menace of terrible 
reprisals, the representatives of the proletarian opposi- 
tion are deprived of the possibility of telling the truth, 
is well known to every Russian worker. For this reason 
the government journals lodged the senseless and stupid 
charge of fomenting strikes against the Printers' Union. 
The printers have struck less than any other group of 
workers in Russia, thanks to their firm and solid organ- 
ization. The workers in many other branches of indus- 
try, on the contrary, driven by despair, have declared 
numerous strikes. They saw no other way to improve 
their conditions. These conditions drove the majority 
of the Muscovite printers to the same extremity, but 
the movement was usually arrested by the officials of 
the Printers' Union. 

For more than a month the Communists fashioned 
public opinion with the aid of their monopoly. They 
lied and calumniated without shame. Finally during 
the night of June 17, they arrested all the members 
of the administrative committee of the Printers' Union 
and all other officials of the union holding important 
positions with the exception of those who had the time 
to hide themselves. On the morning of June 18 the 
offices of the union were occupied by a detachment of 
government troops, and everyone who for any reason 
whatsover had displeased the Communists was arrested. 


In the meantime the private lodgings of the employees 
of the union were searched. 

<-e against the working olass 

aroused the indignation of all tin- printers in MOSCOW. 
understood perfectly that tin- admini* <un- 

cil represented the executive organ of all the members 
nion, especially because it was 
ouncils of all the other trade unions and tho 
organs of the government, liy universal sutTrage. 

Some of the workers struck and demanded the release 
of the imprisoned trade unionists. The masters of 
situation employed against the strikers the same 

:hr lioiircLroisir in every country would like to ;n 
but have never dared to. Tin strikers wen- dep; 
of food. Under present conditions, when the workers 
are C most rigorous weapon that 

could be used. At the same time the government placed 
under arrest the alleged strike leaders. Th- ieas- 

ures attained the end desired by the government : tho 
strikers went back to work, and perhaps, under the ; 
sure of similar lie they will soon be even t'< 

to vote resolutions condemning the men who up to tho 
present have been their leaders. Hut tin- hatnd of the 
MOSCOW printers for the authors of this shameless punish- 

1 will not be lessened tlierel.y; on the contrar 
will increase day by day, and a small amouir 
atmosphere would suffice to chase the inquisitors away 
from the prii: 

In addressing themselves to the international labor 
it, the striking printers declare that, crushed 
l.y brutal physical force, they appeal to tin only t 
which Mill preserves for them a n . th. 

i;d labor movement, 
.intf printers assert that D demons! ra< 

lahor movemint that they arc right 
and not < mnista. 

that the new adminis- 
trative council of the Printers' Union, which has been 


superimposed upon them by force, has no influence and 
no authority over the great mass of the workers, whose 
entire sympathy and friendship, on the contrary, are 
with those who are in prison, the former officials of the 
Printers' Union of Moscow. 

Perhaps the Bolshevist government will institute a 
prosecution similar to the Beillis prosecution so notorious 
under the Czarist regime, but the only possible judges 
at present are the Moscow printers and the international 
socialist movement. 

A judgment rendered by the Communist party would 
be nothing but a judgment of an interested party, of 
an adversary who plays the role of a judge in a case 
involving his political enemies. 
So much the worse for them. 

But the socialist and labor international will under- 
stand ! 

The entire working class of Russia believes in the Mos- 
cow printers ! 




Now that Soviet Russia has been cut off from Poland 
and other industrial districts fully 90 JUT <' nt of the 
population is agricultural. Tin 1 oppiv- the 

agricultural population by the Communists and tho Red 
tfl been vcn more fright 1'ul than tho persecution 
of labor and its political and economic organ i /at; 
The Bolshevists have acted towards tho agriculturist 
majority in Russia as towards a conquered people, and 
expressions acknowledging this relation an- frequent 
throughout Bolshevist otVicial publications. For example, 
in Losov>ky's official pamphlot on the new He. I Trade 
Union Internationale ;>lle<i International Coun- 

'i! of Trade and Industrial I'nionsi he refers to tho 
establishment of the Bolshevist rule as "the Mihje.-tioii 

lie peasants and petty bourgeoisie by tt 
lariat." In a speech quoted in S<>ri< I Iiussia in 1920 

n says: 

las^ iu Russia was undoubtedly 
in ?: t\. The jM-asantry remained in ti 

as property o 

tails' Tliese are the fundamental trai- 

'conomic situ nriirmates the in, 

talk of M, rar\ by those who 

do no tand the actual situation. 



There is no harmony between the interests of the 
proletariat and the peasantry. Here the difficulty starts 
for us. 

Already then there was apparent the necessity of in- 
dividual administration, of recognition of the dictatorial 
plenary powers of one person for the carrying out of 
the Soviet idea ; therefore all manner of talk about equal 
rights is nonsense. We conduct the class struggle not 
on the basis of equal rights. The proletariat wins be- 
cause it consists of hundreds of thousands of disciplined 
men, who are animated by a uniform will. 

The exact meaning of "the dictatorship of the pro- 
letariat" was never stated in a more uncompromising 
form than in Lenin's celebrated speech at the Commu- 
nist Party Congress (March, 1921) a speech heralded 
throughout the world by all advocates of friendly rela- 
tions with the Soviets, as the supreme evidence of 
compromise with capitalism and surrender to the peas- 
antry ! We quote a few sentences as given by the official 
Russian Press Review of March 15th. 

We regard all these events from the point of view of 
the class struggle. We are not mistaken with regard to 
the relations between the proletariat and the petty bour- 
geoisie a most difficult question, which demands com- 
plicated measures in order to secure the victory of the 
proletariat, or to be more correct, a whole system of 
complicated transitional measures. . . . 

What is the meaning of the slogan of "free trade" 
advanced by the petty-bourgeois elements ? It shows that 
there are some difficulties in the relations between the 
proletariat and the small farmer which we have not yet 
overcome. I refer to the attitude of the proletariat to 
the small property-holders in a country where the pro- 
letariat has been victorious and the proletarian revolu- 

100 OUT O1- Tlir.Il! OWN MOUTHS 

tion is developing but where the proletarian makes up 

illation and the majority is i 
up of petty-bourgeois elements. In such a con 
proletariat must lead tin- transition <>t' these petty pi 

into collective and coniinunist labor. This 
'IB theoretically beyond any dispute, and on this we based 
a number of our legislative acts. 

The feature which is peculiar to Russia in the h 
degree is that we have here a proletariat making up 

and a considerable minority at that, of tin- 
population, while the overwhelming majority con- 
e peasantry. 

That is. the class-strut^'le still continues in the shape 
of a class-war between the industrial proletariat and the 
agricultural population or peasants, regarded as p 
bourgeois. The proletariat are the victors in this war 
in so far as they have conquered the peasants and cap- 
d the government. Hut the war con;, ause 

the peasant subjects of the proletariat ;ire the Q 
whelming majority. Th< nts must eontinu- 

be excluded from all power, but they must be handed 
down such economic advantages as are consistent with a 

Mined proletarian dictatorship. Ami in the n 
while they must be terrori/ed by frightful punishn 
against attempting to set up a regime of self-government 
as Chapter IV amply demonstrates. 

The nirrieultir -\ the Communist Party 

are not usually even listed in t! 

figures quoted above will show that they 
do not numl" Mian two or tljn-e pep ecnt of that 

party, t! .it one agriculturist in KHIOO is n pre- 

in tlio orpani/ation tliat ^ov 

out tlie agriculturist majority com- 


pletely as factors in the Government and having assigned 
certain theoretical and "proletarian" reasons for this 
policy the Communists and Bolshevists in all countries 
have proceeded to justify themselves by the worst cam- 
paign of vilification that has ever been directed against 
any great people. The Russian agriculturists or peasants 
are described by the Bolshevists and pro-Bolshevist 
"liberals," such as H. G.Weils, Brailsford, andBertrand 
Russell, as if they were almost savages, preferring 
retrogession to progress in their own business of agricul- 
ture, illiterate, violent, repudiating all urban industry 
and all government. There is no foundation whatever 
for these malicious slanders against this great people. 
The Russian peasants agriculturally are more advanced 
than the majority of the agriculturists of southern and 
eastern Europe. Far from being totally illiterate a large 
proportion of the male population, often estimated at 
one-half, are literate. Their great desire, like that of 
other agriculturists, is for better tools, better stock, more 
farm machinery and better transportation facilities, and 
they have shown themselves willing and anxious to make 
heavy sacrifice for these objects. They proved their 
political intelligence by electing a solid delegation of 
intelligent progressives to all the Dumas under the Czar 
and to the Constitutional Assembly forcibly dissolved 
by the Bolshevists. Far from displaying hostility to the 
town population they even have adopted in a vague way 
in the latter 's aspirations towards a moderate form of 
state socialism. But during the Bolshevist regime they 
have got nothing from the cities except Red Army de- 
tachments which have robbed them of everything loose 
on their little farms, killed them in large numbers and 


carried away thoir men as conscripts for the 1 
military adventures in Poland, Siberia, the Can* 
and other far away sections. 

To Bertrand Russell Lenin said: "Nothing will do 
any good except arming the proletariat (that is, that 
part of the proletariat considered reliable by the Com- 
munists). Those who believe anything else are social 
tors or deluded fools." Asked by the Norwegian 
Socialist visitor, Friss, "Do you intend then to use the 
Red Army against the internal enemy?" Lenin replied : 
' Yes, of course. What the peasants call a divine right 
we call high treason." 

Again when referring to the plunder of the peasantry 
before the British Labor Delegation Lenin laughingly 
replied that they were being paid for what was being 
taken in worthless paper money. As quoted by 1 1 
Guest of that delegation Lenin was not ashamed: "The 
peasant," he explained, "is a small capitalist. Ti 
fore, the dictatorship of the proletariat means the gov- 
ernment of Russia by the towns. We do not recognize 
equality between the peasant (that is, the agriculturist) 
and the town worker." 

The Bolshevists have given various names from time 
to time for this looting of the countryside l.y the Red 
Army. The- usual name has been "taxation in kind." 
As Trotzky declared in certain of his "tbflMl" 
December 17, 191!> : "the obtaining of goods from the 
country will inevitably be considered liy the more : 
perous elements of the peasant class as a State tax in 
kind. The methodical and regular payment of such a 
tax can be assured only by coercion on the part of the 
State." Not only did the peasants so regard these 


requisitions but the Soviet Government itself at first 
gave them this name, as we may see from a passage in 
Soviet Russia of February 28, 1920 : 

Beginning with November, 1918, to this old system 
there were added on two taxes of a purely revolutionary 
character which stand out apart within the partly out- 
grown system "taxes in kind" (decree of October 30, 
1918), and "extraordinary taxes" (November 2, 1918). 

Both decrees have been described as follows by Com- 
rade Krestinsky, Commissary of the Finance, at the May 
session of the financial sub- di visions : 

' ' These are decrees of a different order, the only thing 
they have in common is that they both bear a class 
character and that each provides for the tax to increase 
in direct proportion with the amount of property which 
the taxpayer possesses, that the poor are completely 
free from both taxes, and the lower middle class pays 
them in a smaller proportion. 

"The extraordinary tax aims at the savings which 
remained in the hands of the urban and larger rural 
bourgeoisie, from former times. Insofar as it is directed 
at non-labor savings it cannot be levied more than once. 

"As regards the taxes in kind, borrowing Comrade 
Krestinsky 's expression, 'it will remain in force during 
the period of transition to the Communist order until 
the village will from practical experience realize the 
advantage of rural economy on a large scale compared 
with the small farming estate, and will of its own accord, 
without compulsion, en masse adopt the communist 
method of land cultivation.* " 

Krestinsky 's claim that this intended gradual transi- 
tion to agricultural communism is not to be compulsory 
will deceive no one. He himself classes it with the other 
revolutionary tax which is specifically designed to de- 


the larger bourgeois of Imtli to\v -untry so 

complete! can be levied only 01 

Trotzky is also right about the coercion. Tli 
certainly been nothing voluntary about the payim i 
this "tax in kind. " 

Up to April 1, 1919, the Military Suppl 
(from Petrograd alone) sent 255 militan rnjuisitioniiiK 
detachments to various provinces. (The Nortln m ( 
munc, No. 73, September 4, 1919.) 

According to the report presented to the Moscow f 

nee of Soviets 30,000 men had been sent in 
course of a short period, but the majority of tl 
incapable of performing their task, while 
themselves gross speculators. (The Moscow Pro 

No. !<>:>. .Inly 4. 1!M I 

of aggr :;a^e and hl<> 

h pTui-at'(l tlio villages, coupled with an IP 

1o the pi agricultural lal>or. 'I 

tion is l..^t 01 -hat out of l! 

forming the total <>f the food requisitioning detach- 
ments durinir th.' j>rriod from .Iuu- 1o Dr.-mi! 

'!), i.e., 2< Wm killed and wounded hy 

the [.r;is; in ts while " eollrc t i IlLT the .'rain." CStitt 

of the Pood Commissariat for December, 1!>18.) 

tho very first and while nil of fcl -ivitirs 

were M eoutinued his usual pulicy of 

applying plausihle phrases to tlie Bolshevist j.raei 

At the Communist Party Con 1919, he 

Dressing the Iwurp must 

now transfer our attention tC ': "f luiildin^ up 

lif- "f tin- uiidii 1 . ,lry. Wo must live with 

the middle peasantry in peace. The middle peasantry 


in a communistic society will be on our side only if we 
lighten and improve its economic conditions. . . . 

The middle peasant is very practical and values only 
actual assistance, quite carelessly thrusting aside all com- 
mands and instructions from above. 

First help him and then you will secure his confidence. 
If this matter is handled correctly, if each step taken 
by our group in the village, in the canton, in the food- 
supply detachment, or in any organization, is carefully 
made, is carefully verified from this point of view, then 
we shall win the confidence of the peasant, and only 
then shall we be able to move forward. Now we must 
give him assistance. We must give him advice and this 
must not be the order of a commanding officer, but the 
advice of a comrade. The peasant then will be absolutely 
for us. 

The measures previously described are, evidently, ex- 
amples of " comradely advice" and " actual assistance. " 

Under these methods the peasants hid their products 
and sowed less grain in order that there should be noth- 
ing left for the plunderers. It was then that the Soviets 
decided to put still more terror into their actions and 
to give their requisitions a new name. In order to be 
able to seize plausibly all grain under all circumstances 
they declared grain and certain other food products 
the monopoly of the state. They decreed that the 
peasants should be left only enough to supply their own 
families with food and that all the "surplus" should go 
to the Soviet Government. 

Instead of making things better the new method made 
matters worse. Bolshevist statistics in 1920 admitted 
that the agricultural productivity of the country had 
fallen to fifty per cent or less. The area under cultiva- 
tion had fallen to about seventy per cent. The yield as 


bad seeds, the lack of manure, agricultural 
implements and horses (taken by the Soviet armies), 
as well as poor and negligent methods of en 
(partly voluntary) had also fallen so as to reduce the 
crop to less than fifty per cent. 

The following description of the agricultural pu 
in Russia was given in one of the reports read at a n 
ing in Moscow on February 22, and printed in. the 
Economic Life of February 24 (1921) : 

The present position of agriculture is such that the 
sowing area is one-third less than in pre-war years. The 
yield has decreased by 45 per cent. In former years 
the export of grain amounted to 700,000,000 poods, but 
nS there was already a deficit in the crops amount- 
ing to about 1,000,000,000 poods. Tl con- 
it ing 85 per cent, of the population, is no longer a 
producer, but a consumer. Not finding the D 

noditfes he wants on the markets, the peasan* 
(lucrd his produce to the minimum of his personal needs. 

Alarmed at such figures and at the prospect of a 
greater and more rapid agricultural decay and food 
shortage the Soviet Congress in December, 1920, decided 
upon still more violent persecution of the peasantry. 
The new situation is thus summed up by a friendly 
correspondent, Michael Farbmau: 

Tin- ' -,tf famine and it, inuld obviously 

have led to an immediate Ion ;, \\ s ; md 

a change of policy, yet the oppo.sit,. took place. In 
the Food Department published a pn'trramme 

>ns almost twice as big as that obtained in the 

iousyear, while Os^insky, who frankly admitted the 

peasants' refusal to cultivate their land, outlined a most 


fantastic scheme of compelling them to do so. He was 
not in the least alarmed by the crisis, but frankly ex- 
pressed satisfaction that the terrible miscarriage of 
previous schemes for socializing agriculture and the ob- 
stinate refusal of the peasants to fall into line justified 
the state in intervening. 

Unfortunately, Ossinsky's ideas aroused the sympathy 
of the heads of the Food Administration, who were sure 
their enormous programme of food requisitioning during 
this famine year would fail unless they were permitted 
to apply more force than usual. In a few weeks Ossinsky 
and the Food Administration were able to convince the 
Communist Party that this new scheme was a necessity. 
The All-Russian Congress of Soviets last December sanc- 
tioned Ossinsky's ideas, adopting a decree ''In Aid of 
Agriculture." The main provisions of this embodied 
the scheme of compulsory sowing of the fields and estab- 
lished seed funds. 

The giving to this decree the title "In Aid of Agricul- 
ture" is typical. Lenin also repeated his beneficent 
phrases at this Congress: "We shall not advance a step 
in our program without the peasants," and he again 
said that the law should "assist" peasant farming. 

By March the food reserve was almost completely 
exhausted, the prospects for agriculture were still worse, 
and the peasant revolts, especially in the grain produc- 
ing districts, South Russia, Siberia and the Caucasus, 
were more frequent and menacing than ever before. The 
Communists, led by Lenin, now decided once more to 
change the name of their requisitions, reverting from the 
"grain monoply" back to "taxation in kind." The 
Moscow wireless of March 16, 1921, thus reports Lenin's 
speech indicating this second change in method: 


We can satisfy the small farmer in two ways. He 
must first of all he allowed a certain liberty in effecting 
exchange, and secondly, we must obtain p.ods and 

s. Should we be able to obtain a en-tain amount 
of goods which the State could use for purpose 
exchange, we [i.e. the Communist Party] as a S 
would add economic power to our political pov 
perience will show US how a certain freedom in local 
exchange is possible, not only without dest n>\ iim. 
in fact strengthening the political power of the pro- 

We shall be able to obtain a certain part of the goods 
we require from abroad. If the goods an in 
session of the State then the power of the latter in- 
creases. Economically we must satisfy the middh; 
peasant and agree to the freedom [ !] of exchangi 
order to keep power more firmly in the hands of the 

It will be noted that Lenin n -assured the Commun 
that no concession whatever was to be made in the d 
tion of democracy or towards giving the peasant majority 
any voice whatever over their own atTairs. Indeed in 
a speech which was made to the railway men at Moscow 
after the enactment of the new halation, reported by 
the wireless on April 3, Lenin made this doubly clear: 

As far as I personally am concerned, I know only too 
how badly organ i. I Russian peasants, how 

little class consciousness they have. In Kiich .IK inn- 
stances they do not r- a serious menace t< 
dictatorship of tin- proletariat. T: wt HUM by 
all means Strive to attain union with the peasantry and 
them half with regard to their justifiable demands. 


Again we have fair phrases with no real change in 
the peasants' economic condition: 


After hearing Lenin's report, the March Congress 
passed the following resolution: 

(1) In order to ensure the correct and unhindered 
working of farms on a basis of allowing the owner greater 
liberty in the use of his economic resources, in order 
to strengthen peasant farms and increase their output 
and also in order to accurately estimate the duties to- 
wards the State which must be carried out by the land- 
owners, the levy as a means of supplying the State with 
food stuffs, raw materials and fodder is replaced by 
taxation in kind. 

(2) This tax must be less than the quantity at present 
demanded in accordance with the State levy. The 
amount of the tax must be estimated to cover the 
minimum requirements of the Army, the town workers 
and the agricultural workers. The total amount of the 
tax must be gradually decreased as the restoration of 
transport and industry enables Soviet authority to ob- 
tain agricultural products by normal means by exchang- 
ing articles produced by factories, works and peasant 
craft industries for same. 

(3) The tax will be levied in the form of a percentage 
of the produce of the farms, taking into consideration 
the harvest, the number of consumers on the farm and 
the actual quantities of live stock. 

(5) The law regarding taxation in kind must be drawn 
up in such a way and published by such a time as will 
enable farmers to accurately ascertain the amount of 
taxation which will fall to their share before the begin- 
ning of spring work in the fields. 

When this law was being put into effect by the Cen- 
tral Executive Committee of the Soviets the Moscow 
wireless of March 23 reported a remark of the president, 
Kalinin, as follows: 


The peasant may exchange his surplus supplies, in 

excess of the tax, for manufactured . r at 

tin- local market place or through the co-operative 


What now had changed besid< 

old name for the forced requisitions? What grain had 
tin Soviets taken before? There can only be on* 
all they could practically obtain. For many reasons 
it was desirable to leave the peasants enough food so 
that they could live until the next season and produce 
a new crop. More than that was not left to thru 
of the terrible shortage in the cities. Now that the crops 
are less than ever and the city shortage greater will 
they revert to any other division of the product? 
question only needs to be asked to see what the an> 
must be. 

An effort is to be made, however, to state in advance 
how much each peasant must pay. In those rare cases 
where this estimate is for any reason low the peasant 
may be able to produce a slight surplus for trading 
purposes. He will then be at the mercy of the So\ 
which have a monopoly of all Russia's imports and 
most of her home products. The peasant may be able 
to make some slight exchanges with village workshops, 
but in the first place this has always been permitted 
and besides, being without iron or other raw materials 
and without tools or machinery the village workers can 
produce little of value, Kr the rest this limit. 

:" must be with t ' lied "co-o: "which 

since the law abolishing c<> h.m Income 

nothing lut local branches of the Soviet Administration. 
These institutions have a monopoly of all tools and 


machinery, boots, clothing, and everything in which the 
British Labor Delegation found the peasants so de- 
plorably lacking so far as these things exist at all in 
the country. 

From the side of the population of the small towns 
there will be a certain amount of "free trade" with 
these few lucky peasants who have a surplus above the 
"taxation in kind." This trade has also gone on stead- 
ily, though the Soviets have hitherto branded it as 
criminal "speculation" and executed many persons 

Already the so-called "co-operatives" are setting their 
own prices for the scythes, sickles, and other imported 
tools which have obtained such a high value in the 
country-side because of their scarcity. There is no com- 
petition, the Government has a monopoly, and can set 
its own prices. 

To call the local governmental trading posts "co-opera- 
tives ' ' because they consist of remnants of the organization 
of the co-operatives of the past is the grossest deception. 
At one time, and until a year or so ago, the co-operatives 
were the most remarkable native product of the genius 
of the Russian people. Not only has the Soviet Govern- 
ment destroyed them but it has given no indication 
whatever of reviving them in the shape of what the 
rest of the world calls "co-operatives." It will be 
recalled that the Soviets refused a large relief expedi- 
tion by the Entente powers for the sole reason that 
it was proposed to put these supplies in the hands of 
the real co-operatives. It was then March 20, 1920 
that the Soviets dissolved that organization. How com- 
plete the work of dissolution was we may see from the 

118 OUT or TIIKIR OWN Mor, 

following resolution of the Commumist Party, and such 
resolutions invariably become the law of the land: 

To complete the work which has been begun by tho 
decree of March 20, and the subsequent activity of tho 
Party in connection with obtaining a dominating influ- 
ence t<>r tin Party in every section of the organisation 
of Consumers' Co-operatives. 

For the purpose of obviating parallel activity of both 
Co-operative and Soviet Organs to establish a gradual 
abolition of Local Co-operative Societies and Provincial 
and Central Unions of all those Sections which arc of 
a parallel and competitive nature with Soviet 8 
Such Sections namely. Industrial, Timl- <-ul- 

1. Co-operative, Educational and others are to be 
tran.sfi rred to the corresponding (lovcrnmcnt !); 
ts, such as the Supreme Council of Public i: 
People's Commissariat for Agriculture and so forth. 

As regards the Agricultural and Trading Co-opera- 
I, the Congress completely approves of the lirst stop 
taken on the basis of tin- decree <>!' January 27, 
is to say, the complete abolition of the existence of 
All Russian Agricultural and Industrial TO-OJ 
and their amalgamation with the Central Union of which 
they are to become Sections. 

The pro-Bolshevist British delegate, Marga 
field, in the report of the Brit; Party, adm 

that every voluntary element in the co-operatives had 
been ab<>! d that all citizens had been "<; 

98 members. The crime of the n.-il oo-O] was 

that they believed in the exchange of commodities which 

m call "free trade" but 

which they formerly called "erii; and 

profiteering." Here is a paragraph from Miss Bond- 
field 's report : 


When the Revolution first broke out, the Soviet Gov- 
ernment recognized the importance to their economic 
policy of the co-eperative movement. They nursed it in 
every possible way, and treated it as a pet child. But 
the co-operators, who were Mensheviks and Social 
Revolutionaries, could not or would not grasp the great 
conception of economic change. They were also political 
enemies of the Government. For two and a half years it 
has had the passive and sometimes active opposition of 
some of the co-operative leaders. Earlier still, in the 
first year of war, many co-operative Societies became a 
bunch of speculators and profiteers just like the capi- 

The " speculators and profiteers " then subject to the 
firing squad are now to be known as "free traders." 

It is illuminating to examine the new decree on co- 
operatives which is advertised by pro-Soviet propa- 
gandists abroad (though not in Russia!) as one of the 
most solid proofs of Lenin's "abandonment of com- 
munism." Here is a good press summary: 

The decree matJces all citizens of Russia automatically 
members of the co-operative system. It prescribes that 
there can be only one co-operative in each town, village, 
or factory. Freedom of trading for individuals is em- 
bodied in the provision permitting members to buy com- 
modities through the co-operatives, paying in money or 
products, and to exchange among themselves goods 
received through their co-operatives. To the societies 
within Russia is granted the right to buy surplus agricul- 
tural products or products of national industries and 
to sell them to their members; to conclude contracts 
under Soviet law with peasants' and workers' organiza- 
tions, and to arrange for furnishing agricultural ma- 
chinery, threshing grain, and storing and delivering 


The co-oporntive societies are also given the right to 
' uluction or working over raw 

products, and also 1 and 

ics on a large scale. To the c<>-<n>rrn cties 

are assigned the sole right to organise tlistrihution and 
exchange of product* tlimu<ih<nit tin >untni. They are 
t.i 1> directed l.y adminr 

which all citizens have the ritrht to 
: t those excluded from suffrage by tin Soviet Con- 

The sentences underlined when taken together show 
what it all amounts to. The co-operatives remain a com- 
pulsory governmental monopoly. They trade in what 

agricultural products the So\ phased to leave 

he peasant and in the products of the Soviet 's nation- 
alized industries at prices iixed by the Soviets. The 
;mis" that are to govern the co-operatives are 
official, are conducted under Soviet "law" and sn 

M and, the voting being public, opposition voters \vill 
be n ;ed for discrimination by the Sovet Gov> 

merit and. if too assertive, for prosecution by the lawless 
Extraordinary Commission. A nVmie which has not 
permitted majority control even in the Soviets will 
scarcely permit any but Communist control of the co- 

An almost exact parallel may be noted bet we. n the 
Bols' < atment of the co - - and their 1 

nn-rit of the trade unions. (S< liapter.) 

pite of all these und< i.-ts the American 

pro-Bolshevist press, Red, Yellow, and "liberal." ns well 
as the press representing reaction.. i<: groups 

who hope to make a profitable deal with Lenin, have 
hailed the restoration of "taxation in kind" as the end 


of Bolshevism in agricultural Russia and the restoration 
of capitalism. Lenin, as usual has furnished phrases 
for his friends but it is to be noted that these phrases 
are very similar to those he employed before his sup- 
posed reforms. The following expressions in his speech 
at the Communist Congress in March (1921) must be in- 
terpreted in the double light of his previous speeches 
above quoted and of the relatively insignificant action 
actually taken as a result of all this verbiage. Lenin 

It is impossible to deceive a class of the population, 
and it is dangerous to go on deceiving one's self. It 
is time to admit frankly that the peasants manifestly 
refuse to accept any longer proletarian dictatorship. 

The right of the free disposal of their surplus products 
must be the necessary incentive for the peasants, and 
I invite the party to acknowledge its grave blunder in 
attempting to deprive the producers of this right, the 
most elemental of the peasants' instincts. 

We must grant freer economic relations between 
workers and peasants. As a matter of fact, we hitherto 
have acted in a too military manner, and in some cases 
have gone too far in nationalizing trade. If some Com- 
munists thought the organization of a socialistic state 
was possible in three years, they were dreamers. Free- 
dom of economic relations means free trade, and free 
trade signifies a return to capitalism. 

Those who believe that in this Russia of peasants 
Socialism can be realized, simply believe in Utopia. 

Let us see what all this means. In spite of Lenin's 
statement that the peasants can no longer be deceived 
he is attempting to deceive them with the long tried 


phrase, "taxation in kind." Thr peasants, he r< 
nizes, do not accept th. pi,,! 

n proposes to give tin -m no voice whatever in 
Communist Government. Undoubtedly such very re- 
stricted free trade as has b !ish<d mean 
that small degree, a return to capitalism. By admitting 
the fart Lenin puls his critics off their guard, 
defense of this decree before his own followers (above 
quoted) is that the remaining parts of the Communist 
system will he strengthened by this slight economic con- 
cession, since it is unaccompanied by any surrender of 
actual political power. As to his supposed c 
about the impossibility of realizing Socialism in K 
now, the whole reason for the proletarian dictatorship, 
as we have pointed out, is pr< cisely that violence will bo 
needed to hold the power over the peasant major iiy-- 
until in a generation or two, Socialism does become 
ible. Not only have the Communists always used this 
argument but they have never used any other. 
the country is not ready for Communism, the dictator- 
ship of the Communists must be prolonged indefinitely 
until it is ready. 

In his closing speech at the March (1921) Congress 
of the Russian Communist Tarty reproduced in Soviet 
Russia, May 14th, 1921 Lenin again laid bare in a 
words his entire policy towards the agricultural popu- 
lation (peasants) who compose tin- overwhelming ma- 
joriV nation. The inauguration of the law of 

"taxation in kind," or. rather, th. Q to that law, 

it will be observed, had made no change whatever in 
Bolshevist attitude towards the subj.rtcd peasantry. 
Lenin said: 


The work of onr congress will be the more successful 
that we have achieved absolute agreement from the very 
beginning on two fundamental questions; the relations 
of the vanguard of the proletariat with the proletarian 
masses and its relations with the peasants. 

"We may stop the citation here to point out once more 
that the Bolshevist attitude towards the proletarian or 
industrial masses is almost the same as their attitude 
towards the peasants or agricultural masses. Lenin 
continues : 

We know that the only force able to unite millions of 
scattered small proprietors who are constantly enduring 
great hardships, the only force able to unite them eco- 
nomically and politically against the exploiters, is the 
class-conscious proletariat. 

Here is the same claim of the little group that con- 
trols the Communist Party that they are divinely or 
otherwise called to rule the masses without their con- 
sent. And, finally, Lenin proceeds to disclose the very 
foundations of Bolshevist policy. An alliance or part- 
nership with foreign capital is absolutely indispensable 
because there must be at least a minimum of " benevo- 
lence " in the tyranny of the Soviets or the peasants by 
continued passive resistance and violence will not permit 
them to work. These political serfs cannot be perma- 
nently held in subjection unless something is done 
towards ameliorating the misery into which they have 
fallen through Czarist and Bolshevist rule. On this 
point Lenin declares : 

Relations will be normal then, and only then, when 
the proletariat is in possession of a large scale industry 


with its products, and when it not only meets the needs 
of the peasant but, besides furnishing him with the 
necessities of life, so improves hU ihat its 

superiority over the eapr a will be evident 

and palpable. This, and nothing else, would 00 

- of normal Socialistic society. We cannot bring 
tliis about imni. diately so harassed are we by ruin, need 
and impoverishment. 

indeed, a large-sized task for an utterly bankrupt 
and incredibly inefficient bureaucracy to lift up materi- 
ally the level of 100,000,000 wretched and embitt 
agriculturists. To accomplish this the Bolsh. -\ 
idiose and original idea is to sell all that is most 

la, industrially, to foreign capital 

This plan, in turn, is based upon the expectation of a 
world revolution which, within a few months or a few 
years, will make it unnecessary to pay the foreign ea pi- 
's for the new plants and machinery that will have 
been set up. Even if this plan is not unanimously hcl.l 
by every one of the negotiators, the fact that it is openly 
preached to the entire Russian nation proves ihat any 
such concessions are likely to be the source of endless 
int'Tnational friction and possibly of wars, whatever the 
future government of Russia may he. If that govern- 
ment is Bolshevist the agitation for world revolution will 
'inue, revived whenever any foreign uph< 
tens. If the future government is uon-Holsh. 
itWi 'ily repudiate the transaction that led to the 

delivery of these vast sums int.. the hands of the Bol- 
v, and to this attempted wholesale alienation 
of the patrimony of generations yet unborn. (See 
Chapter XI II.) 



WHILE industry was somewhat backward in Russia 
under the Czars there was already a considerable devel- 
opment. The country had risen to an economic level 
far in advance of Asia or even of the other outlying 
parts of Europe. Several millions of working men were 
employed in modern industries and 40,000 miles of rail- 
road were being operated under modern methods and 
with modern equipment, as good as that of a number 
of other European countries. In a country in this semi- 
developed condition and with a backward political gov- 
ernment the war did more damage than elsewhere and 
the civil war that followed greatly increased the work 
of destruction. We do not quote any figures as to the 
economic collapse, since it is impossible to say what part 
of the existing condition is due to the present govern- 
ment and what part is due to previous causes. Without, 
however, quoting any figures Bolshevist authorities show 
that no effective effort is being made to fight the con- 
stantly increasing economic disintegration in spite of 
the fact that such efforts are more needed in Russia 
than in any other part of the world today. 

In the report of the Central Soviet Executive Com- 
mittee (Moscow wireless March 23, 1921) Kalinin said: 



We are confronted by a number The 

main ob^ km. In order to imp: 

the condition of the workmen and peasants not in words 
but in dfl.<, it is necessary to deliver a decisive blow 
to disorganization. At present, however, there are a 
great many obstacles in the way of a successful struggle 
against disorganization. One of these s is ban- 

in, which is greatly developed in son uces. 

Bandits, who have been created by wealthy peasants who 
iot reconcile themselves to Soviet authority, mas- 
querade as the protectors of the interests of the peasants. 

Here we have a confession as to the state of disor- 
ganization and the chief obstacles, namely, the revolts 

of the agricultural population which Kalinin designates 
as a revolt of bandits and wealthy peasants, although 
the latter class, as recently stated by Lenin is now n>n- 
:ont, and no bodies can better deserve the title of 
diis" than : -lit ions sent out by the So\ 

to plunder the countryside. 

hevists give additional causes for the economic 
degeneration : 

For 3,150,000 workmen thnv are in Russia 2.<'< 
offici Ob longing to th- Of controlling 

organ i /.at ions. (Official B I data quoted in the 

official Economic Life, Dec. 9, 1920.) 

One of t! : >;c?'iptions of the results of this sort 

Of thing is given liy IVm--.. Kp.pntkin. lh-- eminent 

In <: o the British wor ; simihir to that 

report of the British labor delegation, 
Kropotkin declares: 


The ways to be followed for overthrowing an already 
weakened Government and taking its place are well 
known from history, old and modern. But when it comes 
to building up quite new forms of life, especially new 
forms of production and exchange, without having any 
examples to imitate, when everything has to be worked 
out by men on the spot, then an all powerful centralised 
Government which undertakes to supply every in- 
habitant with every lamp glass and every match to light 
the lamp, proves absolutely incapable of doing that 
through its functionaries, no matter how countless they 
may be. It becomes a nuisance. 

It develops such a formidable bureaucracy that the 
French bureaucratic system, which requires the inter- 
vention of 40 functionaries to sell a tree felled by a 
storm on a route nationale, becomes a trifle in compari- 
son. This is what we now learn in Russia. And this 
is what you, the working men of the "West, can and must 
avoid by all means, since you care for the success of 
social reconstruction, and sent here your delegates to 
see how a social revolution works in real life. 

To sweep away that collaboration and to trust to the 
genius of party dictators is to destroy all the independent 
nuclei, such as "trade unions" and the local distributive 
co-operative organization, turning them into bureau- 
cratic organs of the party as is being done now. 

A correspondent of a European socialist paper now 
living in Soviet Russia writes in a similar vein: 

All the new organisations can do nothing with the 
general ruin. "We possess enormous riches, but cannot 
raise them. We have no men, no tools, no transport, no 
dress, nor boots. But we have a Provincial Labour Com- 
mittee, a Provincial Metallic Industry Committee, a 
Provincial Dress Committee (one suit for 10 years), a 
Provincial Leather Committee (only for the army; the 
civilians receive no leather), and so on. 


Another reason for the additional decay which the 
Soviets have sup in- 

dustry ' their deplorable 

y of exterminating the professional classes a p< 
which is summed up in a letter written by th< 
Bolshevist writer, Maxim Gorky, to Lenin and pri. 
in the Volya Rossii on October 2, 1920. In this 1. 
Gorky refers to "the extermination of the cultural 
sources of the count n 

While Raving our own hides we are cutting off the 
1 of the nation, destroying its brain. 

:;mir Hitch, I take my stand on their side, and 
I prefer arrest and imprisonment to compile 
though it be only silent, in the extermination of tin* 
best and most invaluable forces of the Russian people. 
To me it has become evident that the "Reds" arc just 
such enemies of the people as are the "Wh 

< > 

A fourth vice of the Soviet system which is burdening 
industrial administration is U . im- 

practical and unenforceable deems, Lenin hi: 

rs to certain agricultural decrees as intended 
primarily for propaganda. And at a : rt d 

in Izvestia, Moscow, January 1, 1921, he declared : 

In Smolny we have talked more than enough about. 

general principles. Now after three years we have 

decrees on many points of this , [the trade union 

;iing many of its integral parts. Hut 

of the that they ;ij. 

in order to be forgotten and to go unfulfilled by i 

We are able to study differences of opinion in prin- 
ciple ai make mistakes, we are masters at 


this, but to study practical things, and to verify them, 
we are unable to do. 

What is most amusing is that Lenin himself soon gave 
an illustration of the truth of his accusations. The all- 
important problem for the Soviets is to get the perse- 
cuted workers to work. The supposed means of accom- 
plishing this at present are so-called disciplinary courts. 
Yet Lenin and other Bolshevist chiefs had apparently 
forgotten the very existence of these courts or of the 
decree promulgating them. In Pravda (January 13, 
1921) in an account of the All-Russian Conference of 
Professional Unions he is quoted as follows : 

When I read Rudzutuk's theses about disciplinary 
courts, I thought there certainly must be a decree about 
this. And, indeed there was. A regulation concerning 
Disciplinary Labor juries, was promulgated on November 
14th, 1919 (Statute-Book No. 537). 

As this decree had been on the statute books over 
a year no wonder Lenin had forgotten its existence 
in view of the numbers of the decrees issued since that 

In this matter of paper decrees as in the matter of 
the issuance of paper money and of Bolshevist propa- 
ganda generally there is one hope. The paper supply 
is very short. The type is being rapidly used up. The 
production of type-making factories is one-twentieth that 
of peace times. Then the number of workmen in the 
printing industry, doubtless for reasons we have already 
pointed out, has been reduced to one-half. 

We cannot better sum up the total failure of the 


economic and industrial policy of the Soviets than in 
the words of Maxim Gorky in the Moscow Pravda: 

Revolutionary Socialist policy is assuredly a very 
beautiful thing, but \ve mu^t work. We have ere, 
an atmosphere of general idleness and criminal n.-^li- 

have never worked so ill 

as at present. To be sure, this is in part the result of 
malnutrition and consequent bodily weakness, but in the 
main it proceeds from a lack of sense of responsibility. 

Again if we wish a detailed picture of the working 
out of the system we cannot do better tlfan to quote 
from another article of Gorky's in the same journal. 
The description of this master writer and Bolshevist is 
so able and conclusive that we quote it at some length: 

In another place a car is being loaded. On one axle 
are piled heavy barrels of cement, cases of 1 ad, p 

. &o. On the otli -\\ chair 

i goods, a perambulator things that are quite litrht. 

overloaded axle will of course become heated and 

an will not reach its destination. 1 have been a 

. I know that had I tried to load a wagon 

in that way my boss would have hoxed my ears and tM 

to go to the devil. And 1 should d it, 

should have been inju- rolling stock. 

In another place a mechanical saw is being u> 
and planks from a house which has 1 
The wood is full of nails and the s;r. 
fully. It is quickly spoiled and its treth broken, 
common kn< v.l.-dL'c that wr have no saws and 
price is ! one saw we have to 

Houses areb< \ ..It ing fashion. 

The windows are all broken, though we have no glass, 


and it would be so easy to take out the panes without 
breaking them. In the barracks transparent paper takes 
the place of window glass, letting in no light and keeping 
in no heat, therefore more furniture is burnt to warm 
the barracks. 

Metal roofing is allowed to lie for months in the midst 
of the wreckage of destroyed houses. It rusts and be- 
comes absolutely useless. The roofs of the inhabited 
houses are also rusted and the rain -comes through, but 
nothing is done to mend them. Walls and ceilings fall 
in and well built houses rapidly become uninhabitable. 

And this is how by sheer stupidity, by lack of regard 
for their own labor, our people destroy the valuable 
assets of the nation and ruin the patrimony of the public. 

Our streets are littered with pieces of iron and the 
moujik (peasant) in his village has nothing wherewith 
to repair his wheels and axles, and cannot even forge 
shoes or nails for his horses or teeth for his rakes. That 
is why he goes out to the railway bridges and tries to 
saw off a piece of iron, or to loosen the rivets of the 
sleepers, or attempts to steal from the station the piece 
of metal that he needs. For a carload of iron the moujik 
would gladly barter a carload of wheat. Yet the hun- 
dreds of thousands of old saucepans that are scattered 
among the ruins of the houses would suit him very well 
and he could put to good use the window sashes and 
doors that are burned in the cities for heating purposes. 

Doubtless these are all very minor matters, and par- 
ticularly unimportant to us whose object is to teach 
the whole world a new order of things and a new manner 
of life. But can one learn conscientiously from masters 
who themselves either do not know how to work or will 
not work, and who will soon have no clothes to put on 
their backs? I do not think the European workman 
can have any great respect for comrades who do not 
know how to organize their own labor. The politics of 
social revolution doubtless is very fine, but work comes 


All these little things of which I have spoken are 
repeated by thousand ns of thousands, and they 

create an atmosphere of scandalous i. mess 

and of criminal carelessness, for all that goes to make 
up the patrimony of the public. 

In lieu of a conclusion to the above we may quote 

ression of that Socialistic progressive wt 
President of Czecho-Slovakia, Professor Masaryk an 
ardent udmiivr of the Russian people and a life IOIIK 
student at first hand of Russian affairs. President 
Masaryk says: 

i rouble with the Bolshevists is they do not know, 
and never have known, how to work. They know how 
to make slaves, fight, and murder, but they are unable 
to work with application and continuity. 

The economic conditions arc getting rapidly worse. 
The leading Soviet railway expert rnleulates that it will 
take 25 years to put the Russian railways back into 
shape. But to accomplish numeration evrn in this 
period would require Al credit abroad and a high decree, 
h'ciency at home. As lonp as efficiency, according to 
Bolshevist reports, ranges from 20 to 70 per cent of the 
low pre-war level and credit approaches zero, regen 

is impossible and progressive degeneration as 
Hughes and Hoover state in i< .Wording 

to official Bolshevist reports mines are in a worse state 
than the railways and the basic iron and st -1 Indus 
are in a still more complete condition of collapse. Under 
these conditions the few hundred foreign locomo 1 

can be paid for arc but a drop in the bucket. The 
slight improvements r- i mount to nothing in 


parison to the wholesale deterioration of 40,000 miles 
of roadbed and the rotting away of the machinery in 
thousands of mines. 

It is obvious that all social reforms on a national scale 
are wholly impossible under economic conditions like 
these, where the industrial population has been reduced 
to a third or fourth of what it was and where the wage- 
earners 'that remain are wretchedly clothed and are 
happy when they have a starvation ration of black bread 
to say nothing of any other food. Reforms of any 
substantial kind whatever for 100,000,000 people cost 
colossal sums of money, and occasional " model" institu- 
tions in a vast country are but a mockery serving to 
demonstrate the utter inadequacy and futility of what 
is being accomplished. 

Far from moving forward we can be mathematically 
certain that every fundamental institution is falling back 
in Eussia today especially when we remember that the 
liberal Zemstvos, or provincial councils, under the old 
regime, had made a considerable beginning in certain 

Yet the Bolshevist propagandists and their " liberal' ' 
accomplices have the audacity to assert that vast and 
substantial reforms are being carried out in "art," 
" science," "education" and "culture." Though no 
foundation whatever for any of these assertions has been 
produced they have been so often repeated that the 
impression has become widespread that there must be 
"something" in them. 

The most notorious of the mythical "reforms" being 
reported by the Bolshevists and their friends is the 
reform of the schools and the supposed good treatment 


of children by the SovioR Yet it is precisely tho 
generation that always suffer from such i: 

and intellectual chaos and physical suffering as pr 
for men, women and children iu Ku^la today, 
from putting the child ren first, the Soviets have put 
them almost last. First comes the Ked Army used not 
for defense but for aggression and to put down 
peasant attempts at self-government with sutlicient 
bloodshed to terrorize the survivors. Then comes the 
propaganda, squandering millions of dollars from South 
Ameriea to China and in every village of Ru 
Next comes the Soviet bureaucracy usually given 
privileges on the plausible ground that they nerd them 
in the strenuous work of keeping their hold on the 
government. Resides these two classes the army 
food seizing detachments, etc., can obviously get and 
demand preferred treatment. After all these, no doubt, 
the children are given a preference over the mnaindei 
f the population. And our wn-t.-lp-.i sentimentalists 
call this "looking out for the children I" 

The Communists alw; rl and never deny that 

they are deliberately sacrificing the entire population for 
the present in the belief that they are thus introducing 

form of future society that thry prete, T 
acknowledge they are largely responsible for the bureau- 
cracy, disorganization, etc., that ; ".e the chief 
causes of the suffering. Here is how this afTts the 

Frederick .[. Libby, commissioner of tho American 

nds' Service Committee (Quakers), who recently 

returned from Reval, brought back information 

many children are starving in Russia. 


Mr. Libby obtained his information from Arthur J. 
Watts, an English Friend, who has been engaged in 
relief work in Russia. Mr. Watts gave Mr. Libby a 
translation of the reports of Russian commissars from 
various cities. 

It appears from the commissars' report that the situa- 
tion of the children varies greatly in the different cen- 
tres. In some cities, such as Vitebsk, it is reported that 
whole families are perishing from starvation. In others, 
such as Smolensk, Yaroslav, the children are reported 
to be obtaining sufficient nourishment. The report from 
Vitebsk stated that the bread substitutes give the chil- 
dren dysentery which it is impossible to cure. 

The commissars report that in several centres the chil- 
dren had been unable to obtain bread for a long time 
and that in others no kind of fats or meats were obtain- 
able and that milk was received rarely. 

The children of Moscow were declared to have no 
sugar nor fats, and to be either starving or falling ill 
through under-nourishment. Inmates of the children's 
homes in Novgorod are starving, the reports stated. 
They receive no meat, butter, potatoes, milk or salt, but 
live on a daily portion of sour cabbage soup, millet 
cooked in water, and black bread made from bad flour. 
They are suffering from scurvy as a result of under- 

For all this the Bolshevists are largely though, of 
course, not wholly responsible. Whatever the degree 
of their responsibility may be, it is an outrageous false- 
hood to talk of great educational advances under such 
conditions which are admitted as being far worse than 
anything Russia has hitherto experienced. 

Yet the Soviets have never ceased to put forth* inflated 
and grandiose paper schemes as if certain of accomplish- 


ment, to take credit to tl for the reopening of 

old institutions under new names, such as "children's 
palaces/' to show off a handful of favored schools a* 
typical of thousands, to talk of new methods while ad- 
mitting the wholesale lack not only of new hut 
of teachers generally, and while foisting upon the chil- 
dren their crude, ignorant, violent and petty dogmas in 
the place of the culture of the ages to claim that they 
are giving them a new and superior education. We have 
Russian Communists in America. Let anybody who 
know r s them think of what is happening to the starving 
and helpless children of Russia in the light of this Mos- 
cow wireless of February 6th, 1921 : 

Instructions of the General Committee of the Russian 
Communist Party of Communist Workers of tfio People's 
Commissariat for Education: 

The fundamental direction must remain in the hands 
of the Communists, while the specialists arc to he their 
assistants. The curriculum of general education is to be 
d upon by the Communists alone. 

Recalling the fact that only the most violent and 

narrow-minded one per cent. < i arc members of 

the Communist Party, and remembering that the 2M),000 
teachers who, it is said, are needed will absorb a 1 
part of that organi/alion, leaving no possibility 
crimination in appointments, consider the statement of 
' 'ommunist Party Congress in March, 1!M!. that one 
"basis of educational work ai 1 by the 

Soviet Government is the preparation of a new class 
of teachers who are imbued with Communi 

Lenin explained the Bolshevist conception of public 


education in the most explicit manner at the All-Russian 
Political Education Conference on the 5th of November, 
1920. (See Soviet Russia, April 30th, 1921.) He ex- 
plained that the teachers must be, first of all, political 
propagandists and humble followers of the Communist 

We must treat this question frankly and in complete 
opposition to tradition, must combat the erroneous con- 
ception that education may under no circumstances be 
combined with politics. We are living in a historic 
period, in the period of struggle against the world 
bourgeoisie, which is still very much stronger than we 
are. In such a moment of struggle we must defend our 
Socialist work of construction and wage a conflict with 
this bourgeoisie, both in a military and what is more 
important in a spiritual sense, in the way of education. 

The teaching staff must itself attract the working 
classes, fill them with the Communist spirit, interest them 
in what the Communists are doing and win them over 
to the Communist standpoint. 

But the school teacher the world over has a certain 
minimum respect for his calling. Though the over- 
whelming majority of the teachers under Kerensky were 
Social Revolutionists or Social Democrats, they were 
teachers, and not propagandists. Dismissed by the 
wholesale, the majority of the new teachers are scarcely 
more amenable. Lenin and Lunacharsky, Commissary 
for Education, complain bitterly of this difficulty and 
pursue their usual method of vilifying their victims. 
Lenin says, in the speech just quoted: 

Already for a long time the teachers' organization has 
been fighting against the socialist transformation. In 


pedagogical circles the bourgeois prejudices have taken 

"iilarly firm .-ompi-ll |uer 

our Communist position slowly, stop by st< p. The teach- 

-taff. which gn-w up in bourp- 

the bottom of its heart hostile to tl. -iat and 

had no contaet with it. \Ve must now ra'Ne a new army 
of pedagogical workers, which must be more 
connected with the party, more intimately acquainted 
with its ideals, more fully impressed with the spir. 
those ideas. 

Far from any advance less than 27 per cent of the 
children are receiving any instruction whatever. 
manite, the leading Communist organ of France, on 
January 3, 1920, in summing up the official report of 
Lunacharsky, Chief Soviet Commissar for Education, 
gives this figure and the British Labor Party's Russian 
delegation reports: 

The- Russian educational authorities estimate that 25 
p'-r cent of the child population are now in receipt of 
a normal education of the . !. mentary type. This is prob- 
ably an overestimate, as in some plae.s visited accom- 
modation for only 10 per cent of the children 
and also there is no method of insuring compu! 
attendance as in England, and children who do not 
to attend simply remain away. In some of the villages 

M is of a very primitive description and 
fined to the. winter months and to children 1,. 

imated that 1 

of the childr- .ing some form of efiVctiv< 

mentary rdiicat ion. 

It may, t , ! juestioned if the proportion of 

children attending school at IT than under the 



The Bolshevists have repeatedly stated that the people 
must be made literate if they are to become useful sub- 
jects for Communist rule ; this was also the Prussian idea 
of education. But the Communists, not to mention their 
personal incapacity, have a system that produces neither 
the personnel nor the material for educational institu- 
tions of any kind. Far from any sacrifice being made for 
the children, education, literature, science, or art, all 
these are deliberately, daily and unremittingly sacrificed 
in order to maintain and, if possible, to increase the 
power of the Communist Party. 

Education is, first of all, the pre-requisite for propa- 
ganda. Second, after the individual has learned to read 
and write, education becomes propaganda as we may 
see from Lenin's speech already quoted: 

The most important point at present for the comrades 
in the work of culture and education is that of the 
relation between education and our political aim. In 
bourgeois society it has always been, and still is main- 
tained, that the spirit of knowledge is apolitical, or 
unpolitical. This is a piece of hypocrisy on the part 
of the bourgeoisie, nothing more nor less than a refined 
method of deceiving the masses, 99 per cent of whom 
are oppressed by the domination of the church, of private 
property, etc. 

One of our chief tasks is that of opposing to bourgeois 
deception and hypocrisy our truth, and of obliging the 
bourgeoisie to recognize our truth. 

In regard to family life there is the most rapid and 
demoralizing retrogression. Homes are being broken up 
and children, as far as practicable, separated from 
parental influence and placed in a sort of orphan asylum 


called "children's homes" or "boarding schools." The 
children are not quite so wretchedly fed in these institu- 
tions as when with their families (though the reports 
above quoted show they are often starving even in the 
Soviet "homes") a fact which naturally makes f-'iid 
parents surrender them "voluntarily" according to the 
Bolshevists and their cold-blooded "liberal" si; 
But besides this "the theory of the Communist Party 
that every soul must give a labor contribution to the 
community carries with it the implication that tin 
dividual must be freed from the economic burden of 
the family. Both men and women are paid on the basis 
of the individual wage." (British Labor Delegation 

So with other "reforms." All vital and national im- 
provements are costly. Therefore none have hern made, 
and all changes are either of secondary importance 
such as new "movies" or on an utterly insignificant 
scale for a country of the first magnitude. All claims to 
the contrary are among the clearest proofs of the bold and 
'rupulous character of the Bolshevist propaganda. 

The HoKhevist leader himself does not make any claim 
of construction worth boasting about. He is proud of 
work of destruction and has said so again and again. 
All pre-existing civili/ation is to he destroyed. As for 
the rest he is proud of hi > resistance to those who would 
destroy him. Reconstruction can and must wait. He is 
very patient, as to construction, as long as he believes 
the fighting is going his way: 

In our struggle two main factors are apparent. On 
the one hand there is the task of destroying, of an- 


nihilating the heritage received from the bourgeois 
regime, of suppressing the ceaselessly repeated attempts 
of the bourgeoisie to destroy the Soviet power. This 
task has hitherto taken up most of our attention and 
prevented us from going about the other task, that of 

(Speech at Political Education Conference November 
5, 1920 from Soviet Russia, April 30, 1921.) 



THE foundation of the entire Bolshevist movement as 
well as the foreign policy of the Soviet Government is 
world revolution, the overthrow of all existing govern- 
ments even the most democratic all being regarded as 
equally "capitalistic." This is the aim of the Russian 
Communist Party, which is the Soviet Government, and 
also of the Communist Internationale which shapes the 
Soviet foreign policy. No compromise of this aim has 
been adopted or is even projected. 

In the Bolshevist view tin- present is a period of 
closely connected wars and revolutions, all having a com- 
mon capitalistic cause, and all working towards the same 
end, a communist world state. 

The increasing pressure of the proletariat, partieulnrly 
its victories in some count i iivjthens the resistance 

of the exploiters and compels them to create new forms 
NT-national capitalist solidarity i League of 

or^ani/.iiitf the systematic exploitation of 
all i ii a world scale, din <-ts all its , the 

iimn 'i of the revolutionary movement 

of the proletariat of all count r 

All this inevitahly i he Mending of civil war 

within n with the defensive wars of 

revolutionary countries, and the struggles of oppressed 
nations against the yoke of imperialist states. (From 



Programme of the Russian Communist Party (Bol- 
shevists), Adopted at the VHIth conference of the 
Party, Moscow, 18-23rd March, 1919, English Transla- 
tion Published by the Executive Committee of the Com- 
munist International.) 

The same thought has been recently expressed by Trot- 
zky as follows (see Soviet Russia, April 2, 1921) : 

The international proletariat has set out to seize the 
power. Whether civil war is or is not "in general" 
one of the indispensable attributes of revolution "in 
general ' * it is nevertheless incontestable that the forward 
movement of the proletariat, in Russia, in Germany, and 
in certain parts of what was once Austria-Hungary, has 
taken on the form of civil war to the bitter end. And 
that not only on internal fronts but also on external 

The military part of this program is in abeyance be- 
cause of the failure of attempted Bolshevist revolutions 
in neighboring countries such as Hungary, Bavaria, etc., 
and also because of the economic and military weakness 
of the Soviets, but the Soviet regime has not overlooked 
a single opportunity to assault a weakened neighbor, as 
we see from the attack on Poland August, 1920, and the 
recent conquest of Georgia and neighboring territories. 
The very oath of the Red Army shows it is regarded as 
a force for "liberating" the world proletariat. The 
following clauses of the oath are quoted from the report 
of the Russian delegation of the British Labor Party: 

Before the working classes of Russia and the whole 
world, I undertake to carry this name with honour, to 
follow the military calling with conscience and to pre- 


serve from damage and robbery the national nnd military 
possessions as the hair of my head. 

I undertake to abstain from and to d'U>r any not liable 
to dishonour tho name of C i-t Kepublie ; 

cover to direct all my dads and thoughts to ttie 
Great Aim of Liberation of all Workers. 

The effort of the Soviet "Government" through its 

Third Internationale to foment revolutions throughout 
the world continues. Its first aim is revolution now. 
Where this is impracticable the aim beeomes to build 
up a revolutionary movement prepared to attempt a 
revolution within a very few years. The immediate pur- 
pose, iii that case, is to undermine all governm- 
destroy all non-Bolshevist labor organizations, and to 
make converts who may be relied upon not only to give 
the Kussian Soviet Government moral support but to 
obey all the revolutionary orders it issues. While the 
world revolution policy has failed to create revolutions, 
it has succeeded in very large measure in all ' 
secondary objects. It has therefore been a great success 
from the Bolshevist standpoint, and this is the view of 
all tho Bolshevist leaders. 

In making trade agreements and other treat its tho 
^ diplomats find it suits their purpose to make 
a wholesale denial of the entire world revolution policy, 
and they have made these denials iiuntly from 

the beginning. A few weeks befor< <>nd Congress 

of the Third Internationale, where the policy of world 
revolution was brought into its m<>M complete form, 
Kalinin. President of tho Central Executive Committed 
of the Soviets, issued a statement to Poland in whieh he 
claimed that the Russian Communists "never attempted 


and are not going to attempt to bring in Communism 
in foreign countries. ' ' Within ninety days of this state- 
ment the Bolshevist authorities made repeated declara- 
tions of their purpose to set up a Soviet government 
in Poland by force of arms. And when Trotzky, as 
War Lord, was in Bialystock, in northeastern Poland, he 
even assumed that Sovietism would rapidly spread from 
Poland to the entire world. "Bolshevism," he said, 
"was more powerful than ever and would soon spread 
to other countries." "In a year," he continued, "all 
Europe will be bolshevist." 

When we see how totally false was the statement of 
the President of the Soviets we may begin to realize 
the complete worthlessness of other statements of the 
Bolshevist diplomats and, in fact, of all their public 
declarations issued for foreign consumption. The Com- 
munist Government of Russia has now entered into 
solemn agreement with Great Britain not to carry on 
revolutionary propaganda in British territory. Any 
such agreement, along with all other promises of the 
Soviets, was denounced by Secretary Colby as wholly 
worthless in view of their faithless record and their 
revolutionary operations through the Third Internation- 
ale. Secretary Colby said (in his note of August 10, 
1920) : 

The responsible leaders of the regime have frequently 
and openly boasted that they are willing to sign agree- 
ments and undertakings with foreign powers while not 
having the slightest intention of observing such under- 
takings or carrying out such agreements. 

Moreover, it is within the knowledge of the Govern- 
ment of the United States that the Bolshevist Govern- 


mont is it self subject to the control of a political faction 
with extensive international ramifications through the 
Third Internationale, and that this body, which is heavily 
subsidized by the Bolshevist Government from the puMie 
nues of Russia, lias for its openly avowed aim tin' 
promotion of Bolshevist revolutions throughout tho 
world. The leaders of the Bolsheviki have boasted that 
their promises of non-interference with nthtr nations 
would in nourise bind the agents of this body. 

The preamble to the Soviet constitution declares that 

one of the main objects in forming a Soviet government 

> use it "for the victory of socialism in all lands." 

In the preamble of the constitution of the Communist 

Internationale we find the following: 

The object of the Communist International is a strug- 
gle with force of arms for the suppression of th<- i 
national bourgeoisie, and the creation of an Internal 
Soviet Republic, as a transitional stage for the com} 
suppression of the State. 

At its Second Congress, July, 1020, this Internationale 
expressed itself even more strongly: 

The Communist International fully and unreservedly 
upholds the gains of the great proletarian revolution in 
the first victorious socialist revolution in the 
world's history, and calls upon all workers to follow 
the same road. The Communist International niak- 
its duty to support by all the power at its d ' 
Soviet Republic wherever it may be formed. 

Among the "slogans" of the dominating Russian 
Communist Party presented at that gathering were 


Through the III International to the world dictator- 
ship of the proletariat, and through the dictatorship of 
the proletariat to the abolition of classes and the most 
complete liberation of mankind. 

Long live the III International, which is fighting to 
establish an International Soviet of Workmen's Deputies. 

The most important action taken at this congress was 
the formulation of the "twenty-one points." The send- 
ing of these points as an ultimatum to all the socialist 
parties of Europe had the following results: 

First, the powerful Independent Socialist Party in 
Germany was split and the majority faction entered the 
Third Internationale, accepting the domination of Mos- 
cow and all the twenty-one points. 

Second, the same result occurred in the congress of 
the French Socialist Party in December, 1920. 

Third, a powerful element in the Italian Socialist 
Party took the same action in the middle of February, 
the remainder of the party also adhering to the Third 
Internationale but demanding a certain measure of 
autonomy. Similar results occurred in other European 
countries. A powerful group of socialist and labor or- 
ganizations, refusing to repudiate or condemn the Com- 
munist Internationale, also decided not to enter into it 
at the present moment but to attempt to form a new 
international organization in which the communist par- 
ties are to be an important part. 

Thus the effort of the communists to control the 
socialist parties of Europe has made considerable prog- 
ress within the last year, though failing to capture the 
movement as a whole and failing also to convert the 


majority of labor unionists, with the possible 


The revolutionary communist movement directed from 
Moscow is, then, a formidable force on the continent of 
Europe. Let us now recall that among the most im- 
portant of the twenty-one revolutionary points accepted 
by all adhering organizations arc the following: 

In almost all the countries of Europe and America the 
class war is entering the phase of civil war. I'mier such 
conditions Communists can have no confidence in bour- 
geois legality. They are bound t. create everywl 

a parallel illegal organi/ation, which at the decisive mo- 
ment will help the party to fulfil its duty towards tile- 
Revolution. . . . 

All decisions of the Congress of the Communist Inter- 
national, as also the drciM..n< of its Kxe.-utive Commit- 
tee, are binding for all parties belonging to the Com 
munist International. 

When in the Martens case ex-Secretary of Labor, 
W. B. Wilson, decided that the Russian Communist 
Party was an organization that "advocates the 
tli row by violence of the Government of the Hi,. 
States," the Administration had every possible docu- 

:iy evidence to prove its case. 

Naturally the belief of the I; in impending 

revolt fluctuates with their victories and defeats. Hut 
the utility to the Soviet Government of nvolntionary 
agitation and revolutionary propaganda an- 

onlinues regardless of such contingencies. 
We have noted Trotzky's optimism when his armies were 
in 1'ulai; :. when tin- ;. \Vrnngol 

hrown in Novrniln-r. 1920, Lenin declai 


This triumph of bolshevism is the most gigantic ever 
dreamed of, but the victory is incomplete until every 
part of Europe has been revolutionized. 

A month later, in an open letter to the Italian social- 
ists quoted in Pravda, December 10, 1920, Lenin fear- 
ing that the revolutionary movement which began in the 
seizure of factories by the Italian metal workers might 
be checked by the refusal of foreign capitalists to furnish 
the indispensable coal and iron, gave this advice : 

Hasten the revolution in England, in France, in 
America if these countries decide to blockade the pro- 
letariat of the Italian Proletarian Republic. 

At the National Congress of the Soviets on December 
23, the leading economic authority among the Commis- 
saries, Rykoff, said (See Pravda, December 25) : 

With the possibility of international relations and the 
coming communistic revolution in western Europe, and 
since we are nearing our chief aim, the European con- 
gress of Soviets, we have to direct our attention to the 
development of those branches of our economic life which 
will come to our lot in the case of distribution of work 
among ourselves and western soviet Europe. 

We must note in these expressions that the Bolshevists 
find no contradiction between the movement for a trade 
agreement and the continued movement for world revolt. 
Indeed, Lenin has advocated arrangements with foreign 
capitalists from the very beginning of the Bolshevik 
regime, during the period of the revolutions in Hungary 
and Bavaria, as well as the wars of conquest against 


the bord- and during all the revolutionary plots 

set on foot by the Third Internationale. 

In a speech (quoted in I'ravda, November 30, 1920) 
Lenin explains: 

We have found the right way to revolution, but this 
way is not a direct one; it runs in zig zags. 

In the letter to the Italian communists already quoted 
Lenin advises them that in order to bring the country 
to revolution at the earliest possible moment which he 
believes will be very soon in Italy it is necessary to 
move first to the right and then to the left. The failure 
of the Italian revolutionary movement in October and 
of the German revolutionary movement in March 
n to propose one of his momentary zig zags or n. 
merits to the right. The date for the big revolutionary 
movements in Europe has been postponed for a year or 
two. As Trotzky is reported recently to have decla 

The proletarian revolution in America and Europe 
will he found if not in tin- approaching months then 
in the approaching years. 

Touching upon the same subject at the International 
Communist Congress in July, 1920, XinoviefT trucu- 
lently exdaii: 

"Well, what about it!" we shall say to every bour- 
geois: "Yes, perhaps we were wrontr: not on, year, hut 
two or three will be necessary for all Eump.- to b-,- 
Soviet. You still ha. i of grace b< 

fcroyed Hut if you have now bec-miio 
so modest that you rejoice at these few months of grace, 


or a few years, then we, in any case, congratulate you 
on your unusual modesty." 

It is the belief, however, of Zinovieff and of all the 
Bolshevist leaders that even if revolutions are not ma- 
terializing very rapidly or as speedily as expected that 
the revolutionary movement which is so valuable to the 
communists in other particulars is continuing to spread 
and that because of it they can rely more and more 
upon support and aid in one form or another from 
the entire labor movement of Europe. In other words, 
they believe that their propaganda is bearing more and 
more fruit and there is much to support their view. In 
an article in the Petrograd Pravda, November 7, 1920, 
Zinovieff wrote: 

Three years ago, we were absolutely alone on the inter- 
national arena. We know and believed that the inter- 
national proletariat would understand and appreciate 
our movements, and would be with us. But at the same 
time we could not fail to see that at that time the inter- 
tional proletariat as yet was not with us. 

And how all this has now been radically changed! 
Yes, the International Proletarian Revolution is devel- 
oping much less rapidly than we had wished. But 
never-the-less it moves forward. 

Why have the Imperialist giants, the robber League of 
Nations, and the very rich and blood-thirsty bourgeoisie 
of England, France, and America failed to date to de- 
stroy the single proletarian Republic Soviet Russia? 
But they did not do this solely because the working class 
of Europe and America is in its heart behind us. 

The Bolshevist leaders realize and confess that the 
strength of their movement in Russia is very largely 


due to the support they have obtained from port r\ in 

;e.nts of labor outside of Russia. For in add/ 
i<> tin- Kuropean revolutionary parties and 
already referred to other more or less neutral labor 
bodies have undoubtedly given them very valuable mm-nl 
and defensive support. 

All the successes of Soviet policy, to wh, 
trnneous causes they may be due, are attributed by the 
Bolshevists to the merit of their foreipn propaganda 
and the invincibility of their international movement. 
This may be seen from a speech delivered by Lenin 
at a convention of the Communist Party in Moscow 
(Krasnaya Gazetta, November 23, 1920) : 

The world revolution, by whose aid alone we can win, 
does not mature at the speed with which we hoped for 
in the beginning. 

But we have obtained not merely a breathing sp-ll, 
but the possibility of existing amidst bourgeois countries. 

that the revolution has already mat 
within those countri< 

r a period of tl N, the Impi-r 

compelled to give up their struggle against i hich 

has, in comparison with their own military i 
practically none. 

Our foes, burning with desire to crush us by armed 
force, ar mpelled to conclude agreements with 

ml to contribute to our consolidation and strength- 

lie Communist Congress earlier in the year Lenin 
had said (see Soviet Russia, August 23, 1920) : 

We not only won over to our side the workers of all 
countries, but also succeeded in winning the bourgeoisie 


of the small countries, for the imperialists oppress not 
only the workers of their countries but also the bour- 
geoisie of the small nations. You know how we won 
over the wavering middle class within the advanced 

This absolute disintegration of our adversaries who 
were sure of their power, shows that they are but a 
handful of capitalist beasts at odds among themselves 
and absolutely powerless to fight us. 

Here the Bolshevist chief discloses the secret of such 
" success" as he has been able to attain throughout 
the world: his propaganda has succeeded in deceiving 
not only a large number of workingmen but also con- 
siderable elements of the middle classes. 

Taking up some remarks of Lenin's at the Tenth 
Congress of the Socialist Russian Party in March, 1921, 
the Bolshevist press of America, assisted by pro-Bol- 
shevist " liberal" publications, by the yellow press, and 
by commercially directed newspapers blinded by short- 
sighted greed, all joined together to claim that he had 
abandoned world revolution together with communism 
and all the other foundations of Bolshevism. What 
Lenin actually said was: "Were we to suppose that 
presently we would get help in the form of a firmly 
established proletarian revolution, we would be lunatics, ' ' 
this speech being made in answer to a very small group 
of ultra-extremists who opposed trade agreements, not 
realizing that they were entirely consistent with the 
policy of world revolution. Lenin's words are very 
carefully chosen. He does not say that help from a 
proletarian revolution is not to be expected; he says 
only that early help from "a firmly established" pro- 
letarian revolution cannot be counted upon. In other 


words, ho still expects the revolution;. 
develop with steadily increasing ii and to r 

: a point that it will be helpful to tin- Soviets, 
economically, before the lapse of many years. 

Referring to the question of world revolution, Lenin 

Aid is coming from the Western European count 
It is not coming as fast as we should like it. but it is 
coming nevertheless and gathering strength. Of co 
the world revolution has made a great step font-art! . in 
comparison with last year. We have learned to under- 
stand during the last three years that basing - 
on an international revolution docs not mean calculating 
on a definite date, and that the increasing rapidity of 
development may bring a revolution in the spring 
(1921) or it may not. Of course, the Communist In- 
ternational which last year existed merely in the form 
of proclamations is now existing as an independent party 
in every country. ... In Germany, France and Italy 
the Communist International has heeomc not only the 
centre of the labor movement but the focus of attention 
for the whole political life of those countries. Th 
our conquest, and no one can deprive us of it. The 
world revolution is growing stronger, ?////< thr ccon< 
crisis in Europe is getting worse at the san 

But, at any rate, were we to draw from this the 
rnnclusiori that help would come from there within a 
brief period in the shape of a solid proletarian revolu- 
tion, we would be simply lunatics; but in this hall, I 
f< 1 eertain. there are none such. \Ve must, then I 
know how to adapt our activity to tin mutual class 
relat ' within our own and other conn' 1 

that we may be able for a long time to retain the 
''iip of tin- prolet.-iria? and. at gradually, 
ill the ills and crises besetting us. Only such 
a view of the problem will bo correct and s<> 
(Pravda, March 10, 1921.) 


Surely all this is a far cry from " abandoning the 
world revolution!" 

It was as late as July, 1920, that the Third Internation- 
ale declared that ' ' in nearly every country of Europe and 
America the class struggle is entering upon the phase 
of civil war while as late as December (1920) it con- 
verted the French Socialist majority to that view. 
Discouraging and encouraging events have taken place 
since that time, but the total result of all revolu- 
tionary movements during recent months is far from 
such as to discourage visionary fanatics like the Bol- 
shevists. At the meeting of March 15 Kameneff made 
a report on foreign policy to the Tenth Congress of 
the Russian Communist Party: 

"We must consider," began Kameneff, "our relations 
with the capitalist states, seeing that our supposition 
of the speedy assistance which should come to us from 
Western Europe in the form of a world revolution has 
not been carried out with the rapidity for which we 
hoped. Though counting on the world revolution, we 
must shape our practical policy in such a way that it 
will be possible to take action at any time, should the 
course of world development force us to fight for the 
existence of our isolated Soviet Republic. 

The words italicized again give a very satisfactory 
portrayal of the precise state of the Bolshevist mind 
as regards world revolution. The rest of this speech 
develops the grounds for the Bolshevist hopes. While 
indicating the usual state of extreme ignorance, these 
remarks are important as showing the pro-German pre- 
judices, the hatred of America and England, the ex- 
pectation of the Bolshevists that they will participate in 
future wars (it is strange that the pacifist extremists 



t upon continuing their support of tlioso militaristic 
and imperialist ie fanatics) and also the willingness of the 
Soviets to arm the Asiatic against the European races. 
Kameneff continues: 

The great Powers have gained their end. They have 
succeeded in dividing up the world between them. 

rious powers have not only subjugated col ; 
semi-colonies, but many countries such as Austria 
Germany, are entirely dependent on thnn. A small 
party of the richest countries has divided up the world, 
converting the most cultured cmm tries in tin rope, Ger- 
many and Austria, into their enslaved vassals. 

The danger of a new world war is arising. The strug- 
gle will lc for the possession of the shores of the Pa 
Ocean and will take place between ih< former A 
England and Anuriw. while Japan it-ill | Eng- 

land. It may be presumed that all the capitalist st 
will again lie involved in this new struggle, only a rising 
of the world proletariat can prevent this new \\ 

Soviet Russia took no part in the division of the 
world. Thanks to the three :r Soviet K 

gained the right to an independent existence. This in- 
dependence will make it possible for us to take up sides 
in the various historical events of the world. . . . 

Soviet Russia is not isolated. Soviet Russia only in 
the West borders on capitalist states. In the East her 
neighbour is truly revolutionary AMU. The faet that 
we Still exist is explained by the circumstance tb. 

d between eapit. 

Kurope and revolutionary Asia. -itu- 

ated half way between the Kast and \\ 

In a long communication to tho Independent Labor 
Party the Third Internationale last summer outlined 
another war this time it was a war of the world against 


Great Britain and America. This also is a war from 
which the Bolshevists hoped to gain: 

It is probable that when throwing off the chains of 
the capitalist Governments, the revolutionary proletariat 
of Europe will meet the resistance of Anglo-Saxon capi- 
tal in the persons of British and American capitalists, 
who will attempt to blockade it It is then possible the 
revolutionary proletariat of Europe will arise in union 
with the peoples of the East and commence a revolu- 
tionary struggle, the scene of which will be the entire 
world, to deal the final blow at British and American 

The pro-German tendency of the propaganda is al- 
ways in evidence. The Bolshevists are particularly 
friendly to the Germans in the attack on the Versailles 
Treaty. We may see an illustration of this in a speech 
of Lenin's early in 1920: 

The Germans are, above all, our auxiliaries because 
their hope of escaping from the penal clauses of the 
Peace treaty rests on causing disorder and agitation 
with a view to profit by the general confusion which 
will then arise. They seek revenge we revolution. 

This friendliness to the German junkers is also seen 
in a statement of Trotzky when he was at the Polish 
front : 

It is said that the Russian communists were the serfs 
of the Prussian junkers, but that must not weigh with 
us. It must not be forgotten that organized Germany 
constitutes a danger to world imperialism, and nothing 
must oppose an understanding with Germany for the 
destruction of the imperialist governments of Europe. 


We prefer such an understanding to fraternization with 
the so-called free count 

At the same time the Bolshevists have endeavored to 
line up for war upon England and France, alongside the 
junkers, the junkers' hitter enemies, the German com- 

The revolutionary German socialist lead 'ion, 

just returned from a visit to Russia at the invitation 
of the Soviets declared: 

The Russian Soviet Government intended to make war 
on France if the Polish campaign had been successful, 
and England also would have been attacked. The So\ 
were counting on the aid of the German eommtini 
(From Crispien's speech at the Halle Congress of the 
Independent Socialist Party October 13, 1920.) 

While the Soviets rely largely upon wars .>ut of which 
revolutions are expected to arise, they rely still more 
upon the direct results of revolutionary propaganda and 
organization through the Third Internationale. Their 
complicity in the German revolutionary movement of 
March, 1921, for example, is proved ly tin- open asser- 
tions of the Moscow communist organ in Berlin, Die 
Rote Fal> 

In spite of such absolutely conclusive evidence and 
of innumerable other instances of equally stupid B< ' 
vist duplicity several entirely conservative nm 
vist newspapers in America and England insisted that 
it was in that Moscow could at the same time be 

IT n volutions and seeking trade by gov 
mental agreements! 


THE Third Internationale is the child of the Russian 
Communist Party. It was created here, in the Kremlin 
on the initiative of the Communist Party of Russia. The 
Executive Committee of the Third Internationale is in 
our own hands. (Report of Radek, Secretary of Third 
Internationale, to Ninth Congress of Russian Communist 
Party Pravda, April 3rd, 1920.) 

At the Second Congress of the Communist Interna- 
tionale held, at Moscow in August, 1920, the following 
resolution was passed: 

The World Congress is the supreme organ of the Com- 
munist International. 

The World Congress elects an Executive Committee 
of the Communist International which serves as the lead- 
ing organ in the intervals between the (annual) World 

In his report to the Congress, President Zinoviev 
further explained the dictatorial powers possessed by 
the Moscow Executive: 

The Congress has also emphasized the need of a united 
Communist International organization and has worked 
out its statute, according to which the executive com- 
mittee of the III International is given very wide powers, 



including that of expelling from the International a 
whole party for violation < 'me. 

Another resolution parsed unaiiiniously by the Con- 
gress indicated that the control of the Russian Commu- 
Party over this world revolutionary movement is 
absolute. This resolution d< 

The need of a strong world unity of the prol 
is too evident to allow discussion of any kind ot'auton 

Although there are "only" five Russian* on the I; 
national Executive Committee, as a matter of fact, all 
the other ten members were practically appointed by 
the Russian Bolsheviks and their names indicate ab- 
solute suhst -rvit ncy, since with one or two exceptions 
tlu-y have little or no representative capacity. 
example, the late John Reed was 
America! With the sole exception of Italy, onl\ 
most extreme of extremists were chose: the 

permanent bureau or directing body of the Executive 
Committee consists of three Russians out of live mem- 
bers: Zinoviev, Bukharin and Rad( k. 

This body now claims to have the sole ri^ht to repre- 
sent the proletariat of the world and in their name pro- 
pose throw all governmental Revolutionists who 
do not obey orders, such as d'Arragona, head of the Con- 
federation of Labor of Italy, are immediately hrai 
as traitors to the workin 

The application of this principle of the divine right 
of the Russian Bolshe 'he world revolu- 

tion" was amusingly i it the Congress in the 


speeches of Lenin dealing with the revolutionary move- 
ment in Great Britain. Here are some passages, as 
reported in the Bolshevist press: 

Lenin protests against the supposition that the pecu- 
liar situation of the English labor movement requires 
that the decision as to the line of conduct of the Briti>h 
Socialist Party should be left in the latter 's free judg- 
ment. Lenin does not understand why in such a case 
this Congress and this International are necessary. 

Such tactics should be considered one of the worst 
traditions left by the activity of the II International. 
The 2nd Congress of the III International will, of course, 
act differently and will discuss in detail in the proper 
committee all the conditions of the English labor move- 
ment and the tasks resulting therefrom. . . . 

Despite the opinion of Comrade MacLean, the Labor 
Party does not express the political state of mind of 
the working class of England as organized in trade- 
unions; it expresses the views and state of mind of its 
leaders, who are the most bourgeois, reactionary hand- 
maid of British Imperialism. It is necessary that the 
party should effectively represent the ideology and in- 
terests of the proletariat. . . . 

Furthermore, these traitors are at the head of the 
Labor Party which presents an unprecedented situation, 
for the latter expresses the political will of 4,000,000 
workmen organized in its ranks. . . . 

You are constantly speaking of the differences between 
the conditions in England and those in other countries. 
In so far as you enter the Communist International, you 
must remember that you must be guided not only by 
the experience of England but also by general revolu- 
tionary experience. 

After the speech of Comrade Lenin the theses are put 
to a vote. Comrade Zinoviev proposed to vote first, and 
separately, on the thesis relating to the entrance of the 


Brit: ilist Party into the Independent Labor 

Party of England. This 'i adopted by a maj< 

of 48 to 34 with two abstaining. 

This amazing act of coercion against the left wing of 
British labor, as the vote shows, was almost too imn-h 
even for the hand-picked and thoroughly iliseip! 
delegates of the Cominunist Internationale. Lenin's 
plan to capture the Independent Labor Tarty in this 
manner was, doubtless, not quite so wild as the pla: 
the British Communist d< il down. 

These latter wished to attack not only the British Labor 
Party, though it is pro-Soviet in its foreign policy, hut 
also the revolutionary Independent Labor Party \vhi<>h 
expresses the warmest admiration for Soviet ism in 
Russia, but does not wish to have it in England and 
will not take orders from Moscow further than leaving 
the Second and Socialist Internationale at Moscow's 
suggestion. Lenin's taeties on the surface \v 
what less impractical. But they were futile in any event 
as the Independent Labor Party, at its succeed ing 
gress, repudiated Communism by an overwhelming ma- 
jority, leading to the see. 'lie small minority of 
as ordered by Lenin for all countries. 
Whether, from the Comim >lutionary standpoint. 
this outcome in Great Britain justified Lenin' 
>r not, the British Communists were allowed little to 
say on the 

.' eontrol of Mov the key to tho 

id of the Third Internationale. The Commni 
are unaniiii" ed that if it is .-,1 their 

lution must be a world n volution. Tiny are unan- 
imously agreed that it must then fore have a highly 


centralized control. They are equally agreed that Soviet 
Russia is the only " proletarian " country to-day, that 
it has led the world in revolutionary tactics, that it has 
started the world revolution and organized the only 
genuinely proletarian internationale. They are agreed, 
too, that the iron dictatorship established in Soviet Rus- 
sia and within the Russian Communist Party furnishes 
a model for the international organization. 

This is the feeling of the extreme revolutionists and 
communists of all countries. But Moscow goes much 
farther. It feels that the fate of Soviet Russia carries 
with it the fate of the world revolution and that there- 
fore all that pertains to its safety and welfare must be 
given first consideration. It feels that as the light has 
come from Soviet Russia the light must continue to come 
from Soviet Russia. It feels that Russia has already 
experienced what other countries must experience. Rus- 
sia is the older sister, the others must follow in her 
foot-steps. None of these ideas are shared even by the 
extremists of other countries. Lenin sometimes says, 
and possibly believes, he is allowing for the divergencies 
of other countries and treating them as equals. But 
this is scarcely consonant with his astounding twenty-one 
points, by which he drove away even such ardent and 
docile supporters as the leaders of the Italian Socialists. 
His real state of mind is portrayed in his speech before 
the All-Russian Political Education Conference (Novem- 
ber 5th, 1920), in which he said: 

The union of all great capitalist countries of the world 
against Russia, against Soviet Russia this is the whole 
business of the present international political situation, 
and we must be entirely clear as to the fact that the 


fate of hundreds of millions of workers in the capit 

< /if/.s- on this f 

In our country w-- li a manifold shap- 

ing of events in thi' Ken-nsky period, amiiLr tl 
Revolutionists and the Social Democrats, su.-li a \ 
gated color scheme in the various towns of Kus^ia. that 
we may say that we "have been tested more than any 
people. If we look toward Western Europe w< shall 
see that the same thing is now going on there that hap- 
pened in our country. We are beholding a repetition 
of our own history. 

This is nothing less than revolutionary chauvinism, 
similar to the doctrine of the French revolutionists win -n 
they undertook to force their creed on other pen 
by the aid of the bayonet. But it is infinitely ; 
crude. For while France was one of the most adv.v 
countries of Europe, Soviet Russia is one of the most 

The Communist Internationale is now functioning in 
tho United States and declares as its principal imme- 
diate object the destruction of the American Federation 
of Labor. By methods of secrecy, by its hold upon 
tain entirely foreign elements who do not understand 
anything about American conditions or American labor 
organizations, by the aid of the large sums it 
from Russia and by the sympathy and assistant 
secures from our numerous "parlor BoLsl this 

orga is able to give considerable trouble to the 

American Labor movement. 

The danger v-ry largely takes the form of puhlieat ions 
supporting the Soviet cause in the I'n it ed ^ mly 

a few of these arc op.-nly < 'onununist. Hut a large num- 
ber of publications and writers lake the Coniinui 


tion of hostility with regard to the Federation of Lal>or 
combined with friendship to Bolshevism. There can be 
no doubt that some of them are subsidized by Moscow. 
A resolution passed by the Second Congress of the Com- 
munist Internationale declared: 

The Communist parties must create a new type of 
periodical press for extensive circulation among the 
workmen; (1) Lawful publications in which the Com- 
munists without calling themselves such and without 
mentioning their connection with the party, would learn 
to utilize the slightest possibility allowed by the laws. 
(2) Illegal sheets. 

One of the first actions taken by the new Bolshevist 
Government after it seized power was to vote money 
for such purposes. Here is one of its first decrees: 

The Soviet of People's Commissaries deems it neces- 
sary to bring all possible means, including money to 
the aid of the Left International Wing of the workers' 
movement in all lands, quite regardless of whether these 
countries are at war or in alliance with Russia; or 
whether they are neutral. 

To that end the Soviet of People's Commissaries, 
orders to appropriate for the needs of the revolutionary 
international movement 2,000,000 rubles, to be taken 
charge of by the foreign representative of the Commis- 
sariat of Foreign Affairs. 

President, Soviet People's Commissaries, 

VI. Ulianoff (Lenin) 

People's Commissary of Foreign Affairs, 

L. Trotzky. 
(Published in Izvestia, Dec. 13, 1917, p. 9.) 


Far from denying this povernmentally subsidized 
propaganda the entire Hol>l ss of the world 

openly boasts of it. 

In the report of the Executive Committee of the Com- 
munist Internationale to the Second World Coi 
the Communist JnkTiiationale, Zinoviev wm 

Russian workmen, to whom the progressive workmen 
of other countries have rendered brotherly assistance 
during the course of two decades, have considered it 
their proletarian duty now to render similar broti 
assistance to the struggling proletariat that is in i 
difficult material rircumsta- 

With respect to the assistance in money which tho 
Communist International has rendered to brotherly 

the yellow Social Democrats, with th- 
the tatlers of the bourgeoisie pr< i lot 

of noise in various countries of Europe. People who 
dp not e -el'iil to use material support 

given by the brigand-like League of Nation ..uts 

of protest because the workmen ( !) of one country sup- 
port their brothers in another country. 

The workmen th< did not take this attitude 

toward the matter. Tin- Italian Communists, for ex- 
ample, practically declared quite oprnly that son 
their party or^ani/at ions wre ablt to be founded 
becau-'' the Communist International rendered hrotl 
assistance to the Italian workmen. The workmen 
mnnists in other countries have made similar dedara- 

ntirc western European bounreoiK pre^s, wliich 

is bought up by capital, has not ceased to throw dirt 

'inmunism because of the subsidy which the daily 

Daily Herald," was rm-iving 

from the Russian proletariat. 

This last statement was publicly denied by the Lon- 


don Daily Herald, but many facts are known to point in 
the contrary direction. It will be noted that the Bol- 
shevists treat the entire labor press and even the non- 
Bolshevist Socialist press as "bourgeois." 

The Bolshevists regard their enormous expenditures 
in mendacious propaganda as having been brilliantly 
successful and there is some ground for their claim. 
Zinoviev has recently summed up this success at length 
in Pravda, November 7, 1920. We note a few sentences: 

The campaign of slander was very well organized by 
the bourgeoisie and by its lackeys from the II " Inter- 
nationale "; it was organised, one may say, scientifically 
and with talent. But nevertheless, we can say with the 
greatest pride, that we came out victorious from this 
unequal struggle. . . . 

Up to the present, the international proletariat as a 
whole was on the defensive, and now it will be able 
to assume the offensive. . . . 

When Soviet troops were at the gates of Warsaw, 
it became particularly clear that the international pro- 
letariat is entering on a stage which can be called : pass- 
ing from the defensive to the offensive. . . . 

The Council of Action in London, which showed such 
brilliant activity for a couple of weeks, was undoubtedly 
the forerunner of English Soviets of Workmen's Depu- 

Zinoviev 's reference to the Second Internationale also 
includes as non-proletarian and bourgeois the entire 
non-Bolshevist Labor Union and Socialist press of 

Krassin has also made recent reference to the success 
of the Soviet propaganda, frankly stating that "the 
hostility of Great Britain had been overcome by propa- 


ganda," If wo recall the ceaseless campaign of falsifica- 
tion concerning not only Kussia but the cntirv labor 
movement of the world that is being carr'n-il on liy tlio 
London Daily Hi raid and other Sovietist or pro-S< 
organs of Great Britain, chvulatnl not only in that 
country but all over the world, we can realize tho 
enormous damage that has been inflicted upon the British 
labor movement by the gold which the Bolshevists have 
looted from the poverty-stricken population of Russia. 


OPERATING solely in the field of politics, propaganda, 
and insurrection the Communist Internationale was not 
a perfect instrument for the purposes of the Soviets. 
The Communist, or Third Internationale, from its found- 
ation in March, 1919, had directed its operations mainly, 
not against the bourgeoisie, but against what it calls 
"bourgeois" labor as represented in the Second or 
Socialist Internationale. But it soon discovered that the 
most formidable labor enemies of Bolshevism are not the 
political Socialists of the Right or of the Center (the 
orthodox Marxist followers of Kautsky, Longuet, etc.) 
but the labor unions of the world, from the American 
Federation of Labor to the British and German unions 
and even the syndicalistic French Confederation. 

At the Congress of the Communist Internationale at 
Moscow in the summer of 1920, Lenin issued the follow- 
ing declaration of war against organized labor, thinly 
veiled as a war against leaders: 

Our main enemy is tine opportunism in the upper 
ranks of ihe labor movement. This is not a Socialist or 
proletarian, but a bourgeois movement. That these 
leaders of the labor movement are defending the bour- 
geoisie better than the bourgeoisie itself, and that with- 
out their assistance the bourgeoisie could not maintain 


f is shown not only by the regime of Kerensky, 
but also by the present democratic republic in (Jermany, 
and by the attitude of Albert Thomas and I lend- 
toward their bourgeois Governments. Here is our >mn'n 
enemy; we must triumph over this ennui/, <ind leave this 
Congress with a unanimous and firm dtOMIOfl to car?-?/ 
this struggle through to the end in all countries. This 
is our main task. 

If that part of the labor movement which utterly repu- 
diates Bolshevism is to be called "the upper ranks" then 
recent elections throughout the labor movement of 
Europe have proven that fully three-fourths of the mem- 
bership is to be so classified. 

Bolshevist enmity makes no distinction between the 
American Federation of Labor and the European unions 
adhering to the Amsterdam International Federation of 
Trade Unions. The fact that this international body 
was ready to declare not only a general strike but a 
food blockade of the Polish people and to forcibly inter- 
rupt the shipment of food and munitions to Poland, 
all in order to aid the Soviets to accomplish their d !. 
purpose of conquering the Poles, counted for nothing 
in the minds of the would-be world dictators at Moscow. 
In spite of the servile attitude of nearly all the political 
parties of the Second, or Socialist, Internationale and 
of the controlling elements in the Amsterdam Trades 
Union Internationale, the Moscow dictators admin 
nothing but rebuffs to everybody who refuses to ae 
their absolute rule and demand that all exist inir ov^an- 
be wholly reshaped according to Moscow's 

The Bolshevists therefore decided at Moscow, last 


July, to form a new Internationale of Red Labor Unions. ' 
This organization is based upon the fictitious member- 
ship of five millions claimed by the official Russian 
Soviet trade unions, upon the temporary adhesion of 
the Italian Confederation of Labor with its two million 
members although this organization is at present rather 
outside than inside the Communist Internationale, and 
upon lesser but equally doubtful claims in other coun- 
tries. The Communist Internationale adopted, by an 
overwhelming majority, the following amendment pro- 
posed by Radek in connection with this new Red Inter- 
nationale : 

It is the one weapon of the world revolutionary move- 
ment against the yellow International, because the prin- 
cipal enemy of the revolutionary proletariat is not Brus- 
sels but Amsterdam that is the yellow international of 
trade union organizations. By overthrowing Amster- 
dam we shall deal the most terrible blow to the capital- 
istic order, but this blow can be dealt only by the Red 
International of trade-unions. 

This Red Internationale is somewhat stronger than 
at first appears. While it has comparatively little 
direct support from the labor unions, with the ex- 
ception of the Latin countries, it has a very strong 
support from the newly formed Communist par- 
ties created during the last six months by the split of 
the Socialist parties according to Moscow orders in 
several European countries. Thus a majority of the 
Socialist Party members of France, through the newly 
created Communist Party, have accepted the dictator- 
ship of the Moscow Communist Internationale, including 


y -one points. A powerful faction 'of the 
Socialists in Germany, now organized as the Com m 
Party and including a million or two supporters, has 
taken the same action. And, finally, in Italy both the 
Communist Party and the Socialist Party adhere to the 
Third Internationale and accept tin twenty-one points, 
although the latter also claims a certain mrasure of 
autonomy. The leadership of all these movements is 
largely in the hands of "intellectuals" and outsiders, 
non-members of the labor unions. This is markedly the 
case with the Italian Communist Party. But the influ- 
ence on labor is, nevertheless, formidable, 
> Of Moscow's twenty-one points accepted by all these 
so-called labor parties, points nine and ten refer to 
organized labor. They are as follows: 

9. Every party which d join the Communist 
Internationale muM systematically and constant 1\ 
velop a communist activity within the trades unions, 
the workmen's and factory councils, the consumers' 
societies and other mass organizations of the workmen. 
"Within these organizations it is necessary to 
Communist "cells" which by constant. . nt work 
shall win the trades unions, &<., over to the cause of 
Communism. The "cells" are obliged in their daily 
Work to unmask everywhere tin- trOAKMD of the s- 
patriots and the fickleness of the "Ctt Com- 
munist " cells" must be completely subordinated to the 
whole party. 

10. Every party belonging to the Tlii id Internationale 

1 to wage a stubborn war against tin 
ttionale" of the yellow trade nnioi 
must most emphatically propagate aiiion^ the unioi: 

! workmen the neces ,,,-h with the 

rdam Internationale. They must support 


by all means the rising international unification of red 
trade unions which join the Communist Internationale. 

If it is recalled that the orders of the Moscow Execu- 
tive Committee are absolute over all Communist organ- 
izations and that Moscow is willing to spend the last 
gold ruble of the heritage of the Russian people for the 
disruptive purposes it may be seen that the danger 
threatening the labor union movement of Continental 
Europe is considerable. Indeed the French C. G. T. 
was saved for the cause of labor unionism at the last 
meeting of the Council only by a very narrow margin 
of votes. The struggle was most unequal. There is no 
bribery and corruption fund available for the legitimate 
labor unions to counterbalance the colossal corruption 
fund of Moscow. For every dollar legitimately raised 
and expended by organized labor in self-defense, the 
Communists, from the loot they have taken from Russian 
workmen and peasants, are able to spend a thousand. 

The situation in Great Britain is similar, though some- 
what less acute. Because of the absence of any powerful 
Communist political party, the Soviets are forced in that 
country to act mainly through the subsidy of the labor 
press and other propaganda, which Krassin admits ob- 
tained for the Communists the signing of the British 
trade agreement. 

The purpose of the new organization was briefly 
declared by ''The International Soviet of Trade 
Unions," the name which it first assumed. On August 
1st, 1920, this body issued a statement from Moscow 
from which we take the following: 

The substance of our activity and of our program: 


Tho overthrow of the bourgeoisie by force, the establish- 
ment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, a merciless 
iLrgle on an international and in- 

separable union with the Communist International. 

From the first moment of its inauguration the newest 
Red Internationale was mot with grave internal prob- 
lems. A split was immediately t! i the 
ultra-State Socialism of the Russians who hoped to ex- 
tend their absolute authority from the Russian State 
to other nations, and the ultra-revolutionary labor unions 
of other countries, all of which tend in tho direction 
of syndicalism or anti-Stateism. Apparently the conflict 
is insoluble, but the Moscow chiefs of the new li 
nationale decided to use their accepted Machiavellian 
tactics of deception and to "take in" the syndicalist 
elements a,s will be demonstrated by the evidence we 
shall now reproduce. 

Among the reports unanimously adopted at the Con- 
gress of the Communist Internationale in July, lU'JO, was 
the following: 

As for the revolutionary Syndicalists, as well as the 

representatix wards, we shall not follow the 

.pie of the II International, which always harassed 

and II workmen who were not in agreement 


We shall work in conjunction with all honest and 
honestly inis'_ruided workmen, and together with them 
we shall learn and make mistak.s. beetOM funda- 
mentally, in our .-lass aims and ideaN with 
them a single proletarian revolutionary whole. 

Another resolution recommended the most "friendly 
attitude" and "closer connection " with these organiza- 


tions. The language here chosen is highly significant, 
as is also the phraseology of the following sentence from 
the same resolution: 

As regards the I. W. W. of America and Australia 
and the Shop-Steward Committees of England, we have 
to deal with a genuinely proletarian mass movement 
which practically adheres to the principles of the Com- 
munist Internationale. 

In order, however, to show the utter impossibility of 
any real compromise on the part of Moscow toward any 
trade unions or any other body having to deal with 
it no matter how revolutionary they may be we may 
quote the following passages on the trade unions from 
"the theses and statutes adopted by the Third or Com- 
munist Internationale" at their 1920 Congress. "We 
quote from the official publication issued by the office 
of the Communist Internationale in Moscow: 

All voluntary withdrawal from the industrial move- 
ment, every artificial attempt to organize special unions, 
without being compelled thereto by exceptional acts of 
violence on the part of the trade union bureaucracy, 
such as expulsion of separate revolutionary local 
branches of the unions by the opportunist officials, or 
by their narrow-minded aristocratic policy, which pro- 
hibits the unskilled workers from entering into the 
organization, represents a great danger to the Communist 
movement. It threatens to hand over the most advanced, 
the most conscious workers, to the opportunist leaders, 
playing into the hands of the bourgeoisie. 

Placing the object and the essence of labour organiza- 
tions before them, the Communists ought not to hesitate 
before a split in such organizations, if a refusal to split 


would mean abandoning revolutionary work in the trade 

unions, and tfivin^ up the attempt to make of them an 

instrument of revolutionary struggle, the attempt to 

nize the nio^t < xploited part of the proletariat. 

Where a split between the opportunists and tin- ivvlu- 
ti<>nary trade union niovrment has already taken j)lace 
before, where, as in America, alongside of tin ;uist 

trade unions there an- unions with revolution 
dem-ies although not Communist ones th 
munists are bound to support such revolutionary nn 
to persuade them to abandon Syndicalist prejudice*. 
to place themselves on the platform of Commuii 
which alone is economic struggle. 

It is the duty of the Communists in all the phases 
of the economic struggle to point out to the workers 
that the success of the struggle is only possible if the 
working class conquers the capitalists in open lijrht. and 
by means of dictatorship proceeds to the or^ani/ation 
of a Socialist order. Consequently, the Connm;' 

strive to create as far as possible complete unity 
between the trade unions and the Communist K 

Hnatr thr unions to the practical // <1< rsh i}> of 
the Party, as the advanced guard of the wo r <>lu- 

tion. For this purpose the Communists should i 
Communist fractions in all the trade unions and fa< 
committees and acquire by their means an inllin 
the labour movement and direct it. 

In a word, whether with or without a split, the aim 

'".nlmate. We shall now note the prm 
application of the Communist trade union princi, 
according to the method of Lenin aln-ady quoted, "We 
must know how to apply, at net -d, knav 

'i",ls. hiding truth by in order to pen. 

the trade unions, to remain there and 
to accomplish he Communist task." 


As soon as the Trade Union Internationale was formed, 
the leading Bolshevist authority on trade unions, Losov- 
sky, was delegated to prepare an official pamphlet. This 
pamphlet was printed in Russian and accepted, but 
when it was being translated into other languages it 
occurred to the Moscow authorities that it was indis- 
pensable as far as possible to keep from the knowledge 
of the revolutionary labor unionists of other countries 
the irreconcilable differences between syndicalism and 
Bolshevist state socialism which had developed in the 
Moscow conference. Therefore, when it was too late, 
the two following wireless dispatches were sent abroad: 

To Litvinov for Asten, Chairman, Russian Trade Union 

Moscow, Sept. 8. 

The international council of Labor Unions has now 
been joined by the British Shop Stewards and Workers 
Committees, Transport Workers' Federation of Holland, 
German Syndicalists and Italian Syndicalists. Please 
shape your policy in accordance with this fact. The 
aim of the Council is to unite all the Left elements of 
the Trade Union and Industrial movement. In view 
of this pp. 56-70 of Losovsky's story of the Council 
must be re-written before publishing. 

General Secretary of the International Council 
of Trades Unions Tomsky. 

Wireless to Losovsky, Russian Trade Union Delegation, 
Christiana, Norway. 

Moscow, Sept. 9. 

Your booklet on the International Council of Trade 
Unions will be published in Russian with a foreword 
and additional matters. The polemic nature of the book- 
let as far as it deals with industrial syndicalists, shop 
stewards and Italian Confederation representatives such 


&s to make it inadvisable that it should bo published in 
a foreign language. 

General Secretary of International Council 
of Trades Unions Tomsky. 

Tho passages which it was wished to keep from the 
non-Russian adherents of the New Red Internationale 
were those describing the results of the Red Trade Union 
congress held in Moscow the beginning of July, 1 
Among the most instructive paragraphs arc the follow- 
ing: [We quote from the pamphlet entitled "The I> 
national Council of Trade and Industrial Unions, by A. 
Losovsky, (S. A. Dridzo) Price 25 cents Published by 
the Union Publishing Company, New York City.] 

The German syndicalists, tlic British and American 
represent <itir(s of Ihc I. IV. W. and the N/;<//; Stewards 
approached the question fnn <juit, a different point 
of view. They questioned the necessity <>f any form of 
dictatorship. They regard I tin dictotorikip not as the 
dictatorship of the proletariat , but as di< tutorship 
the proletariat and categorically protested o////?/ 
lishing this principle. 

The repres* of the All-Russian Central Coun- 

cil of Trade Unions proposed the following point on 
the dictatorship of the proletariat: "The dictatorship 
tie bourgeoisie must be opposed by the dictatorship 
of the proletariat as a transitional, but resolute measure, 
as the only m< ans by which it is possible to crush the 
resistance of the exploiters, and secure and consolidate 

trains of the pn.letar "ninent." 

Thig formula was adopter! by all e.v-rpt th. 
ista, and the ,f the I. W. W. and the 

P Stewards. 
It was difficult to unite these conflict inp tender- 


from tHe denial of the necessity of a political party 
to the recognition of the necessity of the inseverable con- 
nection between the party and the unions, on a single 
platform. It was still more difficult to reconcile the 
point of view of the Russian trade unionists on the 
supremacy of the party over the unions with the various 
views explained above. The discussion showed one thing, 
and that was that those elements of the labor movement 
which denied the political struggle, which denied the 
necessity of a political party of the proletariat, and the 
closest bond between the Communist Party and the trade 
unions could not enter the new international trade union 
centre, because the whole idea of international organiza- 
tion of the revolutionary unions lay in gathering all 
the economic and political organizations of the working 
class into one body the Third International for defen- 
sive and offensive operations against the capitalist class. 
Pestana [of the National Confederation of Labor of 
Spain] said that he could not imagine such a relation 
between the party and the unions as existed in Russia, 
in Spain, for the reason that in Spain the unions are 
a great force, while the Communist Party is only in 
its embryonic stage. He opposed the subordination of 
the unions to the party, but was in favor of the closest 
contact between the party and the unions on a national 
and international scale. Neither the representatives of 
the British Shop Stewards' or the American I. W. W. 
objected to co-operating with the Communist Party, but 
the German syndicalists and the representatives of the 
industrial Labor Unions were categorically opposed to 
any co-operation. 

These comrades also raised doubts concerning the 
Soviet system. They asserted that the Soviet system 
is not applicable to Western Europe, and that the indus- 
trial unions and the shop stewards' committees will per- 
form the function of the Soviets there. 


The T latives of the All -ral Coun- 

wcre of the opinion that the trade 
unions should oiv Qfl within tin- I: 

national. From this it 1'ollows tliat the Third < 
ii'.unist International should lu> the jr : all 

the militant revolutionary elass organ i/.at ion 


All the delegates except I ;<trmns 0\ 

delegation. The Ital idi and Knirlish, 

approaching the question from various points of view 
inclined to the opinion that an independent inter- 
national oruMiii/ation should he set up which, while 1 
connected hy ideas and orirani/.at ion with the Third 
International, nevertheless should lead an indepei. 

. The representative of the (Icnnr.n syndicalists 
and of the Australian 1. \V. \V. were against all OOH] 
tion with the Third International and argued that the 
trade unions under no eireumstanees will a with 

a political or^ani/ation. It is charac 'hat the 

6 point was held by th- 

of the (Jerman Labor I'nions. Otto Huhle. who ? 
sented the (Jrnnan Coniinunist L.ibor Tarty, the 
tin:uisliinjr feature of which is that it denies the n 

politically criraiii/.in the working 
class. On this qu I "n i.ther (juestions. the 

dicalists and the I. W. W. dilTcn-d. On this occasion 
it was due to the I. AV. \V. supporting affiliation to the 
Third International. 

The question that raised most <i was that of 

the of the Communist revolutionary eleii: 

within the trade union movement in connection with the 

old mass unions, Tin question irai: should the old 

unions be split or captured? Considerable differences 
i among Mtes on this point. K< 

W( akness in compariM.n with 'nan 

tdch embrace nearly 8,000,000 members, 


the German syndicalists and representatives of the Ger- 
man Labor Unions declared that the present day "free" 
unions of Germany were hopeless, that it was necessary 
to destroy them and only by destroying them it will be 
possible to conquer the bourgeoisie. The represi 
of the I. W. W. held the same viewpoint. In their 
opinion the American Federation of Labor is an in- 
vincible fortress. The only thing to do was to abandon 
it and set up a separate organization outside of it. They 
further asserted that the reactionary character of the 
American Federation of Labor is bound up with its very 
construction and to think of fighting the treacherous 
policy of Gompers inside the unions was an Utopia. . . . 
Both the German and the American comrades were 
clearly illogical, for it is ridiculous to think that it is 
possible to bring about a social revolution in Western 
Europe without or in spite of the trade unions. To leave 
the unions and to set up small independent unions is an 
evidence of weakness. 

It is obvious that a conference of representatives of 
trade unions of various countries could not adopt a 
point of despair, and it was resolved to "condemn the 
tactics of advanced revolutionary elements leaving the 
existing unions. On the contrary, these must take all 
measures to drive the opportunists out of the unions, 
carry on a methodical propaganda for Communism 
within the unions, and form Communist and revolu- 
tionary groups in all the organizations for conducting 
propaganda in favor of our programme." 

That the conference took up the correct point of view 
is proved by the Second Congress of the Third Inter- 
national which sharply opposed the tactics of leaving 
the unions. The motto put forward by the Communist 
International, and which is our motto also, is: "Not the 
lestruction, but the conquest of the trade unions." 


It may have been possible on other questions to com- 
promise in order- but on this 
dinal question of international labor policy no com- 
promise was possible. 

nces ended in the acceptance of a declara- 
tion which shoul for gathering all 
the revolutionary class unions into one organi/ation. 
This declaration was discussed for a whole month, and 
is the result of a compromise between various tendencies. 

Losovsky quotes the declaration referred to in full. 
As he himself declares it is vague and for the most part 
unimportant. But one resolution should be noted to- 
gether with the signatur< 

To organize a militant international committee for the 
reorganization of the trade union movement. This com- 
mittee will function as the International Council of 
Trade Unions and will act in (i(jrc< rn< nf witli th- 
tive Committee of the Thin! International on conditions 
that will be laid down by congresses. 
Signed : 

All Kii Mtral Council Trade Unions. 


vat ion of Labor. Italy. 

A : 

National Co. ion of Labor, Spain. 

N. SlI.M'.I.IN, 

General Syndicalist Labor I'nions, Bulgaria. 


Revolutionary Syndicalist Minority, C. G. T., France, 

N. M i K 

iiinunist Minority Trade l"nion>. Georgia. 

n "f Labor, Jugo-Slavia \ 

bia, etc.). 


Losovsky follows this resolution with the following 
illuminating comment: 

What is the reason of the vagueness and incomplete- 
ness of the declaration? It is the fact that several of 
the organizations represented the General Confedera- 
tion of Labor of Italy, the unions which Robert Williams 
and Albert Purcell represent still belong to the Am- 
sterdam Federation of Trade Unions, and that the 
leaders of even the revolutionary class unions of Western 
Europe lag behind the revolutionary masses. 

It is indeed interesting that Purcell and Williams 
should be permitted by the organized labor of Great 
Britain to participate in an organization pledged to a 
war of extermination against the Amsterdam Interna- 
tional. The same remark applies to d'Arragona who 
was later admitted to the Autumn Conference of the 
Amsterdam Federation of Trade Unions. 

Losovsky proceeds to claim that the new organization 
is supported by nine million members. We have already 
shown the absurdity of this claim with regard to seven 
million of these, representing Russia and Italy. It may 
be doubted if the Spanish Confederation wholly accepts 
Moscow's dictatorship. The claim to "the revolutionary 
syndicalist minority of France," seven hundred thou- 
sand members, is absurd. The French labor movement 
has not yet been successfully disrupted by Moscow and 
the minority still accepts the discipline of the C. G. T., 
under Jouhaux, Dumoulin, Merrheim, Bartuel, Bidegary 
and other militant anti-Bolshevists. 

Since its formation and the publication of these official 
pamphlets, the Red Labor Union Internationale has 


proceeded with its work of attempted d' M of 

organized labor in all countries. In a recent publication 
entitled "Two .Months' International 

Council of Trade and InduMrial rnions." ithe of; 
title now assumed by the new Internationale) wo read: 

"The organization of the propaganda of the Council " 
thu- !<> pamphlet "has been started and mani- 

festos have already been issued to the organized workers 
of Great Britain, America, Germany, India and Fra 
. . . The Council is making arrangements for the 
lishment in each of the countries of at least one central 
propaganda committee with its members drawn from 
the revolutionary unions, where possible, the Comini, 
Party. They will not hesitate lo form more than one 

"iial committee' where the^- are : 

committees are to undertal-. ive propaganda 

throughout the unions l.y n. -ans of the publication of 
manifestos, the use of labor papers, by confer- 
the unions, by controversy in the press, by the ortrani/.a- 
tion of speakers, distribution of our literature and gen- 
eral agitation throughout the labor movement." 

In Great Britain the British Eta] tin* Inter- 

national Council of Trades and Industrial I'nions has 
formed under tl diip of notorious pro-Bol- 

i'.ritish unionists, whose names are known if not 
yet officially published. Two resolutions are lieinp 
posed by this "Council" in trade union locals in (, 
n and America and other countries, as follows: 

1. To withdraw from the Amsterdam Federation of 

id- CJnio 

join tl leniationale and send d< ! 

to a uorld ( red to sup- 


port ... a revolutionary policy aiming at tin- 
world-wide dictatorship of the proletai 

The published program of the Communist Party in 
America indicates that they have studied carefully the 
Moscow policy of boring from within and battering from 
without. Here is its definition of the duty of Com- 
munist members of trade unions: 

A Communist who belongs to the A. F. of L. should 
seize every opportunity to voice his hostility to this 
organization, not to reform it but to destroy it. The 
I. W. W. must be upheld as against the A. P. of L. At 
the same time the work of Communist education must be 
carried on within the I. W. W. 

It will be noted that the same effort to capture is to 
be applied against the I. W. W. as against the non- 
Communist unions of Europe. 

Naturally the elements of the European labor move- 
ment adhering to the Amsterdam Federation of Trades 
Unions do not accept the criticisms of the new Inter- 
nationale although as yet the Amsterdam body has 
made very feeble efforts to defend itself and its most 
important international action during 1920 was the 
violently pro-Soviet resolution for a general strike above 
referred to. At the Congress in London in November, 
the Federation passed the following resolution in reply 
to the Moscow Trade Union manifesto: 

The Congress observes that the signatories of this 
manifesto set down their declaration of war by writing 
that the International of Moscow will destroy the " Yel- 
low" Amsterdam International. 


The Congress considers-, judging from tin the 

situation, that those attacks do not emanate from the 
Hat and that the latter could not be 
regarded as in any de^- >nsible for them. Fur 

the Congress considers that these calumnious critic 
and this declaration of war prove either a total ignorance 
of the composition and actions of the I 1 Fed- 

eration of Trade Unions or else an evident had faith 
arising out of the unwholesome < destroy the 

workers' organizations in every country. (From ,/?/- 
December 2, 1920.) 

Throughout Europe the labor elements supporting tho 
International Trades Union Federation and those sup- 
porting the Second or Socialist Internationale are largely 
identical. Perhaps because it had been longer under 
attack, the Second Internationale at its meeting in Brus- 
a few weeks before the International Trade I'limn 
Congress of London, passed a far more resolute anti- 
Bolshevist resolution signed : 

ARTIIT i \, M.P. (Great Britain). 


J. RAMSAY MACDONALD ((treat Britain). 

P. J. TROELSTRA (Holland). 

OTTO WELS i (Jermany). 

ARTIM-I: -wcden). 


From this resolution we may quote the following: 

Tb. ;. *} trod the desires of the Rus- 

;! in tin- dust, and in placi- nf d.-mocracy they 

established an armed dictatorsliip. not of the proletariat, 

but of a committee. Now the mpting to impose 

- \\ ill and their decrees upon the Socialist and Labour 


Parties of the whole world. They belong to the old 
world of Tsardom, not to the new world of Socialism. 

They have insulted twenty-seven millions of organized 
trade union workers by calling them " scabs" and have 
declared their intention to disrupt the trade unions. . . . 

They may have ended wage-slavery; they have > 
lished State-slavery and misery. They have robbed the 
workers of freedom of movement and of combination 
and are preventing the creation of economic democracy. 

This resolution undoubtedly indicates the real state 
of mind of the trades unions of Europe towards the 
Russian Soviets. However, neither of these resolutions 
has led to any effective action of any kind against either 
the international machinations or the subsidized propa- 
ganda of Bolshevism. [For a later declaration of the 
Amsterdam Federation see the following chapter.] 


LENIN, in the summer of 1920, abandoned his policy 
of excluding all persons from Russia \vh \\< iv not 
shevists. Socialist and Labor delegations were admitted 
from Kngland. Italy. France, (iermany, Spain, and 
Sweden which contained non-Bolshevist members. 1 
i!' any of their members belonged to the moderate winp 
of the European labor movement. The majority were 
pro-Bolshevists and tile other nted the revolu- 

tionary or orthodox ''center" of the movement. On 
r.'turningto their various countries the majority of these 
witnesses condemned Bolshevism, root and branch. 

Serrati, Dugoni, Vaeirca and d'Arragona. of the Ital- 
ian Socialist and labor union delegation, after their 
visit, declared that while the capitalist regime had ' 

royed "it has not been replaced by anything that 
meets even the most elementary needs of a civil 
pie." Crispim. ihe revolutionary leader of <Jermany's 
Independent Socialists, said that under the Third h 
nati' tyranny almost as bad as that of capitalism 

would prevail." owden of the British Mi 

declared not only that the Soviets were I .-dist and 

nnti-democratir and anti-Christian, but th bodj 

she had met in -ulside the Communist p. 

"goes in terror of his liberty or his life." 

or of Avanti and revolutionary leader of the Italian 


Socialists, stated that the Russian people are passive 
and indifferent and quotecl Lenin to the effect that fifty 
years would be necessary to complete the work of ili- 
revolution. The eminent German Socialist, Dittmaim, 
one of the radical members of the German delegation, 
reported that Russia was entirely under the control of 
the Bolshevist Party with 604,000 members, and that 
in one month last summer 893 people were shot by order 
of the special revolutionary tribunals and a much larger 
number unreported were executed "by administrative 
orders." This has happened since the Bolshevists were 
accredited all over the world in "intellectual" and 
"liberal" organs with having abolished terrorism. Tom 
Shaw, a member of the British delegation, pointed out 
that the working people of Russia were in a condition 
of actual slavery. 

Both Professor Ballod of the German delegation and 
the Italians, in their official report, concluded that the 
Bolshevists are absolutely incompetent economically. 
Professor Ballod states that the Soviet leaders have 
proven themselves "wholly incapable of effecting an 
economic restoration in Russia" and that "bureaucracy 
is as bad as it was under the Czar and is on the as- 
cendent. ' ' 

The Italians, including the revolutionary Serrati, de- 
clared that the Soviet as an experiment had proved itself 
a failure, though the British report held that, as an 
experiment, it would prove vahlable to other count rit-s 
(carried out it will be noted, at the expense of the 
Russian and not of the British people). The Italians 
and Germans regarded the existing resistance to the 
Soviet oppressors as justifiable and inevitable. The 


British report referred to this r under tin- 

Soviet term "counter-revolution" and concluded that 
the Sovi- nment was supported by the Ku- 

people. The Italians, as we have said, held tliat the ; 
ulation was passive and indifferent, while the al 
named Germans, admirers of the Soviet and the Third 
rationale, discovered after investigation in Russia, 
that the is a tyranny without support 

outside of the Bolshevist Party. 

The second disillusionment of European labor came 
with the ultimatum of the Third Internationale (the 
famous 21 points) by which Lenin declared to his wor- 
shippers that they either had to accept the absolute 
dictatorship of Moscow or be excommunicated, and that 
they had to destroy the International Federation of 
Trades Unions as being a scab organization. 

Finally, most frightful disillusionment, the Polish 
people were not conquered by the Soviets, in spite of all 
the revolutionary mrasuiv.s taken by radical labor 
throughout Europe to help the Bolshevist would In 

All these events took n little time to have their full 

effect; it was not until the labor union and 

Party congresses of tin- fall and winter that Kurop 

labor began to find itself but it has ;ms\\-ivd Lenin 

at last! After a visit to the GaneUDI .1. K. Ma'-Donald 

demanded that (In,'! I'.ritain protect the S<.<-ial Demo- 

ic Labor Government of ' and hrini; about 

an n intry with Armenia and the Tartar 

iblic. As Soviet .in'* official or^an in 

America, rightly remarks, this alliance would be for 

'he Soviets as well as against the Turks. 


Also Kautsky of Germany and De Brouckere of Bel- 
gium, after visiting Armenia, recommended military in- 
tervention and Huysmans, Secretary of the Second 
Internationale sent the appeal to that effect to the Social- 
ist parties affiliated with that Internationale (including 
the British Labor Party). As between Turkish and 
Bolshevist armies and those of Great Britain and France, 
not only Georgia and Armenia, but also aid, 

Kautsky and Huysmans were for the armies of the capi- 
talist governments a far cry from the summer's policy 
of assisting in the forcible Sovietizing of Poland ! 

The French labor unionists, especially, are lucid, con- 
sistent and outspoken. The Executive of the C. G. T., 
the French Federation of Labor, issued an appeal to 
French workmen to remain faithful to the union labor 
movement as against the Communist element that re- 
cently split the Socialist Party at Tours, and on Febru- 
ary 15th (1921) this Executive was re-elected, though by 
a narrow margin Moscow having spent millions of dol- 
lars in an attempt to purchase the Congress. In a long 
manifesto the Federation Executive charged the Com- 
munists with the intention of ''destroying international 
syndicalism that comprises 27,000,000 workers," and 
asked labor to support a program of social improvement, 
rather than "personal ambitions and greeds." 

The Federation Council squarely accepted Lenin's 
declaration of a war to the finish and authorized Jouhaux 
by a vote of 103 to 3, with twenty-two abstentions, to 
take any necessary measures (including expulsion) 
against any members who obeyed the orders of the 
Third Internationale and organized nuclei of Commun- 
ists for the purpose of throwing out all non-Bolshevist 


leaders. This was a logical step in pursuance of the 
Orleans Congress of the C. G. T. Congr 

of in<ii a as 

against all outside political control. Men-heir 

leading union, t, >, at 

this congress denounced the So\ 
described Lenin as "a sanguii 
pitiless tyrant, the greatest menace to the Russian revolu- 

Wi.< hevists yelled in ; 

replied that these were the very \\ L only a 

s before by the Frane.i-Kus -;ian. Kappoport, now 
one of the French Bolshevist leaders. Bart; 
of the next largest union, the Miners, who i 

lined in a recent ronm-ess of his union, < 
Bolshevism as a militaristic and reactionar 
worse than capita! 

At the French Socialist Congress at Tours in 
her, 1920, at which the revolutionary majority 

in as Czar and changed the name of the or^ani/ation 
to Communist Party, the minority (itself Marxian 
revolutionary) showed that the French <;. 'rikc 

Of May 1st. 1920, engi ;:id snbsidi/ed hy the Kux 

sian I'.. had almost d the or^ai. 

labor of France. 

M. Fan ! to the d< legates figures showing 

material the membership in the union 

of the Seine and of the French Confeder. 
of Labor. The Confederation membership has ,1,.,-n 
11 1,500,000 to 600,000. he declared, \ of 

ndicates has d< ' 1" 

140,000. II M to tli- 

:iid that the party would suffer further 
if the revolutionary spirit of Moscow pn \ ailed. 


The most recent delegation to Moscow was that of tho 
Spanish Socialists. Upon his return to Spain. Ivois, one 
of the two delegates, a member of the last Spanish Parlia- 
ment, reported as follows: 

Any one who analyzes the curious state of mind in 
which the Russian leaders find themselves cannot fail 
to note that it is due to the contempt in which the 
notions of liberty and democracy are held. We pointed 
out to Comrade Kobetsky that the Spanish party was 
accustomed to refer policies to a referendum. "That," 
he said, "is playing democracy." 

"How and when," we asked Lenin in our interview 
with him, "can we get out of this period of the dictator- 
ship of the proletariat which you call a period of tran- 
sition and arrive at a regime of freedom for labor 
unions, press, and individuals?" 

"We ourselves," Lenin replied, "have never talked 
of liberty. All we have said is 'dictatorship of the 
proletariat/ That dictatorship we are exercising here 
from the seat of power in behalf of the proletariat. In 
Russia the working class, properly so-called, is in a 
minority. That minority is imposing its will and will 
continue to do so as long as other elements in society 
resist the economic conditions that Communism lays 
down. The peasants and the country people do not 
think readily in our terms. They have the mentality of 
shopkeepers, petty bourgeois. That is why Denikin, Kol- 
chak, and Wrangel have found some support among 
them. . . . 

"However, to come back to your question: The period 
of transition will be a long one with us I should say 
from forty to fifty years. Other countries, such as Eng- 
land and Germany, where industry is better organized 
than here, will recover from the proletarian dictatorship 
much sooner, though the development of revolution in 
those countries is taking longer than we had hoped." 


Perhaps the most complete and authoritative statement 
of the attitude of European labor towards th- 
and their Communist Internationale i^ to ho found in 

open letter of the International 

Unions dated March 23, 1921. This 1. tier i l>y 

the Executive Committee of the International Federa- 
tion of Trades Unions as follows: Jouhaux (France), 
Martens (Belgium), Fimmen and Oudeurest (Holla- 
Only the name of the President of the organization, J. 
H. Thomas, of Great Britain, is lacking. 

This letter was in reply to a very insulting epistle 
sent by Zinoviev, as President of the Communist Inter- 
nationale, in which all the leaders of the International 
Federation of Trades Unions were declared to be "scabs" 
and traitors to the working class. 

The Executive Committee of the International I 
ation of Trades Unions deelares in its reply that it is 
ready to support the Kussian people and the I\u 
revolution to the full extent of its powers, hut it demands 
in return from the representatives of ti 
that "they shall pursue a similar line of conduct towards 
Internationale of Labor Unions." We see from this 
Statement that the International Trades Union Bureau 
recognizes the Bolshevist fJovernment as representing 
the HUN pie in spite of : : 'utely contra- 

dictory evidence it furnishes later in the same letter. 
Of the Soviet ivirime it demands only a friendly attitude 
to the Trades Union Inter . in exchange for this, 

I ready to gi-. luidy free hand 

Urania to continue the despotic rule over labor de- 
; -d in the remainder of the letter! II ince 

this introductory nt shows that the Intrrnntional 


Federation of Trades Unions wishes to be as fru-ndly 
to the Russian Bolshevists as the latter will allow, the 
indictment that follows has all the more weight. The 
International Bureau Executive continues: 

Up to the present we have received nothing from those 
who claim the right to speak in the name of the Russian 
people but curses, libels and lies, which have been ip] 
without the shadow of proof. 

And is it possible for us to fail to state that we find 
it difficult to believe in your good will towards the pro- 
letariat ? Is it not a principle of your party to subordi- 
nate the freedom of labor unions to political considera- 
tions? You suggest that we should hold conferences to- 
gether, but up to the present you have not shown that 
you have learned how to consort with decent people. 
The proof of this is found in your lies and in the fact 
that you cannot write a letter without filling it with 
insults and you haven't even enough cleverness to 
introduce variety in your attacks. Your dictionary of 
curse words, gentlemen, is as monotonous as the starva- 
tion and the news of massacres in your country. 

For three years you have been destroying the freedom 
of the labor movement in Russia with fire and sword. 
And you have done this so thoroughly and radically that 
the "White Terror" of the bourgeois Government of 
Hungary is but a weak reflection of your "Red Terror." 

The Executive of the Trade Union Internationale then 
turns its attention to the ignorance displayed by the Bol- 
shevists in all their discussions of the labor situation of 
other countries and especially of the labor unions. It 
points out that the International Trades Union Federa- 
tion has twenty-four million members and estimates on 
the basis of Zinoviev's own statement that the new Red 
Labor Union Internationale has less than a million mem- 


ben outside of Russia. The International Execu 
then continues: 

That Zinovieff, who speaks in the name of a so-called 
Labor Tnion Internationale, is ignorant of all this only 

s that he has no conception whatever of the 1. 
pean labor union movement. This does not sin 
We are only too well aware that this gentleman ki 
the labor union movement only from :ul pam- 

phlets and was never a working man. Was it i 
who. shortly before the October (1W7) coup d 1 < 
wrote ;is follows of this Mr. Zinovirff: "1 knew h 
an ignoramus; but 1 didn't know he was also a cowar 
And this man accuses us of not being working D 
The confusion which runs among tin- ideas of Mr. Zino- 
viefl is very comprehensible to us. He is simply in. 
to conceive of a labor union movement which is fully 

pendent of the political movement. Did he i 
in ti Internationale" on April !Mh "You 

(the Communist Party) bind the political struggle 
the economic struggle together as lie whole 

supervise the political struggle of the proletariat just 

ou conduct its economic stnigL- 

We declare frankly that the situation in which the 
labor organizations of your country find tin 
(wing to your conduct, doesn't entitle you to give us 


Lectures from you! You dp not appear to know. Mi. 
ZinovietT, that your standpoint has long air t>6C 
obsolete and belongs to the past. For more than thirty 
- the labor unioi Tal and \\Vst, TII Kir 

1 themselves from the guardianshiji of all ; 
ticians and political jait 

(y. All \..ur . 

do away with the fact that you are setting about to begin 
the development of the labor union movement all 

u. Try, gentlemen, to be a littl- nnd tin- 

times and endeavor to gain some know) he facts. 


It is of little consequence whether these facts are 
known to you or not, or whether, according to tin- t-:n-li- 
ings of Lenin, you regard all poisons and tricks and 
cloakings of tho truth as permissible in order to gain 
control of the labor unions. (This refers to the Macchia- 
vellian expression of Lenin cited in previous chapters.) 

In our letter of the 15th of December we wrote: "If 
you or other representatives of your labor union move- 
ment chance to desire to gain more information about 
our movement during which you would perhaps con- 
vince yourselves that you have hitherto done nothing but 
to damage your own movement and to harm the prole- 
tariat then we are ready at any time to give you the 
desired information. 

If we haven't had the opportunity of enjoying the 
blessings of your regime personally, at least we know 
your system and your principles. We know your 
theories, as they are printed on paper, but we also know 
them as applied in practice, which is well illustrated by 
your over-crowded prisons. We know the dependence 
of the Soviets upon the Communist Party which has 
created a new autocracy. We know the happy condition 
the Russian people finds itself in and the welfare your 
rule has brought on paper. And we hear with satis- 
faction that you regard Middle and Western Europe as 
not yet being ripe for your beneficent plans. 

Look once more at our letter of December 15th which 
in your haste to answer quickly you read too super- 
ficially. For there we declared that we are very ready 
to teach you, however painful it is to us that im-n 
equipped with such complete power as you have can 
scarcely open their mouths or take a pen in hand with- 
out giving new proof that they are without the slightest 
knowledge of those things which men in their position 
ought to know. 

We declare to you that we are still ready to undertake 
this work of instruction. 


The Soviet Government itself hn i to take 

notice of the rising tide of hostility in tin- ranks of 
European labor. The Brit Mi Labor Party protested 
against the severe punishim-nt meted out to Russian 
le unionists who ha<l been bold enough to give them 
truthful information during their visit to I; 
protest had no effect upon the barbarian ears of the 
Soviets. They refused to moderate their policy in the 
slightest degree in response to such inefYerfive verbal 
but at the same time felt obliged to issue one 
of their usual statements attempting to cover their 
actions by a few utterly meaningless phrases. The si 
ment, signed by Krassin, was in part as folio 

The Soviet Government is responsible to the working 

>es of Russia and to the world proletariat fo: 
mail 'it' the success of the Russian Socialist 


The Soviet Government is extremely desirous to main- 
tain the best relations with the British Labor Tarty, 
and with other proletarian or semi proletarian 
tims. The Soviet Government is extremely grateful to 
them for the support they have given to the cause of 
the Russian Revolution. (The British Labor Party has 
not even threatened to withdraw or curtail this sup- 
port! ed.] 

-Minent . . . considers, as is th. 

at present, that the sole organ having any right to 
impose conditions upon the Soviets and to make any 

:>laints to them is the Russian working masses 
the revolutionary organizations of the prohtarian world. 

That is. tl mmunists. claiming t 

the revolutionary proletariat of the worl 
their rik'ht of life and d<ath OVOT anybody ^ ho happens 
to fall into their power, no matter how large the pro- 


letarian majority which condemns their action! It may 
be doubted if a more thinly veiled defense of sheer des- 
potism was ever offered to the world. 

In spite of the fact that the Russian people are allowed 
no voice whatever within that country, it must not be 
supposed that they have been successfully stifled. In- 
numerable representative individuals from all classes, 
including the trade unions, men and women whose 
integrity and credentials cannot be questioned, have 
escaped, to give voice to the opinions of the Rus- 
sian people. Moreover, the largest labor organiza- 
tions of Russia, that is the rank and file of the 
trade unions, without reference to the new leaders ap- 
pointed by the Soviets or the new imaginary organiza- 
tions created by them, have been in continued contact 
with European labor. The same is true of the Socialist 
Revolutionary Party, numerically the most important 
political organization in Russia. There is, moreover, 
no misunderstanding whatever of the Russian situation 
in neighboring countries, such as Germany and Scan- 
dinavia, where the contact with Russia has been close 
and continuous and pro-Bolshevist "intellectuals" can 
deceive nobody. But besides this testimony the labor 
delegations visiting Soviet Russia have secured reports 
from the trades unions and from the socialist parties 
as organizations. Some of these are published in tin 1 
report of the British Labor Delegation. From the most 
important, the address to British labor by the Executive 
Committee of the Socialist Revolutionary Party, signal 
by Chernoff, Gotz, and other leaders known to the entire 
labor and socialist movement of Europe, we quote the 
following characterization of the Bolshevist regime: 


We quite understand that the British proletariat, 
deafened by the clamour of t: world slaughter, 

not . : from tin- wave of national eh,. 

!d like to sec in Russia, in .spite of the libel* 
bourgeois penny-a-liiu rs, the living exaini 
peep having shaken oiV its feet the du>t of tin- 

old world, has risen on the ruins of the war conflagration 

new work of creation, free and tint rannnelled by 
chains or bonds. We qii ODM illu- 

be left, and that the proletariat of has 
created "the Red Legend" of a great country where 
Socialism, unrcalisable to Philistine bff has not 

only been tried, but has now existed f.r nearly 
years, in spite of the civil war, the blockade, and an 
artificial isolation from tl :' the cultured world, 

amid the <_ribes of inimically-inelined pcnpl.- hediri: 
round. We are well aware that this ; nd. this 

Red Myth may exert an elevating intlu- the 

ardour of the proletarian vanguard. Causing its ! 
to 1 r, proudly raising its head, and straining 

its revolutionary muscle. \V. 
hat this Ked Legend must react with a f 
directly proport'n 'lie s.|iiare of its distance, and 

the number of models of admirable energy worthy 
;.itation is far below the nuin!>< -how- 

iiow a Social Revolution should not bo accom- 

We would ask you to try and distinguish among the 
man : . \siat ically savage facts of Rolshevik- 

"inething more than the : 

mad pranks of a Caliban, !><> \.>iuiion- 

lon carried to fai . added to the im- 

nce characteristic of an ,-i<-iive tempi-r. 

You must always bear in mind that Russia 
has lived for ages under a regime of all around oppres- 
sion on the part of the Government; that the training 

oplr in ideas of dem<. manded . 

of time too long for the patience of a great number 


of the people themselves. The temptation proved too 
strong to effect a leap right over the dead level of 
unpreparedness with the help of enlightened despotism 
and the rod of Peter the Great shaped according to a 
new Communist fashion. Taking all this into Considera- 
tion, it will, perhaps, be clear to you why in the tumul- 
tuous chaos of the revolutionary tempest, one part of 
the Russian Socialists so quickly and easily cast off the 
outward gilding of scientific Socialism, showing uml< r 
neath the Asiatic nature of enlightened despotism with 
a Communist lining. 

In spite of abundant evidence of this character con- 
tained in its report, the British Labor Delegation, being 
divided, took no decisive stand and made statements 
flatly contradicted not only by other delegations, 
but by some of their own delegates, as already noted. 
This led to further protest by the Socialist-Revolution- 
ists represented in Paris by another leader known in all 
countries, 0. S. Minor a man, like the others, who has 
spent most of his life in prison or exile because of his 
socialistic and revolutionary opinions. Referring es- 
pecially to the failure of the British Labor Party to do 
anything on behalf of the oppressed population of Rus- 
sia, in particular the labor unionists and agriculturists, 
Minor said: 

Still less can we understand how so many of the 
Socialists can, with a clear conscience, justify tlu> 
methods of Bolshevism for Russia, at the same timo 
rejecting them for their own countries. Such a view 
shows either a conscious or unconscious deep contempt 
for the Russian people, an insulting attitude toward 
them as towards a nation of slaves for whom the Com- 
munism of the Whip is the most appropriate, natural 
and national brand of Socialism. 


Such an attitude towards the working poop!.' 
sia, proved to be wrong by innumerable uprising 
workers and peasants, we, Russian Social! 

ted to mTt with among our Kim-pi-an ft and, 

we declare, that we cannot leave such a ; 
mutual i within the international Socialist family 

without our most emphatic protest. 


BOLSHEVIST diplomats have repeatedly acknowledged 
that one of the purposes of their negotiations for gov- 
ernmental trade agreements is to obtain de facto recog- 
nition of the Soviet Government with all the prestige 
that this implies. Krassin, the chief negotiator with 
Great Britain, has acknowledged that there can be very 
little trade for some time and Mr. Hughes has demon- 
strated that trade will depend upon the extension of 
credit by somebody or other to the Soviet Government, 

The whole negotiations are described by Lenin in a 
speech before the railwaymen, reported by the Moscow 
wireless on April 3rd, 1921, as "our game with the 
bourgeoisie. ' ' 

But an additional purpose of these trade negotiations 
is Bolshevist propaganda throughout the world and as 
part of this propaganda the word has been passed along 
by the Bolshevists for foreign consumption that by 
the very act of making trade agreements with capital 
Communism in Eussia was being abandoned. 

There is no foundation for this claim. All the revolu- 
tionary wars, insurrections, general strikes and agita- 
tions openly subsidized by the Bolshevists throughout 
the world for the past three years have been going on 
simultaneously with the agitation for trade agreements 
and the effort to interest capitalists through concessions, 



that is. through alienating the patrimony oi 
people without tl.- ut. 

'c can be no question that tin- Soviet British 
agreement was a tremendous rictOJ 
both in Russia and in every country of the world. 'I 

-.pie ground for the follou in Soviet 

Russia published on April l(i, 

Tin- full extent of the victory won by the workers of 

-ia over the rulers of England is revealed in the 
>f the Anglo-Russian trade agreement published in this 
number of Soviet /I'l/.v.vm. In the issue of .January 
l!lM. there were published in *<>i'i< t J\ti*xi two prelim- 
inary draft agreements, one submitted by the British 
government on November 29, and the oilier submitted 
by the Soviet government on December II. 1920. A 
i <f the two papers ,. Horded a view of the 
rgent and conflicting claims and purposes of the 
ian and British (Jovernmen: lively. The 

! agreement is the outcome of the contest in which 
Mr. ! representing the power and purpose of the 

kers, met Sir Robert Home, rcpn-srntini; 
the power and of the British imp It 

was a lest of strength, a significant skirmish, hetv 
Communism and Capitalism. We purpose here to ex- 
amine the tinal document paragraph by paragraph, to 
see by comparison with th- which of the 

two powers prevailed in the adjustment of their op 
ing conl' -ntions. The examination will show that the 
Worken 1 !>' public won an overwhelming vid. 

ipire. Point by point. olftO 
;d principle^ advan. ed by the Soviet < 
"wn the objections and evasions o! 

final document e. -ible and four- 

panied by a separate dee! 
. signed on the same day. 


The very fact that the British Govern incut <!,, 
until the last moment that there was to be no political 
recognition of the Soviet Government shows how this 
aspect of the agreement was a defeat for Great Hritain 
and a victory for the Soviets a victory undoubtedly 
due, as Krassin claims, to the Bolshevist propaganda. 
Yet it was only a few weeks after the agreement had 
been signed that the British courts declared that it 
amounted to a de facto recognition, in spite of the fact 
that it is distinctly stated in that document that it was 
only preliminary to such recognition. A tremendous 
comment on this trade agreement is the fact that the 
Bolshevists apparently continued to expend the same vast 
sums of money in Great Britain for the overthrow of 
the British Government after that agreement as before. 
Apparently the Bolshevists put special hopes upon the 
coal strike (April and May, 1921). Although this was 
a purely economic struggle in the fundamental questions 
raised, a very considerable minority in the organization 
openly attempted to take advantage of the crisis for 
revolutionary purposes. In view of this fact the official 
statement made in the House of Commons by Edward 
Shortt, Secretary for Home Affairs, on May 12, is of the 
utmost significance : 

The British Government is considering the possibility 
of introducing legislation to prohibit the receipt of 
foreign money in the United Kingdom intended to pro- 
mote a revolutionary movement or to sustain a revolu- 
tionary propaganda. 

If such agitation was indeed being carried on by the 
Bolshevists it was done with the encouragement of the 
British Government itself. 


From tho very first Lenin has advocated this policy, 
with the expressed belief that Bolshevist -aided n-vnlu- 
> would soon overthrow all existing governments and 
release him from his obligations. 

As early as February. 1919, Tehiteherin, the Soviet 
Com: '.HI Affairs, sent to the government* 

of Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan and the United 
States a note in which he said: 

Seeing the great interest which has always been shown 
hy foreign capital for the exploitation of Russia 's natural 
riches, the Russian Sovi< iinent is disposed to 

grant concessions upon mines, forests, and so on 

eiti/ens of the Entente Powers, under conditions which 
must he carefully determined so that the economic and 
social order of Soviet Russia should not suffer from the 
nal rule of these concessions. 

At the meeting of the Russian Communist Party on 
March l.">th. 1!21. Kann-neff ns-d an identical argument 
(Moscow Wireless, March 18, 1921) : 

. . . Can we without the assistance of foreign capital 
rapidly n-store our economic life? No, we cannot. \Ve 

have il perts. By 1;. 

on, Mgth \ V e might have restored our 

life iudepmdi'iitly hut fur this we would 

'ii: time. 

he foreign capitalists will not assist us for noth- 
\Ve will have to pay them a liberal tribute. 

1 having ivc.-ivi d this tribute from us will 
product: .iid will thus 

the rob d for it by Marx: Capital will dig 

istoric grave. 


In the Pravda (November 30th, 1920), Lenin defended 
the policy of concessions with 1h<s<> expressions: 

We have defeated the world bourgeoisie up to the 
present owing to the fact that they can not unite. Both 
the Brest-Litovsk and Versailles treaties have tended to 
keep them apart. A bitter hatred is now growing up 
between America and Japan. We are utilizing this, 
and are offering Kamchatka on a long lease, instead 
of giving it away without payment, considering that 
Japan has taken away already by military force a large 
territory in the Far East. . . . 

I must repeat, concessions are a continuation of war 
on an economic basis but instead of destroying tiny 
reconstruct our productivity. They surely will try to 
deceive us, to evade our laws, but for such purposes 
there exist our respective institutions, all Russian Extra- 
ordinary Commission, Moscow Extraordinary Commis- 
sion, Provincial Extraordinary Commission, etc., and we 
are sure that we shall be victorious. 

It must be remembered that these Extraordinary Com- 
missions are the official Soviet bodies for enforcing the 
"red terror." 

In his closing speech at the March (1921) Congress 
of the Russian Communist Party Lenin exposed all the 
main elements of Bolshevist policy. His internal policy, 
as there developed, has been discussed at the end of 
Chapter VII. It is closely linked with the external 
policy. Once more after the adoption of his "new" 
proposals by the Congress as in his opening speech, he 
based everything on the coming world revolution: "But 
when we look on our party as the hearth of world revo- 
lution, and observe the campaign now being conducted 


against us by the govern i ;he world there is no 

room for doubt." That is. the growing certain!;. 
world revolution, removes all doubt o: 
cess in impending negotiations with foreign iroverni; 
for the official recognition of the Soviet tit It- b 
and all tin* B and human chattels it cont;. 

Th. Soviet leader does not deny the weakness of tho 
Soviets. Hut let it be remembered that he OC 
drills his followers to the thought that all other nations 
are weaker still! As he says in his speech, " All this in- 
formation given out by the international bourgeoisie . . . 
reveals once more how we are surrounded by 
and how feeble these enemies have grown within tin- 
year! 11 

Bearing this blind and fanatical optimism in mind 
we can better grasp other parts of the spee< -h in which 
in shows he is counting absolutely on getting from 
America the credit and supplies to revive Ku^i;m 
shevism by means of a trade agreement on the British 
model ! As quoted by Soviet Russia (May 14, 1921) 
n said: 

The world press syndicate freedom of tho press con- 
sists there in the fact that 99 per ant <>f I In jtress 18 
owned by financial magnates maniimlufinr/ hu 
millions of rubles opened the world-wide cam; 
the imp. .vith the aim nf preventing, fii 

with Kn<_:land which wen- be^un by I 
also tin imniiui nf ctDirlu.fion of fr >rilh 

America. Tl that the prho -nn-ound us, 

no longer able to bring about intcm ntiui. are counting 
upon a revolt. The events at I\ ; 

with the international h. 1 in addition to 

it we see that more titan anything i/.s< they now j 


from the practical standpoint of international capital, 
the sound establishment of trade relations. But they 
will be unable to prevent it. There are now in Moscow 
representatives of big capital, who did not beli 
rumors, and they have told us how in America a certain 
group of citizens carried on an unprecedented agitation 
for Soviet Russia. This group made extracts of every- 
thing printed about Russia for a few months in news- 
papers of the most diverse kinds about the flight of 
Lenin and Trotsky, about Lenin's shooting Trotsky and 
vice-versa, and they published all this in the form of a 
pamphlet. Better agitation for the Soviet power cannot 
be imagined. The contemporary American bourgeois 
press has completely described itself. . . . 

Was there ever a wilder farrago of gross exaggeration 
and misstatement ? A few foolish rumors are taken from 
thousands of substantiated dispatches and reproduced 
as giving a fair picture of the American press on Ru- 
But we must note, especially, that Lenin appreciates the 
aid he is getting in his propaganda from "a certain 
group" of American citizens, while at the same time he 
openly boasts of the British trade agreement from the 
practical standpoint as a defeat of international capital, 
i.e., a defeat of all existing governments (all regarded as 
capitalistic by Lenin) and of the existing social system. 

A part of the so-called trade agitation has been the 
claim that the Soviets were abandoning Communism not 
only in making trade agreements with capitalists bnt 
in other directions. Such changes as have in fact taken 
place could be so absurdly misinterpreted and misunder- 
stood only by those who have made no effort to follow 
the Bolshevist policy. The Bolshevist chiefs, and 
pecially their foreign diplomats, have never hesit.< 


to use any and all methods for their purposes. In a 
' which appeal (! in Pravda on December 1 

192d -ed to the Italian Socialists at a moi; 

which Lenin thought to be "the eve of the revolution," 

the i :<t leader thus advised the Italian revolu- 


The Italian fmrty, in order to carry out the revolution 

,lly, must still take a certain number of 1 
to the Left without tying itself down and without for- 
getting that circumstances may very well demand some 
steps to the Bight. 

This advice is typical. Foreign trade agreements and 
other negotiations regarded abroad as compromises are 
not only presented to the Russian people as 
but are evidently so considered by the Bolshevist el 
The- apparent concessions made to capitalism by the Rus- 
sian Communist Congress about the time of the Br 
Trade Agreement are explained by Krassin. the chief 
negotiator, as foil. 

It from wartime conditions and advance 
toward reconstruction and peace, we proceed toward a 

biiMness-likr adaptation of t.ur methods to thosr of real 

:11 it neither going to the right nor to the 

rts we may n ; am sure. 

that Lenin will D0V6V abandon his communistic prin- 
ciples, but as he is a practical man with a ; 
mind, lie may decidr in one matter or another to 
a practical course with regard to present-day conditions. 

A Moscow wi \pril Ifith, H21 > cynically and 

frankly States the 15- -Ian to repudiate any 


treaty at the first favorable moment, as they did that of 
Brest-Litovsk. It may be said that the following dis- 
patch is for home consumption by the ultra-revolui in- 
of Soviet Russia. But as long as such matter uncon- 
tradicted is the sole pabulum officially furnished the 
Russian people (the opposition being prohibited) how 
can we expect anything but a continuation of treaty- 
breaking to result ? The dispatch is as follows : 

The present peace is only an armed truce. We cannot 
base our peaceful policies on the present peace treaties, 
because the peace itself is not secured. All Europe is 
boiling. We do not know what will happen to-morrow. 
All our treaties are just like the Brest treaty and may 
suddenly become pieces of paper. But it makes no dif- 
ference to us at present. We are striving to get in touch 
with the Far West (East?). Our chief aim still remains 
the fight with capitalism. But first we must give our 
country time to rest. For a while we are smiling sweetly 
at Lloyd George and shaking his hand, but our policy 
remains the same. We shall profit by the short breath- 
ing space offered us and then deal a death blow to capi- 

Among the working people the agitation for a trade 
agreement with Soviet Russia is put forward on the 
double ground that it would give employment to the 
American workers and that it would relieve the suffer- 
ing in Russia. The argument that it would give employ- 
ment to American labor is fully answered by Secretary 
Hughes in response to a letter by President Gompers 
requesting information in this matter. President Gom- 
pers' letter was as follows: 


Maidh i:. 1 

If it is not incompatible with the public interest would 
it be possible for me to M from your 

department relative to tin- situation in Soviet Kn 

TO is mucli propaganda hi-in_r circulated in the 
United States claiming that the demand for manufac- 
tured goods in Iiiissi; -.rival and the purcha 
power of the Russian Soviet government t is 
almost impossible to determine the actual capacity 
the Russian market to absorb goods of Ionian manu- 

urc. Ths scarcity of goods is laid to the block 
which as 1 understand it was rei:;\<d .Inly S. 1 
It is said that the pressing needs of the Russians 
large quantities of the following: 

"Locomotives, cars, rails, tires, springs, etc. Tractors, 
plows, reapers, mowers, hinders, harrows, and on 
large and small, binder twine, motor trucks. 
goods: shoes, etc. Textiles. Chemicals, druu's. | 
Notions. Belting, all kinds. Oil well machinery and 
piping. Mining machinery. Rubber \i 

writers. Sewing machines. Surgical instrnm< 
Machinery and machine tools of all Printing 

presses, and printing supplies. Small tools. SI 
Tool steel. Camera and camera supplies, fil; Raw 

It is also claimed that the Commissariat of 1 
Trade of the Soviet government has given orders for 
the purchase of the following in America: 

"Agricultural machinery, including tractors, mowers, 
binders. . etc.. qp 

">: machine tOOll, bet-. 

$3,000,000.00 to $5,000,000.00; small tools, files, drills, etc. 
bet^ 000,000.00 and $5,000,000.00 to 

100,000 ; in. ooo tons of loo 

of sprin. oniotive and car springs; 

10,000 tons ol <>n; 50,000 tons of piping." 


These figures, it is rlaimed, do not represent all the 
orders that would be placed at once. 

It is alleged that the Federal Reserve Board has 
refused to permit the transfer of funds to the Un 
States from the Soviet Russian government in order to 
pay for the goods, although payment in gold is guaran- 
teed. It is claimed that the American manufacturers 
are prevented from accepting the gold on the probability 
that it was illegally acquired by the Soviet government. 

It is also said that the following raw mat or in' 
ready for shipment to the United States if only the 
American government recognizes the Soviet government 
of Russia: 

''Lumber, unlimited quantities; Flax, 20,000 tons; 
Hemp, 10,000 tons; Furs, 9,000,000 pelts; Bri 
sorted and cleaned, 1,000 tons; Horse hair, 2,000 tons; 
Manganese ore, 250,000 tons; Asbestos, 8,000 tons; 
Hides, 3,500,000 skins; Platinum, large quantities; 
Petroleum and petroleum products, 2,000,000 tons. ' ' 

Another claim made is that if the restrictions placed 
on trade with Russia were removed it would place in 
operation many mills, shops and factories now closed 
down and would give employment to the unemployed 
of America. 

This propaganda is being widely circulated among 
labor organizations and I have received many letters 
asking me what is the truth. In this connection I have 
repeatedly called attention to the action of the American 
Federation of Labor convention at Montreal, June 7-19, 
1920, as follows : 

Resolved, That the American Federation of Labor 
is not justified in taking any action which could 
be construed as an assistance to, or approval of, the 
Soviet government of Russia as long as that government 
is based upon authority which has not been vested in 
it by a popular representative national assemblage of 
the Russian people; or so lon as it endeavors to create 
revolutions in the well-established, civilized nations of 


the world: or so long as it advocates find applies the 
mill' :i of labor and prevents the organizing and 

lulling of trade unions and tin- main of a 

i tree public assemblage." 

This resolution was based on a report made by tin- 
Executive Council of the American 1'Ydcration < 
and previously unanimously approved by the convention 
as follow 

"Bolshevism has been a lure for some of our people 
and its doctrines have been propagated with great v 
This hideous doctrine has found converts among two 
classes of people principally those intellectuals, so- 
called, who have no occupation save that of following 
one fad after another, and those so beaten in the game 
of life that they find no appeal in any t hi' 
most desperate and illogical schemes. The rank and tile 
of the organized labor movement, as was to h. 
expected, has given no countenance to the pr< 
of Bolshevism, but. has, on the contrary, been its I 
effective opponent in America." 

Whether the statements in the circular are bf 
untrue, the widest publicity of the facts should be given. 
It would be more effective if it could be in official form. 
If that can not be done the proper knowledge should bo 
transmitted to the various organizations that have resolu- 

OM the sulij :v them for approval or di 

pi-oval and only awaiting an answer from me as to the 

I. tl, ntrary to the rules 

of the Department of State or if not against, the public: 
interest, that you fur with such informal ion as 

you mitrht have on the matter. 1 would also like to 
knot :;ount of and imports between the 

Unit' for a number of years preced- 

ing the ncd these would be enormous 

because they ha\ ant. 

f vital i! the people of the 

I as they should not be misled by propa- 


ganda that is consciously or unconsciously directed to 
aid the Soviet government of Russia against the interests 
of our people. I therefore trust that I am not asking 
too much. 

Yours very truly, 

(Signed) Sam'l Gorapers. 


American Federation of Labor. 
Hon. Charles Evans Hughes, 
Secretary of State, 
Washington, D. C. 

Here is the response of the Secretary of State : 


Mr. Samuel Gompers, 

President, American Federation of Labor, 

Washington, D. C. 

The receipt is acknowledged of your letter of March 
15, 1921, in regard to the trade relations between the 
United States and Russia. 

I recognize the interest of the American people in the 
questions you raise and I take pleasure in replying in 
detail to them. 

In reply to your first statement, it is evident that a* 
years of war, during which normal industry was diverted 
to the production of war supplies and accumulated stocks 
were consumed, Russia does not now possess important i 
quantities of commodities which might be exported. It 
should be remembered that in addition to the period 
of the war against Germany, Russia has n<>\\ 
through more than three years of a civil war during 
which industrial activities have been almost completely 
paralyzed. In fact the devastation of industry in Ru 
has been so complete, the poverty of the country is so 


acute, tho people are so hungry and tin demand for 

i^n-at that at present Russia repp- 

a gigantic economic vacuum ami no evidei> ;hat 

tin- unfortunate situation above described is like];. 

ileviated so long as tin- present political ami economic 
m continues. Though tl 

,.:!<; variety of coinmo. lilies uri: 
i. llu- purchasinr power of that count r 
at a minimum, and the demand must con 


In some respects the condition of Russia is analog 
to that of other European countries. The war lias 
tin- pe. pie with diminislied productive man-power and 
largely increased numbers of the disabled, the sick and 
the helpless. In one important respect. howe\ 

condition does not correspond to that of other bel- 
ligerent i the world war. While 'ates 
are taking such action as is likely to reestablish 

ice, the attitude and action of the present author 
of Russia have tended to undermine its political and 
economic relations with other countries. The Rm 
people are unable to obtain credit which otherwise might 
be based on the vast potential wealth of Ru-Ma and 
compelled to be deprived of commodities immedi;.' 
necessary for consumption, raw materials and perma 
active equipment. The effect of i Ins eonditioi 
that Russia is unable to renew normal e 
activities, and apparently will be unable to obtain 
urgently needed commodities until credits may be 
tended to Russia on a sound h. 

It should not ! I that there has been a 

steady d- don in evm those industry 

not dependent up<>n ; :' either 

raw material or partly finished products, nor in which 
has then tagC >f labor. The Ku^ian 

f coal, of iron and steel, of flax. 

ulfuric acid, or copper, of agricultural 
products, of textiles, and the maintenance and repair ^ 


of railroad equipment, have degenerated steadily from 
their level of production at the time of the BnKhevik 
revolution. There can be no relation of the failure of 
all these industries to blockades or to civil war, for 
most of them require no imports, and the men mobilized 
since the Soviet revolution were far less in number than 
before that event. 

During the existence of civil war in Russia, her ports 
were in the hands of anti-Soviet forces. However, trade 
with the world through Baltic ports was opened in April, 
1920. Restrictions on direct trade with Russia were 
removed by the United States on July 8, 1920. The 
conclusion of treaties of peace with the Baltic States 
enabled Russia freely to enter upon trade with Europe 
and the United States. Both American and European 
goods have been sold to Russia, but the volume of trade 
has been unimportant due to the inability of Russia to 
pay for imports. 

As suggested in your second statement, it is true that 
agents purporting to be representatives of the so-called 
Bolshevist Commissariat of Foreign Trade have placed 
immense orders for the purchase of goods in the United 
States, Europe and Asia. It is estimated that perhaps 
six and one half billion dollars' worth of orders have 
been booked. But shipments as a result of these orders 
have been made only in small volume because the Soviet 
agents were unable either to pay cash or to obtain credit so 
as to insure the delivery of the goods ordered. The 
actual result of the placing of these immense orders on 
the part of the Soviet regime has not, therefore, ma- 
terially stimulated industry in the countries in which 
the orders* were placed, but has chiefly resulted in 
further impairing the credit of the Soviet regime due 
to its inability to carry out the transactions which it had 

Much has been written about the large sums of Rus- 
sian gold which have found their way abroad in ex- 
change for foreign goods. In reality, such transfers of 


gold have boon n-latr. vding to the most 

-timatcs the Soviet authorities do not now have 
in their possession more than 17.") .000,000 worth of r 
It is apparent that the proportion.; 
amount of gold which might be expected 
United States, and even the immediate expenditure of 
all of this amount of gold in the Tin ould 

not have a pronounced or lasting effect ad- 

vancement of American industry and trade, whil- 
loss to Russia would take away the scant hope th 

of a sound reorganization of the Russian system of 
currency and finance. 

In r- to your question regarding the transfer 

of funds from Russia to the United States it may be 
d that there arc no restrictions on the- importation 
of Russian gold into the United States, and since De< 
her 18, 1920, there have been no restrictions on the 
exportation of coin, bullion and eurreney to Soviet Rus- 
sia or on deal in ITS or exchange transactions IM Ru 
roubles or on transfers of credit or exchange transac- 
tions with Soviet Russia. It is true that no a.ssurances 
can be given that Russian gold will be accepted by tho 
Federal Res, rve Banks or the Mint, in view of the fact 
that these public instil ut ions must be fully assured that 
the legal title to the gold accepted by them is not open 
to question. 

It i i been slated that if the Government of the 

United States would -.died Soviet Gov- 

ernment. Russia would immediately export immense 
quantities of lumber, llax. hemp, fur and other commo- 
dities. The facts in regard to supplies in Ru 
pletely refute such statements, l.'u la doei nut to-day 
have on hand tV which might be 

made the basis of immediately profitable trade with tho 

I, Furthermore, tin- transportation 
is utterly inadequate to move any large quant it. 
goods either in the interior of Russia or ! 

ts. The export of such commodities as exist in Rus- 


sia at the present time would result merely in further 
increasing the misery of the Russian people. 

The issue of January 1, 1921 of "Economic Life," an 
official organ of the so-called Soviet Government, reports 
that the production of lumber amounted to seventy 
million cubic feet in 1920, as compared with four hun- 
dred million cubic feet in 1912. The production of 
lumber is, therefore, less than one-fifth of the pre-war 
level, even though the lumber industry is in far better 
circumstances than other important Russian industries. 
This same situation is further illustrated by the follow- 
ing article appearing in the " Economic Life" of Feb- 
ruary 6, 1921: 

"By December 20 the following supplies were gath- 

Horse hides 3,831 12 per cent of am 't expected 

Colt hides 1,142 35 < 

Cattle hides 22,701 20.6 < 

Calf hides 15,679 14.6 

Sheep hides 37,771 58 

Flax poods 22,871 12 

Hemp 6,863 18 

Bristles 99 14 

"The Government of Ekaterinburg, which occupies a 
high place in furnishing food supplies, for several rea- 
sons has proven to be very weak in furnishing raw 

"During the past week the results of the work have 
become still smaller, reaching zero in some places, in 
spite of the extreme energy and intensity of the work." 

Note is taken of the statement that if restriction on 
trade with Russia were removed, many mills, shops and 
factories in this country, which are now closed, would 
resume operations, and unemployment would thereby be 
diminished. Even before the war, trade with Russia, 
including both exports and imports, constituted only 
one and three-tenths per cent of the total trade of the 
United States. In view of the fact that the purchasing 


power of Russia is now greatly diminished, as compared 
with pre-war years, it is evident Dial at ; 
under ti favorable circumstances the trade of 

Russia could have but a minor influence on the indus- 
trial and agricultural prosperity of the I'nih-d States. 
Under conditions actually prevailing in Kussia, that 
trade is of even less importance; a statement amply 
demonstrated by the fact that though n strict KM. 
trade with Russia have been eliminated, no business of 
consequence with that country has developed. 

According to the reports of the Department of ( 
merce, our total trade with Russia for tin fi-.-al 
ending June 30, 1913, was as folio. 

Imports from European Russia $26,958,690 

Import* from Asiatic Russia 


Exports to Kumppan Russia 795 

ports to Asiatic Russia I. Id, 419 

Total trade between Russia and the United 

States $55,780. 

The total imports into the United States for the t 
year ending June 30, 1913, were $1, 813,008 ;j:M. ami the 
total export! for the same year \v< i,884,149, the 

i "f hnih imports and exports amounting, tl 

For the calendar year 1920, the total trade of the 
1 States was: 

. $8,228,000,000 
Imports 5,279,000,000 

Total . $13,507,000,000 

udiiiK Finland, the Baltic States, Armenia, and 
Georgia and Sil-rria for the periods when they have been 


free of Soviet Domination, the trade of thr T'nitrd S- 
with Russia during 1920 was absolutely negligible, prob- 
ably amounted to less than $4,000,000. 

Though figures for trade with Russia during that 
period are not available, there is every reason to 1>< 1 
that it was of far less relative importance than in I'JI'J. 

It is unquestionably desirable that intimate and 
mutually profitable commercial relations on an extensive 
scale be established between the United States and 1; 
sia, and it is the sincere hope of this Government that 
there may be readjustments in Russia which will make 
it possible for that country to resume its proper place 
in the economic life of the world. 

I am enclosing herewith as of possible interest to you 
in this connection, copies of the Department 's announce- 
ment of July 7, 1920, of the Treasury Department's 
announcement of December 20, 1920, of a statement 
made by Mr. Alfred W. Kliefoth, of the Foreign Trade 
Adviser's Office of this Department, before the Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representa- 
tives, and of an announcement made to the press by the 
Secretary of State, dated March 25, 1921; also a brief 
statement of the total trade with Russia for the fiscal 
years ending June 30, 1911 and June 30, 1912. 

I would also invite your attention to the recently 
published hearings of the Committee on Foreign Affaire 
of the House of Representatives, entitled ''Conditions in 
Russia," and of the Committee on Foreign Relations of 
the United States Senate, entitled "Relations with Ku 
sia." The former was held in compliance with House 
Resolution No. 635, and the latter in compliance with 
Senate Joint Resolution No. 164. 

I am, Sir, 

Your obedient servant, 

(Signed) Charles E. Hughes. 
Enclosures : 

(5) as stated above. 


This disposes of the argument that a trade apn 
with So\ ia could materially aid American in- 

dustry. Even if trad*- were resumed on a pre-war basis, 
which is practically impossible, it would BOaroety inev 
our exports by one per cent. But our fon ILMI trade 
absorbs only one-tenth of the product of American in- 
dustry. It is, therefore, practically impossible that the 
reopening of Russian trade on this comparatively large 
scale could keep American industry going for more than 
three or four hours! 

Secretary of State Hughes has given a conclusive 
answer to the argument that a trade agreement might 
be materially helpful to the Russian people as long as 
they are still the helpless subjects of the present "gov- 
ernment." In addition we may point out that two 
efforts were recently made to help the Russian p 
one through the Norwegian statesman, Nansen, and the 
other through the Russian cooperative organization!. 
Tin- Soviet Government refused both offers because the 
supplies to be sent were not to be left in the hand 
the Bolshevists. Rather than to lose tit e of 

strengthening their own hold over the Rn "pie 

decided to let the suffering of their helpless subjects 

It must also be remembered in this connection that 
whatever the hidden objects of the Hritish 

'. the position of the I'.rilish (lovernmeiit would be 

i by a similar policy on the part of the 

I'n i ted States. The p it out by Mos.-ow wn 

on November 17th. lirjn, that "KiiLfland is carrying on 

in the I'nited States agitation in favor e \val 

with Soviet I .t least, plau- 


sible. A number of well-known Englishmen have boon 
agitating for that object by speeches and by articles 
in the American press. Possibly the intention is that 
America shall provide the credits without which the 
British-Soviet agreement must remain an empty form. 
This agitation certainly offers no reason why America 
should fall in with the designs of the British Govern- 
ment. The British Empire is threatened by the Soviet 
military forces around the Black Sea and in Mesopo- 
tamia, Persia, Afghanistan and the Pamir region and 
by Bolshevist propaganda not only in these districts but 
also in Turkey, Egypt, India, and China. The foreign 
policies of the powerful British Labor Party as well as 
the Independent Liberals are thoroughly pro-Soviet. 
Certain groups of British capitalists fear they might get 
less out of Russia from a democratic and patriotic 
peasants' government than from the cynical diplomacy 
of the Bolshevists ready to give to foreigners the title 
to everything in Russia, so far as this is necessary to 
secure the means needed to hold their power and prevent 
popular government. In the same way a certain school 
of British diplomats note that Lenin is ready to alienate 
Russian territory in the belief he can win it back or 
at least control it by instigating revolutions. These 
financiers and diplomatists have another view of future 
probabilities. In the meanwhile they are ready to take 
advantage, for the purposes of the British Empire, of 
Lenin's willingness to sign away Russia's territory, 
natural wealth, and industries. These are certainly 
among the leading motives of British opinion on Russia 
and so undoubtedly influence British policy if, indeed, 
they do not dominate it. 


America neither hopes to gain anything at the cost 
of the Russian people, nor ha> tins nation anything to 
fear at home or abroad from the band of insane fanatics 
momentarily in control of that great country. We are 
concerned with Bolshevism as a world evil, \v 
operates in varying decrees in many countries. Hut we 
regard it neither as an indomitable power whieh we are 
forced to recognize and com- ilia to, nor as a n 
with which honorable governments ean afford to co- 
operate as the beneficiaries of its unparalleled e rimes 
against the Ku^ian people. 

The danger that the pro-Soviet agitation may be 
revived is not past. Krassin has boldly stated that the 
British trade agreement was obtained not by any funda- 
mental concessions of communism to capitalism but by 
propaganda, and he plans to station himself now in 
Canada, whence he says he hopes to return "via New 
York." Provided only he will come "as an individi. 
certain Senators say he will be welcome. But he eau 
operate quite elTeetively from Canada. 

What makes the 8 mpaign in America d: 

ous to some extent is the curious espousal of the Soviet 
cause by numerous so-called "liberals" and by : 
eal minority grouped in various camps. 

II will look hack upon this support of Sm 

with a smile, a sardonic. grin at the pretenders of 

Liberalism, when it is tnw to its n 
extension of democratic pi lavement of 

the opportunities in democracy. It is the implacable 
foe of autocracy and of all dictatorial pn The 

diseased state of mind that calls itself liberalism in 


America at the moment is guilty of betraying democracy 
in the most portentous situation of our time. It sneers 
at the democracy of America, turns up a supercilious 
nose at the great American labor movement, and rushes 
with abnormal appetite into the social and moral violence 
of Moscow. 

Perhaps some of this phenomenon is due to the fact 
that the so-called liberals of America have fallen victim 
to a mania for mysticism and Moscow is the small end 
of the cornucopia from which is emitted the great haze 
the great narcotic supply of all the conglomeration of 
mental morphia addicts. 

What this condition makes necessary is that Americans 
must distinguish between the true liberals and the false 
liberals, the real liberalism and the pretense of liberalism. 

The pretending liberalism is for Sovietism in Russia 
and for American recognition of that reversion to bar- 
baric type. 

If, as we are told, all that now is required by the 
Soviets is a de facto recognition, let there be no mis- 
apprehension as to what that means. That means recog- 
nition to the extent that we declare the Soviet Govern- 
ment to be the government in fact the government that 
is. An official Soviet wireless on September 10 said: 

The only thing which the Russian Government de- 
mands is that de facto relations be resumed, as it is 
obvious that otherwise trade relations are impossible; 
therefore such resumption of de facto relations is in- 
separable from trade relations. 

Plain notice, this, to the world that Russia will pay 


in trado for recognition. It is an sup- 

posedly gold-hungry Americans. 

What the Soviets hope would follow such de facto 
"-Tuition and free resumption of trade would be un- 
limited opportunity to attempt corruption of the world 
by propaganda. 

The Tinted States has lifted all trade bans. This 
government interposes no legal ban-in- to trade wiili 
Soviet Russia. A treasury order signed on December 
20 took down the last barrier, permitting exportation 
of gold to Russia and allowing dealings in exchange. 

This is surely enough. If it is too much may be a 
fair subject for discussion. Hut we have gone that far. 
Surely, democratic America will take no further 
in compromise with an autocracy the like of which tho 
world has never seen. 

Information about Russia continues to accnmu 
Only those who are determined not to be informed can 
remain uninformed. Upon encountering a questioning 
opponent the exponents of Sovietism say that we do not 
know what are the conditions in K'u^ia and advise us 
to "wait until we can get the truth." 

This is subterfuge that dec. i\. > only the unthinking. 
We do know the great, main truth about Kusjsia. and 
we do have fairly accurate in format ion as to the material 
Conditions of the people. It is perhaps no fault of the 
rigid control of visitors' permits exercised by the Soviets 
that numerous persons have tfone into Kussia as fervent 
Soviet advocates only to come out running, hands over 
their fa> iiritives from a scourge. That ardent 

Socialist H. G. Wells found conditions so terrible that 
for a defense of the he had to resort to the 


plea that no other government could stand and that if 
the Soviets fell we should have a nation of Asiatic hordes 
running stark wild over the country. 

The all important thing that Americans know about 
Russia is that in every sense the Soviet Government and 
the philosophy back of it are absolute in their denial 
and repudiation of democracy. This is the principle 
that has been at stake in all the history of the contest 
between freedom and slavery, self-government and auto- 
cratic government, light and darkness. This was the 
issue in the struggle against Prussianism. It was the 
issue when the first man, in answer to a spark that had 
been lighted in his soul, struck the first blow against 
imperial rule. It is the issue over which the agonies 
of the world have rolled. It is an issue on which Ameri- 
cans can not be deceived and from which they will not 
be budged. 


THE friendship of American Labor for the Russian 
people has been invariable stradfast, and unqualified. 
In a series of cablegrams the American \-\ deration of 
Labor and its President have expressed at length their 
ardent interest in the permanent welfare of Ku 
labor and of the Russian people generally. This meant 
Uncompromising hostility to Czarism and it means un- 
compromising repudiation of Soviet ism. These cable- 
grams prove that American labor understands the ele- 
ments of the Russian situation and takes its stand 1. 
and soul with Russian labor and the Russian people. 


Trngton April 2, 1917. 

Tstr-heid/e [President of the ''Soviet'*] 

Representative, of working people of Russia. A 

this message to the men of labor of J\ 

greeting. The newly established lib-rtr of 

aw;: nerica's workers. We 

rejoice at the intelligence, courage and the eonvi 

of a people who even while eoneent ratine :Vort 

upon d'-fni^' against foiviirn aggression h. 

their own institutions upon prim 
and lint it is impossible to achieve the 

state immediately. When the right foundation has been 



established, the masses can daily utilize opportunities 
for progress, more complete justice, and greater lil 
Freedom is achieved in meeting the problems of life aiid 
work. It cannot be established by revolution only it is 
the product of evolution. Even in the Republic of 
United States of America the highest ideals of freedom 
are incomplete but we have the will and the opportu- 
nity. In the name of America's workers whose watch- 
words are Justice Freedom and Humanity we plead that 
Russia's workers and masses shall maintain what you 
have already achieved and practically and rationally 
solve the problems of today and safeguard the future 
from the reactionary forces who would gladly take ad- 
vantage of your lack of unity to reestablish the old 
regime of royalty reaction tyranny and injustice. Our 
best wishes are with Russia in her new opportunity. 


American Federation of Labor. 


Washington, D. C., 

April 23, 1917. 


Executive Council American Federation of Labor in 
regular session here as representatives of the labor move- 
ment of America send fraternal greetings to you and 
through you to all who have aided in establishing liberty 
in Russia. We know that liberty means opportunity for 
the masses especially the workers. The best thought, 
hopes and support of America's workers are with your 
efforts to form a government that shall insure the per- 
petuity of freedom and protect your rights and new 
found liberty against the insidious forces and agent 
reaction and despotism. May we not urge you to build 


practically and constructively. Our heartfelt sympathy 
ith you in the great opportunity and work that lie 

before you. 


\ R. A i 

IniiN- B. LEN 

Executive Council 
American Federation of Labor 


Washington. May fi. 1017. 
Workmen's and Soldiers' Council [Soviet] of Dcpu 

IVtrograd, Kussia. 

The gravest crisis in the world's history is now hang- 
in tin- halance. and tin- OOOIW whicli Kussia will 
pursue may have a determining inllueixv \\hetlier 
democracy or autocracy shall prevail. That <1> 
and freedom will finally j>revail there can he no dmiht 
in the minds of in.-n who know, hut the cost, the time 
and the sacrifices which would ei la-k of 

united action may be appalling. It is to avoid this that 
I address you. 

In view of the grave crisis through which tl 

MIT w<- assure you 11 

absolutely upon the whole hearted support and Oft 
ntion of the D people in ,iust 

our common enemy. Kaiserism. hi the fulfillment of 
that cause the present American Government has the 


support of 99 per cent, of the American people, including 
the working class both of the cities and of the agricul- 
tural sections. 

In free America, as in free Russia, the agitators for 
a peace favorable to Prussian militarism have been 
allowed to express their opinions so that the conscious 
and unconscious tools of the Kaiser appear more influ- 
ential than they really are. You should realize the truth 
of the situation. There are but few in America willing 
to allow Kaiserism and its allies to continue their rule 
over those non-German peoples who wish to be free from 
their domination. Should we not protest against the 
pro-Kaiser Socialist interpretation of the demand for no 
annexation, namely, that all oppressed non-German 
peoples shall be compelled to remain under the domina- 
tion of Prussia and her lackeys Austria and Turkey? 
Should we not rather accept the better interpretation 
that there must be no forcible annexations, but that 
every people must be free to choose any allegiance it 
desires, as demanded by the Council of Workmen's and 
Soldiers' Deputies? 

Like yourselves, we are opposed to all punitive ana 
improper indemnities. We denounce the onerous puni- 
tive indemnities already imposed by the Kaiser upon the 
people of Serbia, Belgium and Poland. 

America's workers share the view of the Council of 
Workmen's and Soldiers' Deputies that the only way 
in which the German people can bring the war to an 
early end is by imitating the glorious example of the 
Russian people, compelling the abdication of the Hohen- 
zollerns and the Hapsburgs, and driving the tyrannous 
nobility, bureaucracy and the military caste from power. 

Let the German Socialists attend to this, and cease 
their false pretenses and underground plotting to bring 
about an abortive peace in the interest of Kaiserism and 
the ruling class. Let them cease calling pretended "in- 
ternational" conferences at the instigation or connivance 
of the Kaiser. Let them cease their intrigues to cajole 


the Russian and American working people to interpret 
demand, "no annexations, no indemnities," in a 
way to leave undiininished the prestige and the power 
of the (Jrrnian military ca 

Now that Russian autocracy is overthrown, neither 
the American ^oyernment nor tin- American peopl, 

.end that the wisdom and experi- 'liivsia in 

the coming constitutional assembly will adopt any I 
of government other than the one best suited to your 
needs. We feel confident that no message, no individual 
emissary and no commission has been sent, or will be 
sent, with authority to offer any advice whatever to 
Russia as to the conduct of her internal affaii 
commission that may be sent will help Russia in any 
way that she desires to combat Kaiserism whercv. 

ta or may manifest itself. 

Word has reached us that t >rts of an American 

purpose and of American opinions contrary to the above 
statement have gained some circulation in Russia. We 
denounce these reports as the criminal work of d 
pro-Kaiser propagandists circulated with the inte? 
deceive and to arouse hostile feelings between ihe two 
great democracies of tin- world. The KY <>p]< 

should know that these activities are only addil: 
mar MS of the "dark forces" with which Ri. 

has been only too familial- in the unhappy ; 

The American Government, the American peopl 
rican labor movement are whole-heartedly with tin* 
an workers, the Russian masses, in the trrrat effort, 
to maintain the freedom you 1 idy aehi. 

'rave problems y-t het'oiv you. \V, 
appeal to you to make common cause with us to }1 b 
all forms of autocracy and ! ; >lish 

and maintain for general unborn the priceless 

treasures of justice, freedom, democracy and humanity. 
American Federation of Labor, 

SAMUEL GOMPER*, President. 




September 13, 1917. 

Kerensky Premier Russian Revolutionary Government 
Petrograd Russia 

At a tremendously important national conference 
three days of representatives of labor and socialist 
Minneapolis Minnesota September fifth sixth seventh 
called to solidify working class and all people of United 
States among other declarations the following was 
adopted with great enthusiasm and without a dissent- 
ing voice or vote. We address ourselves to the: 

"Sons of liberty in all lands are now watching with 
heavy hearts the desperate contest of their brothers in 
spirit and arms now battling on the plains of Russia. 
Born amidst the thunders of the greatest war of all 
times, the great Russian democracy brought to all lovers 
of man's freedom a new hope and inspiration. Assailed 
on all sides by a terrible and insidious foe, now spread- 
ing death and devastation in its ranks and now masquer- 
ading as a friend and penetrating, under the guise of a 
revolutionist into the very councils of the revolution, 
the Russian democracy is now passing through the most 
critical time in its struggle for existence. 

The American Alliance for Labor and Democracy 
sends greetings to the fighters for liberty in Russia as 
brothers in the same cause. The aims of the Russian 
democracy are our aims; its victory is our victory and 
its defeat is our defeat; and even the traitors that assail 
the Russian democracy likewise assail us. In the con- 
flict for the liberty of Russia, the liberty of America is 
likewise at stake. Every Russian soldier who faces un- 
flinchingly the enemy in the field is striking a blow for 
the liberty of America. 

The American Alliance for Labor and Democracy, 
representing every loyal thought of American Labor and 


American Socialism, pledges and dedicates the Amor 
working class to the support and service of the Ru- 
democracy. It calls upon the working people an.l 
Socialists of America and also upon the goven 
the United S and resour< 

their command to the ail of tin Russian democracy." 


President, American Federation of La' 
President, American Alliance for Labor and Democracy. 


Washington March 12 1918. 
All Russian Soviet, Moscow. 

We address you in the name of world liberty. We 
assure you that the people of the United States arc 
pained by every blow at Russian freedom, as they would 
be by a blow at their own. The American people d 
to lie of service to the Russian people in their stru. 
to safeguard freedom and realize its opportunities. We 

re to be informed as to how we can help. \\ 
for a great organi/.ed movement of workm-/ who 

are devoted to the cause of freedom and the idea! 
democracy. We assure you also that the whole American 
nation ardently d be helpful to Russia and awaits 

with eag' i indication from Russia as to how help 

most effectively be extended. To all those who 
strive f.r t'nedom we say, Courage. .lustier must 
'triumph if all free people stand united against autocracy. 
We await your sugp< 

American Alliance f" and Democracy. 


This cablegram was sent 1 fore the full news of the 
overthrow of the Constitutional Assembly had rea* 


No better test can be found of any social sysn-m than 
its administration of justice. When that is utterly dis- 
orderly and without semblance of equity, the whole 
regime, we may be certain, is chaotic to the core. 

In an article in the Journal of the American Bar Asso- 
ciation, Judge Fisher writes that agents of the Soviet's 
supreme tribunal may combine in one person arresting 
officer, prosecutor, judge and executioner. He found 
secret courts engrossed in litigation to recover bribes 
promised by tradesmen but not paid. A former Moscow 
lawyer justified the system of wholesale bribery, he said, 
on the ground that it had become impossible to live at 
all without it. Judge Fisher found widespread trading 
despite the abolition of private property. Such illegal 
transactions were so general that they only could have 
been carried on with the connivance of corrupted officials. 

Judges, the writer of the article found, were snl>j< < -t 
to no restraint but the "Revolutionary conscience." An 
effort was made to induce all workmen to act in that 
capacity, and in Petrograd there already had been more 
than 40,000 judges though there were only 40,000 

Judges even in small villages had absolute power to 
carry out their decrees and the Cheresvechaika "the 
All-Russian Extraordinary Commission for the Suppres- 
sion of Counter Revolution, Speculation and Sabotage" 
continues to employ capital punishment in parts of 
Russia which were declared to be under military rule, 



although the death penalty was abolished in 1 
Offenders ii deaths were 

transferred to a military district ! 

Judge Fisher says that the accused are n<>; 
to face their judges and are n>t '"Id tin- natm 
charge nor given a d - \plam. Many have 

executed without even knowing that they had been con- 
victed. The tribunal "has no regard for the B 
any other departnu-nts nf the State." It Mble 

to no one, and even the communist <>fti 
is provision for appeal from the local or depart in. 
Cheresveehaika to the All-Russian, but ordinarily the 
defendant has been executed b -t'.in- the aip<al is 
fected. Controlled by no law the tribunals, it is ^ ;) id. 
openly ns their power to avenge the wrongs attributed 
to old-time ( -iii'inies. 

Judge Fisher, who is Chairman of tin Kusxian and 
Ukrainian Committee of the .Joint Distribution Commit- 
tee, ends with a plea for the innocent 

(Summari/ed by the New York Tinn 




THE Government of Georgia has issued from Constan- 
tinople an appeal to all Socialist Parties and Labor 
organizations "in the name of the Georgian people, 
whose liberty and independence has just been destroyed 
by the armies of the Russian Bolsheviks." The appeal 
describes how the Moscow Government have striven to 
extend their power over Georgia by "sovietixing" the 
country through insurrections organized by its subsidized 
agents. These efforts being unsuccessful, others were 
tried, and military operations resorted to. 

On November 28, 1920, Trotzky, in a long sport. 
before the Commissars of the Communist Party as- 
sembled at Moscow, pronounced the death sentence on 
the Republic of Georgia. " Armenia being soviet! zed. it 
is now the turn of Georgia," he said. "It will be suf- 
ficient to tighten our hold in order to connect Baku with 

Bolshevist troops were massed at the frontiers despite 
protests of the Georgian Government. After refusing to 
discuss matters the Moscow Government launched the 
attack in the middle of February. The attack on Tit! is 
was at first repulsed. On February 21 a radio telegram 



was despatched by the President of the (Jroivinn 
public requesting Tchitcherinc to "formulate tin- oh;- 
of the war you are conducting against D& Perhaps we 
can come to an understanding without l)ln. 
Tchitcherine did not reply. Similar messages to Tro* 
and Lenin shared the samo f;r 

Finally, Georgia was surrounded by Bolshe\ 
aided by those of the Turks at Angora. "The tread 
of the Angora Government deprived us f tin 1 last pos- 
sibility of continuing tho struggle on the line at Rion. 
Our troops, surrounded on two sides by tho armies of 
two great military powers Soviet Russia and Turkey 
were condemned to perish without the smallest hop 
success. On March 17 the Georgian Government ! 
to cease fighting, and to disband the army. This 
laid open the road to Batum to the Bolsheviks. 
March 18 the Government left Batum. and a few hours 
later the Bolshevist troops entered the town." 

The appeal concludes : 

The Georgian people has the ri^ht to rely in this 
struggle on the fraternal support of the international 
proletariat. And it is to you, comrades, that \ve 
for this support! You have always condemned \va- 

;uest. Are the authors of this war against (J.'or^ia 
less culpable because they hide their imperialistic- char- 
acteristics under the flag of Communism? 

We ask you to stigmatize the crime of the invaders 
nf HUT country, and the hypocrisy of those who h;i\< 
MUM to bayonets to wipe out the influence of lOOfe] 
ideas and to implant their own ideas. 

Raise your voices, oomrad* I, and demand from tho 
Government of Moscow that it withdraws its armies from 
Georgia; that it gives the Georgian people tho right to 


govern themselves, and to organize their life and their 
State according to their own wishes. 

NOE JORDANIA, President of the Govern- 
ernment of Georgia, the Central Commit tr, 
of the Social-Democratic Party of Georgia, 
and the Soviet of the Workmen of Tiflis. 

NICHOLAS TCHEIDZE, President of the 
Constituent Assembly, member of the C. C. 
of the Social-Democratic Party. 

Foreign Affairs, member of the C. C. of the 
Social-Democratic Party. 

NOE RAMISHVILI, Minister of the Interior, 
member of the C. C. of the Social-Dejnocratic 

The whole Labor and Socialist press of Europe, both 
the moderates of the Right Wing and the orthodox 
Marxists and revolutionists of the Center, with few ex- 
ceptions, has denounced this conquest as an example 
of the crudest imperialism. For example, Die Freiheit 
of Berlin, organ of the Independent Socialists, condemns 
the Soviet action against Georgia as "a brutal imperial- 
istic coup d' etat" (Die Freiheit, April 28th, 1921.) 


EXTRACTS from his Speech on the Tax in Kind before 
the Congress of the Russian Communist Party, March 15, 
1921. (Reproduced by Sovitt Itiusia, May 15, 1921.) 

In Russia the induct Hal workers arc in the minority 
and the small farnu rs overwhelmingly in 1h< mnj< 
The social revolution in such a country may meet with 
complete success only under two conditions: 

1. It must he supported hy the social revolution in one 
or more of the advanced count r > -. .K [i<m knmr, much 
has been accomplished in this respect in recent days, as 
compared with the past f but this condition is still far 
from fulfillment. 

2. There must bo an understanding between the pro- 
letariat, which is the executor of the dictatorship and 
holds the state power in its hands, and the majority of 
the population. 

After thus admitting the dictatorship and reiterating 
his faith in a steadily approaching world revolution, 
Lenin continued : 

The small peasant has aims that are not the same as 

those of the worker. We kmnr thai <>nhj an understand- 

"iV/i the peasantry run sun the sci<il r<rluti<>n 

until the revolution is ready to break out in oth<r 




Now what is the nature of the proposed undf r 
ing? The Communist chief first shows that there is to 
be no fundamental economic concession, no restoration 
either of private property in land or of free trade in 
agricultural products: 

We must say [to the peasants] : if you want to go 
backward, if you want to restore private property and 
"bring about free trade, this will mean that you are 
handed over irrecoverably to the power of the landed 
proprietors and capitalists. 

The one great argument to produce an "understand- 
ing" is that there is no choice for the peasant except 
Bolshevism or Czarism. The very existence of agrarian 
democracies is to be kept from him and, since his expe- 
rience has been limited to Czarism and Bolshevism (ex- 
cept a few months of the Kerensky regime) there is 
some hope of success. On this point Lenin says : 

A peasant who has even a modicum of class conscious- 
ness cannot help understanding that we represent as a 
government the working classes, those working classes 
with whom the toiling peasant can agree (and the peas- 
ants represent nine-tenths of our population). A class- 
conscious peasant understands very well that every turn 
for the worse means a return to the old Tsarist Govern- 

Lenin understands that the peasants cannot be con- 
verted to Bolshevism at least for decades and genera- 
tions, though he hopes that the process will be achieved 
within a century with the aid of certain illusory < 
nomic and material benefits, such as electrification (!) of 


:a. In the meanwhile they are to be governed with- 
out their consent by "the proletariat," or Communist 
Party. He says: 

The transformation of the entire psychology of the 
pen ts is a labor that will re-quire gem-rations. 

This question of stabilizing the ideology of the small 
peasants can be solved only on a material la 
application of tractors and machinery in agrieultup 
a large scale, the electrification of the whole emintry, 
would immediately produce a transformation of 
thought of the small peasants. And when I speak of 
generations, remember that generations do not in 
sarily mean centuries. You know very well that UK- 
obtaining of tractors and machinery and the carrying 
out of the electrification of a gigantic country are a 
matter of decades. Objectively considered, that i- 
state of things . . . 

Our problem in this Congress is to formulate the main 
lines of the question. Our party is a governii 
and the decision that the party congress adopts will be 
binding for the whole Republic. 

What now are the material concessions which are to 
"satisfy" the agriculturists with a government over 
which they have no control! Here is Lenin 's project : 

If we go carefully into this question wo must at once 
come to the conclusion that the small peasants can be 

tied in two ways: in the first plape, by a certain 
freedom of exchange of commodities, a certain freedom 
for the smatt peasants, <md t in the second place, we must 
get commodities and product*; for what would 1< tin- 
use of a freedom to exchange commodities, if there are 

'mmodities to exchange! 
If we were in a position to obtain cvrn n small quan- 

of commodities and t l -hoi i Id take possession 


of these commodities, the proletariat now holding po- 
litical power would receive, in addition to that political 
power, the economic power also. 

We cannot extricate ourselves from this difficulty 
without resorting to freedom of local exchange of com- 
modities. If this exchange of commodities gives to the 
state a certain minimum quantity of grain, sufficiei 
satisfy the needs of the cities, of the factories, and of 
industry, this exchange of commodities will contribute 
to soUdify and strengthen the political and national 
power of the proletariat. 

In a word "local" free trade is to be permitted within 
narrow limits (see Chapter VII) in a manner to increase 
both the political and the economic power of "the pro- 
letariat, " i.e., the Communist Party, over the agricul- 
tural majority. 

Lenin then says: "We shall now be asked how and 
where we are going to get the commodities?" For a 
certain minimum of commodities are essential to "sat- 
isfy" the peasants, just as beads are necessary to extract 
valuables from the savages. The answer to this question 
is simple indeed. The commodities are to be obtained 
at the expense of the foreign and domestic enemy, the 
big and little bourgeoisie, the capitalists and the peas- 
ants. The patrimony of the Russian people or a large 
part of it is to be offered to foreign concessionaires at 
an enormous sacrifice, the argument of the concession- 
aires being that the uncertainty of continued Bolshc 
rule and the vagaries of their methods demand a huge 
reward, while the Bolshevists' calculation is that they 
will be released of the entire debt by world revolution. 
Or, if the world revolt does not materialize the future 
generation (90 per cent of it peasants) will pay. 


Hero is Lenin's answer to his question: 

So long as the revolution has not yet broken out in 
other countries, we must not grudge the hundred 
millions and milliards, which our boundless resources 
and our rich raw materials afford us, as a compensa 
for the trade that the advanced capitalist count ris may 
give us. We shall later recover all this with advantage 
to ourselves. 

There is no thought either for the future Russia or 
for its population. The entire object which may be 

achieved if other nations lend themselves to this ma- 
neuver is to maintain the dictatorship of the Commu- 
ni>t Party, which Lenin insists upon calling the dictator- 
ship of the proletariat. As he himself sums up his 


The situation is now this: either we must economically 
satisfy the medium peasants and consent to a fn 
commodity exchange, or it will he impossible to maintain 
the power of the proletariat in Russia, in view of the 
slowing down of the international revolution. (Our 



THE British-Soviet Trade Treaty was signed in March, 
1921, after nine months of intensive negotiations. In 
May the British courts decided that this treaty amounted 
to a de facto recognition of the Soviet Government. But 
actual trading on any considerable scale depends not 
upon paper documents but upon the granting of huge 
credits. Without such credits the trade treaty will have 
little if any economic results. The official British White 
Paper on Russia, issued in that same month, shows that 
there are no grounds whatever upon which any intelli- 
gent investor would provide such funds. 

When the British Government first began to consider 
the trade treaty it appointed a special committee of 
prominent business men to collect data on the subject. 
Selected in May, 1920, this committee reported in Feb- 
ruary, 1921, and a summary of its findings is now pub- 

Its main conclusions may be stated as follows : 

a. There can be no important Russian exports for a 
considerable time to come. 

6. There can be no economic regeneration of Russia 
at all without foreign capitalist aid, i.e., credits. 

c. It is highly questionable if there can be any regen- 


on of Russia oven gradually and with capitalist aid 
as long as Bolslii'vi 'Utilities. 

As regards resumption of trade between Russia and 
other countries the report says: 

We are convinced that for the economic equilibrium 
of the world the exports from Russia an- must imp<rrtant 
factors to the European market. We do not, hw 
(insider that Russia will he in a position to make its 
contribution toward the relief of Europe for a consider- 
ahle time to come. There can be no question of the 
export of cereals in the immediate futuiv. 

It is our conviction that there is no possihil 
economic regeneration of Russia in the near future with- 
out the assistance of capitalist countries. Our conclu- 
sions with regard to the rendering of suvh assistance are 
guided by the following considerations: 

1. That the destruction of capitalism by violen 
only in Russia, but in other countries, is the deli!" 
aim and purpose of the Russian Communist Party, which 
forms the Government of Soviet Russia at tin 


2. That, to this end, the Third or Communist Ii 
natiniiale ha- .iblished at M< ad m believe 
this has been don.- under the auspices of the Soviet Gov- 

and with its financial and material support. 
That the Russian Communist Party and the Third 
'nationale are actively endeavoring to the 

ruction by \ apifrilism in countries to 

which the Soviet Government has addressed overtures for 

4. That the Soviet Government, in destroying capital- 

ing about a comj 
collapse of industry in that country. 

5. That, in face of this collap-e. the Sovi 

ment invites capitalists to help to restore Russian in- 


6. That the Soviet Government has carried on, up to 
the present time, an active and widespread int-ni:itional 
propaganda, and that had that propaganda ad 
object, international capital, to which the Soviet Govern- 
ment now turns for aid in restoring economic prosperity 
to Russia, would have disappeared. 

7. That the credit and capital required for Russia's 
urgent needs are large; that no Government can give 
this credit and capital on the scale required, and that 
such aid can only be furnished by individual capitalists 
or financial groups who are willing to provide the neces- 
sary supplies in money or goods. 

8. That it is inconceivable that the credit and capital 
required in Russia should be provided by foreign capi- 
talists as long as the destruction of capitalism and the 
violent overthrow of so-called bourgeois Governments 
remain the main object of the Russian Government, or 
of the political forces by which it is controlled. 

9. That if the Soviet Government renounce and 
abstain from propaganda directed to the destruction of 
capitalism and the established order in other countries, 
it still remains to be seen how far in the near future 
they will be able to arrest the process of economic dis- 
integration and to lay a foundation upon which it will 
be possible for Russian industry and agriculture once 
more to develop and expand. 

The report specifies certain changes in home and 
foreign policy that are indispensable before there can 
be any trade: "the complete renunciation of the Third 
Internationale/' safety of foreign business men in Rus- 
sia, '-'the restoration of rail and river transport," "the 
co-operation of the peasantry," and "the settlement of 
the agrarian question." 

The White Paper makes it more than doubtful, how- 
ever, whether the Bolshevist regime could arrest "the 


process of economic disintegration" even if foreign capi- 
talists encouraged ai rtrd by tlueir governments 
should come to its aid. One of its conclusions 

That the state of admin istr.v <> and 

corruption into which the departments ni' the S 
Government have fallen militates against the proper 
trilmtion of available supplies among the population and 
must he remedied if tin- Russian worker is 1o he restored 
to the standard of health and strength necessary to re- 
establish the diminished productivity of his labor. 

On the main industrial policy of the Soviets, the 
nationalization of the leading industries which, together 
with the nationalization of import and export trade, 
remains unaltered after the "reforms" of March (1921) 
the British report says: 

The Soviet government, in a situation calling for the 
exercise of the utmost discrimination and care, car 
out the policy of nationalization in haste, without taking 
account of the disorder already prevailing in Russia, of 
the complex structure of modern industry, of tin 
of expert technical assistance, and of tin- disabilities re- 
sulting from the lack of knowledge and experience under 
which they themselves labored. 

The document further declares that, as a result of this 
nationali/.ation, "the power of officialdom in Russia has 
developed on a scale to which there is no parallel, ami 
represents an attempt to control completely the condi- 
tions of work and leisun*, of food and drink, of educa- 
tion and aimiN-ment. of t ravel, and even of the home life 
of every individual in a nation whose population 
now exceeds 120,000,000." The report adds that r 


evidence shows that the tendency toward State control 
is increasing rather than diminishing. 

"It would appear," says the report, in summing up 
the persecution of labor and of the peasantry, "that th> 
Soviet Government must decide whether they are going 
to maintain a policy of political repression at home and 
aggressive Bolshevist propaganda abroad, which will in- 
evitably, whatever international treaties they may make, 
lead in practice to a continuance of their present eco- 
nomic isolation, or whether they will accept and hon- 
estly carry out the fundamental condition which can 
alone obtain for them the outside aid they so urgently 

"If they decide to maintain the campaign for the 
violent destruction of capitalism in other countries, and 
the policy of ruthless repression which makes it impos- 
sible for foreigners to live and to do business in Russia, 
then Russia will of necessity be left to her own resources. 
Then will the future show whether or not the combined 
effect upon the worker of persuasion as to the merits 
of communism, and of persuasion by payment for work 
done with the shadow of imprisonment and the bayonet 
ever present y can restore the old productive power of 
Russia within the short time available for the experi- 

"If it does not Trotzky himself admits that the Rus- 
sian Socialist Society is on its way to ruin, however it 
may twist and turn." 

Bolshevism or Sovietism consists in such nationaliza- 
tion and State control and in the rule of a minority by 
repression the only way a minority can rule. The 
moment this control is abandoned and the peasants and 


workmen arc freed and repression is discontinued 
shevism will have ceased 1.. he. Hut till the evidence 
shows that tin- B .rty and its 

BT one moment c< : either the cessation 

of repression, or tho abandonment of their dictatorship. 

It must be noted that the parts of the Hri: 
so far published in America do not deal "with weighty 
political questions siidi as the commercial inlctm' 
the Soviets or the probability that the succeeding 
eminent will repudiate their transactions. Nor do 
touch upon certain vital economic factors. Th> 
propose to pay for the needed imports chiefly by 

-since they have so little to export. Lomov, the 
head of the confessions division of the Soviet govern- 
ment, declares- that the Holslievists are i y to 
tfrant concessions not only in forests and mines hut in 
oil and in the iron and steel industry. ll< < 
however, that a serious problem is created by the higher 
wages the concessionaries would pay their skilled labor 
when compared with Russian wa^cs, by the diflidilt 

iiitf it, by the Soviet labor laws, 
missions surest another whole nest of addit: 

IM to Hi.' ation of Kussia by C6l :>ital 

and t'oreiirn trade. These are doubtless amonx r tin 

why as Loniov also admits not one concession of 
importaii' d by for- 

The White Paper. ts interesting condusi. 

to the probable practical out- tent 

into causes. Miple. the antagonism and 

country is one of the most frightful of the existing 
ditions. Aa to the 


That having due regard to the causes of economic dis- 
organization antecedent to the rise of the 1 
power, the attempts of the Bolsheviks to reuli/e tin- class 
war in the towns by a precipitate nsuionali/atiou of 
industry and in the villages by the eMablishment >;' 
dictatorship of the village poor w rineipal con- 

tributory causes of the gradual separation of town from 

The practical efforts of Bolshevism up to the pi 
time, so far as they affect production, have b< < -n u, dis- 
astrous failure. The magnitude of the industrial col- 
lapse in Russia and the consequent cessation of < 
of products between town and country are the factors 
that have forced themselves particularly on our atten- 
tion. We know of no similar instance of a collapse so 
complete, so sudden and so far-reaching, although a 
similar tendency is to be observed in Central Europe, 
and more especially in those countries which formerly 
composed the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Want < \ 
jn Paris during the revolutionary period, but it was 
submitted to for the sake of the political liberty sought 
by the people, and there was no general economic 
debacle such as has occurred in Russia. 

The White Paper also points out that the financial 
policy of the Soviets is leading rapidly to inevitable 
bankruptcy. In 1918 and 1919 expenditure \s;us three 
and two and one-half times income. In 1920 expendi- 
ture was seven and one-half times income. The report 
continues : 

In spite therefore of wholesale confiscation of prop- 
erty and repudiation of debt the three years of Soviet 
rule have resulted in a deficit of enormous si/.e and 
rapidly increasing magnitude. These deficits are being 
met by issues of paper which, month by month 
of less value. That the present state of things cannot 
continue is certain. 


That is, wholesale confiscation and debt repudiation 
were but a drop in the bucket in view of the mad ; 

. finance. 

It might he supposed that this pep last, would 

be enough to satisfy the pseudo-liU -nil pro-Bolshevists 
as to the character of the Soviets. What is our ;u 
ment to find it also being interpreted as a pro-S< 
document ! The same leading Democratic n 
one of the chief supporters of President Wilson in this 
country, already quoted in Chapter I, declares thai 
White Paper shows that Lenin and Trot/.k;. been 

doing their utmost since they were freed of //< 
of invasion, 'to establish a system of individual control 
in industry in place of the collective system which has 
proved a failure.' to repair locomotives and rolli 
to revive industry and avoid famine by conscripting 
labor, to end bureaucratic control in local nffan 
encourage trade with other nations. Tl not 

succeeded even passably in any of these undcrtak; 
but it is plain that they have endeavored In <///*/// n 

irtive programme in the face of disorganixaiion and 
disorder for which modern history has no parallel. 

"Whether disorganization and disorder would have 
struck so deep in Russia after the war wiih ami oth<-r 
Government in power it is too /<//< HUH- /<> decide. I 
to-day some of the countries of Central Knnp- arc <>nty 
a little better off than l\ ussia; if //</ hwl l> n 0&j 
to endure an AUied blockade tiny rni<iht hurt- been no 
nearer recovery in //>;.'/ thun Ihtir )i(ihl>r t<> / 

An unparalleled inversion of the facts. "Individual 
Control" by Soviet bureaucrats is the control to which 
the White Paper refers, and this was accomplish. 


year or two ago. Lenin and Trotzky have not done their 

"utmost" because they are still working first, last, and 
all the time for Bolshevism and Communism as the 
report demonstrates. It also .shows that the conditions 
in Eastern Europe are not "only a little better," and 
that the blockade can not be held as the sole or chief 
cause of Russia's plight. 

A leading Republican organ speaks of the new trad- 
ing conditions established in March, 1921, as permitting 
"the factory owners" (!) to begin making things they 
believed could be traded to the Soviets for food. This 
also betrays amazing ignorance. Factory owners in 
Soviet Russia! The factories are all (except petty work- 
shops) owned by the Soviets. This is the very essence 
of Bolshevism. The real conditions introduced by the 
March decree permitting restricted and local trade are 
portrayed in a Washington dispatch to the New York 
Times (May 28) based on information from Soviet 
sources : 

The Moscow Soviet has issued licenses to trade to the 
following: Bars in the theaters, tea houses, restaurant^, 
gastronomic shops, dairy shops, butchers, ^n m ^r 
and owners of kiosks. Lately many artisans' work 
have been opened, hatters, shoemakers, etc.; big indus- 
tries, however, are at a standstill, and the genera: 
nomic life reminds one rather of the Middle Ages. 

The only big or Sovietized industries "prospering" 
are those engaged in the manufacture of arms. 


Agrarian Revolt, 126 

Agriculturists (Peasants), 11, 14, 15, 29, 33, 41, 45,68,79, 104- 

Alpine, 230 
America : 

(1) and the Soviets, 1-19, 26, 156, 157, 207/208, 224- 


(2) Bolshevist Press on, 22, 23, 24, 25 

(3) Gorapers-Hughes Correspondence, 212-221 

(4) Lenin on, 22, 149, 208, 209 

(5) American Press on Soviet Reforms, 10, 11, 14-16, 120, 

153, 250-253 

(6) Trotzky on> 150 

American Bar Association, Journal of, 235 

American Communist (Bolshevist) Party, 24, 185 

American Federation of Labor, 1, 7, 25, 165, 170, 181, 185, 228- 


American Socialist Party, 18, 19 
American Socialists, Loyal, 230, 231 
Amsterdam International, see International Federation of Trade 


Australia, 174 
Armenia, 190, 191 
Art, 133 

Assassination, see Terrorism. 
Asia, 156, 157 
Autocracy, Industrial and Political, 78, see also Dictators and 

Avanti, 188 


256 INDEX 

Ballod, 189, 190 

Bartuel, 183 

Bavaria, 143, 149, 150 

Belgium, 186, 231 

Bidegaray, 183 

Blockade, The, 06 

Bondfield, Margaret, 63, 118 

Boni, Albert, 85 

Bonus System, 82, 83, 86 

Bourgeoisie, see Middle Class, Capital, Democracy 

Brailsford, 107 

Brest-Li tovsk Treaty, 207, 211 

British Labor Party, 4, 34, 52, 64-67, 138, 161, 162, 186, 188, 

190, 198, 199, 201, 202, 223 
British Socialists, see British Labor Party 
British White Paper, see White Paper 
Hrnusilloff, 100 
Hukharin, 160 
Bulgaria, 182 
Bureaucracy, 126, 127, 189-191 

Capital, Foreign, see Trade Agitation and Concessions 

Chernov, 53, 64, 68 

Children, 134r-141 

China, 223 

Chinese, 60 

Civil War Advocated, 143, see also Class Struggle 

Class-War, 46, 47, 106, 108 

Code of Labor Laws, see Labor Laws 

Colby, Secretary, 1, 2, 4, 10, 145 

ununlst Labor, 84 
Communist (or Third Intom.itionnlr), 18, 22, 23, 25, 31, 38, 44, 

45, 46, 144, 146, 148, 150-168 
"Communist Manifesto," 132 

INDEX 257 

Communist Party, Russian, 28, 30, 31-48, 67, 73, 85, 90, 91, 

115, 118, 142 
"Compromises" and "Reforms," 6, 14-16, 112-116, 121-124, 


Compulsory Labor, 6, 66, 72-87 
Concessions 170, 175, 182, 192, 203, 206, 226, 227, 243, 245-253, 

see also Trade Agitation 
"Conservative" Bolshevism, 12, 14 
Conscription of Labor, see Compulsory Labor 
Constitutional Assembly, 15, 28, 107 
Cooperatives, 14, 117-120 
Counter-Revolution, see Terrorism 
Cossacks, 59 

Credit, Foreign, see Trade Agitation and Concessions 
Crispien, 18, 158, 188 
Culture, 98, 133, 134-141 

Dalin, 62, 64 

D'Arragona, 160, 182, 183, 188 

Dan, 64 

De Brouckere, 190 

Decrees, Government by, 128, 129 

Democracy, Bolshevism vs., 28-48, 78, 104, 142, 188-190, 


Desertion, Labor, 58, 74, 75, 86, 97 
Dictators, Factory, 77 
Dictatorship of the Proletariat, 7, 10, 19, 28, 30, 33, 37, 38, 

91, 114, 122, 193 
Disciplinary Labor Juries, 129 
Disorganization, Economic, 126 
Dittmann, 18, 189 
Djerzinsky, 68, 98, 99 
Duffy, 230 
Dugoni, 188 

258 INDEX 

Dumoulin, 183, 194 
Duncan, 230 

Economic Coilapee, 125-133, 245-253 
Economic Conference (Soviet), 42, 78 
Education? 26, 107, 143-111 
Egypt, 223 

Elections, 35, 36, 71, 94 
Electrification of Russia, Proposed, 241, 242 
Extraordinary Commission for Fighting Counter-Revolution, 
see Terrorism 

Factory Soviets, 72 

Family, The, see Home 

Farbman, Michael, 10, 112 

Faure, 192 

Finmen, 194 

Fisher, 235, 236 

Food, Requisition of, see Taxation in Kind 

France, 22, 149, 154, 157, 184, 206, 207 

Freedom, see Terrorism 

Freedom of Press, see Free Speech 

Free Speech, 26, 34, 36, 104, 189, 193 

"Free Trade," 14, 43, 113-118, 241-244 

Freiheit, Die, 239 

French Confederation of Labor (C. G. T.), 53, 169, 173, 180, 

183, 191 

French Revolution, 10, 164 

I n-nrh Socialist Party (now Communist), 147, 155, 171, 188 . 
Friss, 108 

Georgia, 143, 190, 191, 237-240 

German Socialists, 18, 63, 154, 172, 186, 188-190, 231, 239 
Germany, 4, 22, 150, 154, 156, 158, 177-182, 184 
Compere, 6, 25, 181, 211-215, 228-236 

INDEX 2.=>o 

Gorky, 130, 131 

Goutor, 100 

Great Britain, 3, 14, 32, 149, 156, 157, 181, 162, 173, 174, 184 

203-205, 206, 208, 209, 223-224, 235-253 (see also Britiib 

Labor Party) 
"Green Annies, "59 
Green, William, 230 
Guest, Haden, 63 

Harding, President, 3, 10 

Hearst Newspapers, 9 

Henderson, Arthur, 21, 170, 186 

Herald, London Daily, 4, 166, 168 

Holland, 186 

Home, War against the, 135, 140 

Home, Sir Robert, 204 

Hostages, 52-55 

Hours of Labor, see Overtime 

Hughes, Secretary, 3, 4> 5, 6,<9, 10, 132, 203, 215-221 

Hungary, 14, 149, 195 

Hungarians, 60 

Huysmans, 186, 190, 191 

Independent Labor Party (British), 161, 162 

India, 184, 223 

Industrial Workers of the World (I.W.W.), 175-182, 185 

Inefficiency, 130, 131, 248 

Intellectuals, 51, 128, 172, 189, 199, 214 

International Federation of Trade Unions, 170, 171, 173, 184, 

185, 190/194-197 
Intervention, 66 
Italy, 4, 149, 150, 154, 206, 210 
Italan Confederation of Labor, 160, 171, 177 
Italian Socialists, 18, 45, 63, 149, 150, 166, 188-190 

260 INDEX 

Japan, 22, 156, 206 
Jugoslavia, 182 
Justice, 235, 236 
Jouhaux, 183, 191, 194 

Kalinin, 70, 115, 116, 126,144 

Kumoneff, 4, 155, 156, 206, 207 

Kaplan, 55 

Kautsky, 169, 190 

Kofali, 92 

Kerensky, 47, 52, 137, 164, 170, 241 

Kliefoth, 221 

Krassin, 94, 167, 198, 203, 204, 205, 208, 210, 224 

Krestinsky, 109 

Kronstadt Rebellion, 208 

Kropotkin, 126, 127 

Labor Army, Red, 77, 79, 85 

Labor Conscription, see Compulsory Labor 

Labor Delegations to Soviet Russia 

"Labor Opposition," 97, 98 

Labor Unions, see Trade Unions 

Lansbury, 4 

Lateis, 50, 55 

Laws, Labor, 72-87 

League of Nations, 142 

l/'iiin (Lenin is quoted umlor noarly all the topics of the present 
volume. Refer to topical titles) 

b-nnon, 230 

Letts, 60 

Libby, F. J., 134, 135 

.rala," Pro-Bolshevist, 14, 19, 120, i:tt. 1 in. n;i. is-j, 199, 
214, 223-227, see also Middle-Classes and Intellectuals 

Liberty, see Terrorism 

Licbknecht, 54 

INDEX 2 r,l 

Lloyd George, 211 
London Daily News, 21, 22 
Longuet, 169 
Losovsky, 104, 177, 182 
Lunacharsky, 137, 138 
Luxemburg, 54 

MacDonald, 186, 190 

Mahon, 230 

Martens, "Ambassador," 7 

Martoff, 55, 87 

Marx, 32, 148, 206 

Massacres, see Terrorism 

McLean, 161 

Menshevists, see Social Democratic Labor Party of Russia 

Men-helm, 53, 183, 192 

Metal Workers Union, Russian, 75, 76 

Middle Glass, Bolshevist Success among, 153, 154 

Militarism, see War 

Militarization of Labor, 75, 79-81, 95 

Minor, O. 6., 201, 202 

"Moderates," Bolshevists, see "Conservatives," Bolshevist 

Morrison, 230 

Nansen, 222 

Nationalization of Import and Export Trade, 248 

Nationalization of Industry, 116-120, 248 

New York World, 16 

Non-partisans, 37, 48 

Norwegian Socialists, 108 

O'Connell, 230 
Ossinsky, 42, 97, 112, 113 
Oudegeest, 194 
Overtime, 76, 83, 86 

262 INDEX 

Paris Commune, 29 

Pacifism, 52 

Paper and Printed Matter, Bolshevist Monopoly of, 26 

Peasants, see Agriculturiste 

Perham, 230 

Pestana, 179, 182 

Press, Freedom of, see Free Speech 

Printers' Union, Russian, 93, 99-103 

Prisons, 68-70 

Propaganda, Bolshevist, 4, 9, 18, 20-27, 136-139, 173, see also 

Trade Agitation 

Political Education Conference, 39, 163 
Purcell, 63 

Radek, 159, 160 

Railway Workers, 50, 94, 95, 98 

Rakovsky, 66, 67 

Rappaport, 192 

Recht, Charts 

Recognition of the Soviets, Agitation for, 1, 2, 203, 265, 225, 

see also Trade Agitation 
Reconstrucfton, see Reforms 
Red Labor Union International (or Council of 

Trade and Industrial Unions), 160-187, 194-197 
Red Terror, see Terrorism 
Reed, John, 161 

-ins, Social, 134-141 
Revolt of Trade Unions, 94-1 as 
Revolutionary Agitation, see World Revolt 
Rois, 193 

Rote Fahne, Die, 158 
Kudzutuk, 129 
Knhlo, Otto, 188 

Russian People, Voice of, 199-201 
Russian Relief, 7, 8, 222 


Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, eee Social Democratic 

Labor Party 

Russian Socialist Revolutionary Party, see Socialist Revolution- 
( ary Party 

Russell, Bertrand, 18, 63, 107, 108 
Rykov, 71, 149 

Sabotage, 51, 52, 55, 58 

Savinkov, 53 

Schliapmkoff, 77, 97 

Schools, see Education 

Science, 133 

Serbia, 2*1 

Serrati, 45, 188 

Shaw, Tom, 18, 63 

Shop Stewards, 177-182 

Slavery, see Compulsory Labor 

Snowden, Philip, 21, 188 

Snowden, Mrs., 18, 63 

Social Democratic Labor party of Russia (Mensheviste), 35, 36, 
52, 53-55, 56, 61-63, 64-67, 71, 137 

Socialist (or Second) Internationale, 19, 31, 167, 168, 170, 174, 
185-186, 192 

Socialists on Sovietism (see Labor Delegations) 

Social Revolutionary Party of Russia, 36, 62, 56, 137, 199-201 

Socialist Review, 33 

Soviet Elections, see Elections 

Soviet Form of Government, 15, 33-36, 37, 42 

.Soviet Russia, 84 - 

Spanish Socialists, 18, 45, 63; 179, 182, 193 

State Capitalism, 16, 17 

State Socialism, see State Capitalism, 36, 42 
I Steklov, 59 ' 
I, Strikes, 76, 89 
Syerdlov, 47 

264 INDEX 

Swedish Socialists, 18, 63, 186 

Switzerland, 4 

Syndicalists, 72, 97, 174, 177-183 

Taxation in Kind, 14, 108-122 

Tchitcherin, 206 

Terrorism, 30, 31, 34, 43, 46, 49-71, 85, 96, 98, 106, 188, 189, 

195, 235, 236, 249 
Thomas, Albert, 170 
Thomas, J. H., 194 
Tomsky, 25, 177 

Trade Agitation, 3-15, 203-227, 243, 245-253 
Trade Treaties, see Trade Agitation 
Trade Unions, 20, 25, 31, 33, 36, 37, 39, 63, 71, 74, 75, 83, 

88-103, 169-187, 193 
Transport Workers' Congress, 47 
Troelstra, 186 
Trotsky, 11, 12, 35, 36, 41, 50, 51, 60, 77, 79-82, 94, 95, 108, 

143, 145, 148, 152, 165, 249 
Tscheidze, 228, 229 
Turks, 190, 191 
Turkey, 223, 231, 238 
Turner, Ben, 18, 63 
Twenty-one Points, The (Communist Ultimatum to Socialist 

Parties), 147, 155, 172, 192 

Ukraine, 66, 67 
Uriteky, 52, 54, 55 

Vacirca, 188 

Valentino, 230 

Vanderveldc, 186 

Versailles Treaty, 22, 207 

Violence, see Terrorism 

War, 45, 143, 155, 156, 237-239 

INDEX 20.", 

Watts, A. J., 135 
Wells, H. G., 107, 207 
Wels, Otto, 186 
White Paper, British, 245-253 
Williams, Robert, 63 
Wilson, ex-President, 4, 10 
Wilson, ex-Secretary, W. B., 7, 8, 148 
Wrangel, 53, 148, 193 

World Revolution, Movement for, 3, 8, 12, 142-168, 240, 244, 

Yaroslav Prison, 68-70 

Zemstvos, 133 

Zinoviev, 31, 45, 89, 152, 159, 160, 166, 167, 194-197 

Zorin, 90 

Gompers, Samuel 

59 Out of their own mouths