You are on page 1of 157

2012-06-17 21:13:12 UTC

4fdd3991b2d8d United Kingdom



The Workers

Peasants and Russia :: :: of


















ILL.. U. S.







Peasants of "" "" Russia Ukraine








jityof California






1001 W. Madison


of the Industrial Workers

of the World
111., U. S. A.



Author's Preface of 11 and


Socialist and












17 17



(Social (National




19 19 19 22 24 25




of of

the the

Right Left

Social The
The The

Revolutionaries Maximalists Anarchists Syndicalists





The The




of of



34 42



The The The



of of in
or or


Development organization





Trade Trade

Unions Unions








and Artels


Co-Operative 72


The Workers' National The










86 88

Finance Soviets
Red Army



97 103






107 Ill

Socialist and

Movement the




Communism The

133 Ukraine





letariat of the days of 1917, the inspiration of the world's proWhat is transpiring behind its endless boundaries? What forces are shaping themselves on its millions of square miles? Those 180 millions of people; peasants and workers, How have they fared since the November days what of them? Are the thrilling those 1917? programs and slogans of of days being carried out or is it true that,the.initiative November bqen in RiissteJ nave ardor of the workers and revolutionary iron-rule dictatorship?. How do by a the the party of stifled and peasants, the great lower layer.-, workers oj: the- -Eu"si^r. look upon Is it true that their present government? masses, is a party government the Russian Soviet Government and that have no voice in choosing or electing their delegates the workers to the Soviets?


Such questions as the above, were they asked a year or two down have howled by been as heresy. ago any radical, would But at the present day and on the eve of Russian recognition by the capitalist powers, the questions above suddenly assume an answer one or another. way great importance and demand in And they are being answered as all such questions are, depending the influence on various ways, prompts reply. what Formerly the capitalist press carried its daily quota of polished depicting conditions in Russia. But generally these tales news were the concerned only with misfortune of the bourgeois lately is from that a sudden source there class, and noted ness stillabout Russian atrocities and in its place appear conciliatory articles that portend what? During the time that has elapsed since 1917 a few people have come from Russia carrying information with them which

has, however, only been of a general nature and political in Such information because character. nature of its vague Russian served to create a false impression about conditions, is manifest between the until at present a sharp controversy the In the light of the various elements of radical movement. Russia, even if it is slight, present day knowledge concerning it is beyond doubt that much information the of previously circulated in America about Russia is misleading and some of it basely false. Who tales needs to be reminded of the many circulated about Russia, in which the conditions of the workers there have been O. K.d and in which they have been reported as masters of their destinies? Generally the whole text of the

itself with that have been circulated seemed to concern leaders. Russian describing the impossible qualities of certain What a strange coincidence it is that the real extent of the of the Communist power wielded by the Central Committee to is never Party of Russia could and yet such a power referred investigator. the a have sincere of notice not escaped

It is quite likely that the description of Russia in this book By some as a source parative of comwill be greeted in various ways. Vilification knowledge; by others in a spirit of rage. and praise will follow in its wake. busy constructing a The Communists now are of America they bogy the can away silence and scare great with which They "anarchist/* call this bogy critics of their program. tactics are These "counter-revolutionary," etc. peculiar to but they mere are a puffs of wind parties of political nature, the leaves." even "stureth Jiot

.wjhich It :

an" act js/oiiiy:



to the reader if justice


.investigations -pf'.the Souchy





qualify the by telling

is truly an "internationalist". Properly he is a but his activities member of the German syndicalist movement, in the European labor movement have taken him to most of the countries of Europe, and whenever there is an important meeting or a conference of the progressive forces of European labor one can look for Souchy's name the on nearly always list of delegates. The authorities of all countries keep their eyes on him and he has been deported from several countries, He was to the Second a delegate notably from Scandinavia. Congress of the Communist International at Moscow in 1920 sional and also participated in the conference that organized the ProviCouncil of Trade and Industrial Unions, the forerunner of the present R. L. U. I. In these conferences he opposed, on philosophical grounds, the political theories that dominated these conferences. The investigation of conditions in Russia in as down this book was set made in the same period as his bodies. (1920). attendance to the above mentioned In this book will be found a chapter dealing with Machno who has been variously represented in this country as a bandit, murderer, anarchist and a friend of the upper classes of the Ukraine It is. certain that around this particular peasants. there will always be a fierce dispute as to his real person His importance a figure in the Russian as motive. ary revolutionperiod will always base itself on the fact that he had a large following among ally Historicthe peasants of the Ukraine. his intentions and what he sought to accomplish ways will albe an open question. In short he will always have friends The author of the book Souchy and enemies. pictures him in a favorable light. He sees him as a friend af the lower classes of peasants as against the higher element of that class, even to the extent of carrying on open warfare against the


by his observahe is justified Perhaps tions his opinion is his in this stand. Be that as it may, but his record of this historical figure is as much entitled own, to consideration as those who tell a different story. a delegate from the I. W. The writer of this introduction was Union International Labor Red the W. to the first Congress of at Moscow and personally witnessed a stormy debate at the Machno which developed from the following" closing session over

Soviet Government.

circumstances : the first days of the sessions a movement was During launched by the syndicalist delegates of France and Spain to then in Russian the release of some secure anarchists who were signed by many prisons. As a result of a petition which was between interview was some arranged of the delegates, an Russian figures Soviet the leading the (Lenin government of of delegates who had signed the a committee was and of present) was thing reached that everypetition. At this meeting an agreement have be done them to released under the possible would of condition that they would leave the country in the company the French delegates at the end of the congress, and it was further understood that no issue would be made of this matter in the Congress of the Red International. The delegates left it. this meeting and said nothing more Suddenly, on the about day Congress, before last just of the adjournment, Bukharin as a representative appeared of the of the Central Committee prisoned imParty with a statement Russian Communist the accusing Machbeing "Machnovtzi" (members of anarchists of no's band) and raised some question about releasing all of them. Bukharin's appearance the imprisoned anarchconcerning ists fierce a storm of protest especially from a part of raised the French delegates who charged the Soviet government with bad faith in bringing up the subjectwhen they had formerly agreed to keep it quiet. Bukharin, representing the Central Committee sian of the RusCommunist Party, reported their action on the subjectof the imprisoned anarchists which accused them generally with in prison on supporting Machno and indicating tHat they were that account. Whether or not these anarchists were supporters I Machno I do know cannot say, neither of ticular whether these parI were ever heard later that some anarchists released. of them had refused to agree to leaving Russia when released hunger were on a and strike. Machno to me but his a at that time was strange name in this national Interfloor Red the on the prominence controversy of Congress aroused my interest and I began to inquire But I soon about him. realized that trying to find out who and Machno is like the identity of the trying to uncover was what devil. Thus, Machno to the communist boil like a sore was him as a murderer, bandit and elements and they emphasized 5

By the non-communist element, anarchists, counter-revolutionist. is highly praised. many syndicalists, and others, Machno described the Some communists, again, anarchists, and even having but as Machno purposes, good originally movement become it had permeated with elements who were claimed that I left Moscow When for it their own particular purposes. using learned Machno I was I forced had up what about and summed be quite understood to the opinion that this figure will never His motives will be appreciated by anyone. or condemned the his faction From to to. this according appraisers adhere is important only because viewpoint then, the subject of Machno he presents one the Russian situation. In the of problems of is it the that we are short, not personal qualities of Machno he has grouped around him. concerned with, but the movement There is abundant proof that the Russian revolution was the not the venture of one particular party, but that it was Russian the Only masses. spontaneous outburst of after the Czarism do we see the various political parties coming crash of for favorable positions. After a period out and manoeuvering the Bolsheviki stepped into power on proof political moves mises In in that fact they do today. are not exist and slogans Kerensky's the same as ment position now coalition governwhen But Bolsheviki term the their assumed of power. short or Communists of Russia must undergo, because of their altered as any other revolutionary policy, the same criticalexamination That it still clings to revolutionary phrases is not a group. for adopting a watch-and-wait Conditions, not cause policy. our of words, are chief concern, and only with a knowledge in Russia Peasants the conditions of the Workers can we and apply the measure of the revolutionary yard-stick.

There are many ways of judging the Russian revolution at its present stage. Many the present policy of the Soviet excuse Government the ground that the workers and peasants are on depraved mass a dark of low intelligence, floundering around in a dumb them fertile ground state of mind, which makes for White-guard of this, a strong central activity. Because dictatorship is necessary dencies. to curb their aimless reactionary tenTherefore they have been stripped of every right have enjoyed under such a rule as the they even which might former Czar. But those who say this are as ignorant as they then If this is the case claim the workers and peasants are. Nor if we the Bolsheviki would have never power. assumed been the have ever a rethere judge volutio situation correctly would is the that What is paradoxical about this argument old that the workers czarist regime acted on the assumption and were the they likewise suppressed just peasants opposite and them vigorously on the same grounds. But whatever they can in any the the communists out of make above argument, case never their fierce suppression and abowill explain away lition lifted them from the masses of all human very rights who

This will always be a blemish that will cling to into power. birth-mark them like a and like the legendary writing on the be wiped out. wall can be never Another way of judging the Russian situation is the theory that as long as the present government retains a tight hold on they can the powers at any period liquidate of government for the benefit of the the new program capitalistic economic high-flown theory, this book is as a Russian proletariat. This in its discussion of Russia will demonstrate, not in a direct, perhaps, as the author did not have this conscious manner particular phase before him at the time of his investigations, sian but by acquainting the reader with the development of the Rusto The Russian date revolution revolution up to his time. thing clearly: "that successful revolutions are one not shows Human human the product of the abstract will power will." factor in as by a masses, the counts social changes. expressed only Revolutionary tacticians flounder helplessly trying to regulate social laws to fittheir particular plans. They hide their failure in such terms as "transition periods" or "economic retreats." as the other and neither means One is as vague anything.

the Russian situaon explanations are advanced tion for that the can present at least we everybody must admit hope that dismiss from our capitalism minds any remaining has not been invited back to Russia, and from this viewpoint we forced into must then inquire why the Russian revolution was idea that any set of this position. Dismissing, too, any wrong the direct cause, the we individuals were must search amongst force for the What the reason path and ask: ruins obstructed in their surge towards emancipation? of the Russian masses vestiga bent on infor those who And read this book with a mind information it is certain that much be can valuable Regardless of whatever antipathy the reader may obtained. develop because this author holds certain views, there are facts in this book that compel serious thought.


This book deserves praise mainly because it is a study of leaders perchance, of a reconditions in Russia, and not men, volutio because after all is said and recorded government, person about the personal qualities of this or that prominent in Russia, the Russian ever be correctly revolution cannot known are judged unless the conditions of the great masses Labor laws, crees delibertarian and understood. regulations and finally, nothing but dried ink and signify nothing. are, Soviet institutions are corrupted by much the same methods as any other governing body. Particular notice is due to the chapters that describe the many socialist parties of Russia as well as the Anarchists Syndicalists. These various factions are representative of and the sociological ideas that dominate sian the minds of the RusThe 16, Chart on a study people. page especially, makes

more simple and assists the reader to a of these movements clearer understanding of the following chapters. to call to the readLest the point be missed it is necessary ers' the the that principal point which author has attention, is has that to the Soviet failed not sought show government alone in the sphere of production, but also- in the field of distribution. Thus it is that the Soviet government allows a to the latitude labor of unions as producing certain amount organs, but it liquidates entirely into the state the once powerful integral were an part of the co-operative societies which Russian national life. These co-operative societies flourishing of operation, in becoming and alive under their former mode henceforth for bureaucratically distribution, state organs and Free managed have withered like a cut flower and become lifeless. trade inaugurated in the spring of 1921 is an indication of this decay.

of the features of bolshevik rule described in this book disappeared due to the rapid changes that are being in the policy of the bolsheviks, but each such feature made be recorded and rescued from oblivion. The failures should the mistakes of the bolsheviks are the red danger lanterns and road and will save us in the future from running along our own into the same obstacle, just as the red lanterns hung out by from us into save street pavers and sewer workers running holes or piles of debris. The author of this book hangs out these danger lanterns where them. The can see everybody information the author gathered in 1920 will never be out of date as long as we ourselves have not achieved the great social transformation in this country. Together with the publishing of this book in America comes Lenin by the news October 1921, in 17, a on speech made of which the prophetic writings of this book are verified. Lenin says in the speech :



"Our new economic policy consists essentially in this, defeated and that we in this respect have been thoroughly have started to undertake a strategic retreat; before we defeated, let us retreat, and DO THING EVERYare completely AGAIN, Communists OVER but more can steady. have the front doubt the on that we slightest not economic have suffered an economic defeat, and a very serious defeat at that." He also says, in connection with the former policy of food requisition, the following: "On the economic front we have, with the attempt to to a over go communist society, suffered a defeat in the spring of 1921, more fered serious than any previous defeat sufthe hands a Denekin, Kolchak Pilsudsky, or at of defeat which has taken expression in the fact that our to be cut economic policy in its superstructure has proven

off from the substructure and did not create the stimulation is which in our party program of the productive powers, the fundamental as and immediate problem. recognized in the country and the commun"The requisition system ist the in the organization problem method of solving cities, these are the policiesthat prevented the increase in the productive be to the cause the deep-, powers and proved main of crisiswith which we collidedin going economic and political the spring of 1921.
"There have the cause has happened, you of what from the our which, viewpoint of general policy, cannot be than thorough a defeat and a retreat." called anything else

But the defeat that Lenin admits and which he terms defeat" should not be construed to mean a defeat of all revolutionary principles. It is wholly, and only, a defeat of the politicaltheory of revolution. Bukharin is perhaps the frankest of all when he says in an Policy": article entitled, "The Soviets' New

"When the state apparatus is in our hands we can it in desired direction. But are any guide unless we at the helm we can give no direction at all. "Consequently we must seize power and keep it and no But we make political concessions. may many make is we are economic concessions. But the fact of the matter making economic concessions in order to avoid making
political concessions. "We shall agree to no coalition government or anything like it,not even to peasants and workers. We equal rights cannot do that."

defeats are above quotations are but proof that when defeats of political centralism; as spoken of they are meant of party policies. The reasons of these defeats are shown by the contents of this book.


Feb. 10th, 1922.


Author's Preface
the Russian Revolution broke out and czarism was not a socialist who did not greet overthrown, there was this revolution with joy. All, from the most moderate state and reformist to the most radical anarchist, yes, even the socialist in the overthrow liberals of Europe, saw progress of czarism. to later Kerensky When steer the wreck of the Russian wanted ship of state into the safe harbor of the entente, and continued the Russian the war against Germany, dissatisfactionarose among it not peace that the revolution was for was masses, going to Kerensky, with the coalition Miljukov and When bring them! Gutschkov, threw himself in the arms ally, of the entente, he, naturRussian It the fulfill the peace of people. not wishes could keep but that the wave was revolutionary would not stop evident For that reason, the on rolling further in the direction of peace. had the greatest prospect party that put peace on its program And bolsheviks. the was that party winning,.'



The politicalreasons To these politicalreasons



bolshevik victory were added psychologic and

at hand.


The psychologic reasons: The Russian people had for centuries lived under the rule of czarism. The autocracy at the top did everything to keep alive the respect for authority at the bot^ torn. This respect for authority has penetrated so deeply into the life of the people that it even had set its mark on the relations between the peasants themselves in their daily life. Symbolic of this is the word "Little Father." One of the strongest factors for preserving this respect was religion. The Catholicism the Orthodox has Greek Church today its strongest supeven of port in Russia. The revolution has shaken faith in czarist authority, but has not completely eradicated it. Faith in authority to-day stronger than in continues to live in Russia and is even England or America. For this reason it was natural that the new political system would become authoritarian to the extent that faith in authority stillexisted. Bolshevism is an authoritarian Theoretically it professes to be Marxian, i. e.y authorisystem. tarian-socia
The economic reasons: Already during the Kerensky period dissatisfaction grew, and with it the demand for independence the workers. The workers, represented by the grew also among Workers' Councils or the Factory Committees, did not want to remain the wage the factory owners slaves of any longer. They


and take over the factories wanted to dispossess the factory owners themselves. After ,a long-drawn struggle they finally succeeded in no way But, as they were in this, in a favorable moment. production, and as they had no unions, prepared to take over that task, the first period after which could have undertaken notable for a the taking over of the factories by the workers was The workers did work for themselves butgeneral break-down. had no industrial unions of their own; They not for society. too littledeveloped, and, what littleorganization they had was consequently, in this general break-down, a strong centralistic the only power that could in any way combat chaos. party was One might even say that it was lucky that the bolshevik party was vigorous enough to undertake it. Otherwise, at hand and was perhaps, a non-socialistparty, the Cadets, might have payed the way for immediate reaction. Thus, as it happened, the ideal of socialism was not realized,but under the given circumstances it the support the only way out. Another economic factor was was land to the by take the the away from the peasants made of effort in factors The large land owners. city and country were economic consequently, favorable to a bolshevik victory. shevik To-day there are numerous who disapprove of bolsocialists rule in Russia. They are adversaries of the bolsheviks because the conditions in Russia under bolshevik rule are not And, to be true, if we put the measuring stick of socialism socialistic. it is Russian then or on not really communism conditions, difficult to find that in Russia no socialism or communism exists, shevism. and from that high observation point one can then condemn bol-



distinguish three kinds



of Bolshevism.

the representatives of capitalism and the capitalist order of society. These are all the states which during the formed the entente against Germany war and Austria-Hungary have in League now the united and which of Nations, and besides Add thereto capitalist Germany. there is America. All these bolshevism, combat not because it did not bring them what they had hoped for they were, on the contrary, enemies of bolshevism the start but because they felt themselves threatened by i from it; they fear that a bolshevik Russia may be a constant revo^ lutionary danger to all other countries. But above everything else th?y fear a revolution in their own country, as they would then Jose their privileges,and first of all their private property, on which rests the whole social order of to-day. In addition to these general, international, capitalist interests there are special nationalis interests. Thus, France belongs to-day to the bitterest more than all opponents of bolshevism, because French capitalists interested in Russia. They want, others are with their money back that they had under all circumstances, to get the money lent to czarist Russia. Although the bolsheviks time and again declared that they were willing to do this 'at the start the bolare first




sheviks cancelled all the debts of czarism the French capitalist* they also want to do business in the future witt are not satisfied; And this applies also to al Russia, so rich in natural resources. they fight Soviet Russic other capitaliststates. For these reasons disposition through their : means the open or secret war at with all to the Russian through counter-revolutionaries support given and

The second kind of opponents ate of bolshevism are the modersocial-democrats. These were, in the firstplace and reformist opponents from the start to bolshevik revolutionary tactics, i e. of the bolshevik approval of the dispersion of the Constituenl to some by the anarchists (the bolsheviks were, Assembly extent, implicated in this dispersion) ; in the second place, they latei became opponents of the anti-democratic and anti-humanitariar dom measures of the bolsheviks, such as, the suppression of the freeThey were also opponents bj of the press and assembly. immediate to the principle italists and absolute expropriation of the capAccording the land owners without compensation. and of to their opinion the bolsheviks should have sought co-operation with the democrats of the West. They invoked the aid of Marx about by a development and said that socialism could only come through Politically, there should firsthave com(. capitalism. democracy in Russia afterthe overthrow ically, of czarism, and economThereupon, development had this capitalism. slowly after taken place, Russia would be ripe for socialism. Socialism must through a progressive development; it is a product of evolucome tion. Russia was not yet ripe for socialism. They also oppose the liberty-crushing tendencies of the bolsheyiki, their extraordinary But in they are commissions, etc. power, they by when no means allow themselves to be guided by humanitarian viewpoints in their policies. A Noske, who is one of this group, as humanely, but perhaps minister of defense, has not behaved more hypocritically, than the bolsheviks. On the whole, this group more of social-democrats, social patriots and reformists, or whatever the principles, methods you call them, turn down and tactics bolsheviks, the because bolsheviks the too are of radical for them. These social democrats, furthermore, combat the bolsheviks secretly or openly mostly secretly with all the means of force. They help the armed counter-revolution, support the blockade against Russia, etc. During the social democratic reign in Germany that government did all it could against bolshevik Russia. To the third kind of opponents of the bolsheviks belong, the anti-authoritariansocialists, finally, the anarchists and the syndicalists While the two first-mentioned are opponents of the revolution as such, this third kind are entirely revolutionary. And they are not adversaries as sense of bolshevism in the same the two former. They are rather opponents of bolshevik teachings, opponents of the bolshevik authoritarian world philosophy; they are philosophical opponents. They fight the bolsheviks on the intellectualfield. While the reformist socialistsare against the bolsheviks, because they went too far, the syndicalists and 12
" "

the anarchists take a negative position towards the bolsheviks, the They make because for them they did not go far enough. do not remove against the bolsheviks that their methods objection the the foundations of the old world order of state and capitalism too have they that concessions to great made radically enough, the spirit of authority, to the discretion of the state, and to the dered have hinslavery, and that they in this manner system of wage They the revolution in its further development. reproach have a new they that bolsheviks the state and thus led set up They the revolution into the wrong show the bolsheviks channels. the inconsistency of their position, when they, on ftie one hand, maintain that the state is an institution of oppression and class but, rule, and that a free society only can exist without the state, this on the other hand, concentrate all their power on making it was, ever as formidable as as possible, class state as powerful kind of centralism. The revthe it through olutiona strongest and perfect the that furthermore say syndicalists and anarchists this centhis the bolsheviks through tralism state and establishment of to liberty but are getting further are not getting nearer aivay from it. As opponents of the conquest of politicalpower to the bolsheviks that, through the conthey make the objection quest have become they cians politipower-seeking power, of political important side of socialism and and have pushed the more When they once struck out on the in back-ground. the communism compelled to it. From path leading to politicalpower, they were dencies, this follows suppression of the other socialist parties and tenfree press and assembly, suppression of the right of bolshevik They are quering methods of conof etc. also opponents of centralism and of state socialism. political power, But it is hardly necessary to state that they, like the bolsheviks, ocracy bitter enemies of private property, capitalism, bourgeois demare kind a of national assembly. and any

will be easily understood, the capitalists and socialadversaries of reformists are the strongest opponents and political the bolsheviks. The anarchists and revolutionary syndicalists,on the other hand, are also opponents on principle of the bolshevik tion methods, but if the bolsheviks really honestly desire the destrucsition of the state, then they ought to approach them and the oppoAs fighting the into a matter now might grow alliance. the the anarchists and revolutionary syndicalists take a stands, negative position towards the bolsheviks, when it is not downright hostile. As
To take refuge behind the cloak of "objectivity" often signifies for free is judgment capable of without nobody cowardice, any subjective cerned. views, and least of all when personalities are conI freely admit that I am For that reason a revolutionary I, like those sharing my syndicalist. But when views, do not bolsheviks, it the the the tactics approve methods and of all of would be tactlessin the highest degree for the bolsheviks to brand us as counter-revolutionists, as they are so inclined to do, in


order to discredit the revolutionary syndicalists and' anarchists Before the outbreak of the before the revolutionary workers. it before the war, would not have occurred to any revolution, and label to a Russian bolshevik revolutionary syndicalist and an the anarchist as a counter-re volutipnist, only because he rejected as the dictatorship the well proletariat and centralism of state, as capitalism. On the contrary, at that time, the anarchist and right to give the bolsheviks syndicalist would have had far more he did not call the bolsheviks by But, of course, that surname. viks The bolsheBut now the matter has changed. any such name. the ruling party. Their theories, their methods and their are a cold reality tactics are now no longer platonic ; they have become Russian ories people. The thewhich often is quite perceptible to the less formerly or were more useful which and methods tions, material for discussion in the papers, are to-day in Russia regulato-day decrees and laws for the Russian people. When we into these theories tactics, we are also and enter polemics against compelled to take a stand on the decrees. But when we do this ing, the bolsheviks brand us, if our criticism happens to be disapprovlittle We as can, course, as just of counter-revolutionaries. But is before. the difference from this as criticism now abstain that we to-day have a concrete basis while we formerly worked ever: One thing is necessary to note, howwith only an hypothesis. laws difference between decrees the and regulations and from be traced to the those theories, can which spring and which A in Russia. latter the criticism of would be a criticonditions cism itself, that bolshevik the party is a of the revolution seeing But such a criticism we revolutionary party. cannot yet enter into, particularly as revolutionaries. A criticism of the former hold to-day to be just as necessary as formerly the discussion we between the different socialistgroups. But, besides, we must investiga the effects upon the people of both kinds of decrees and laws, those that spring from theories, and those that are traceable to the conditions. As little believe in decrees and laws, still as we we they that a the people. The must admit produce reaction among to decrees these is popular reaction partly friendly, partly hostile, 3re according to their nature and the wishes of the people. For there decrees that release the revolutionary powers are the of people pie and stimulate them, and there are decrees that dam them up a nd annihilate revolutionary initiative.

investigation is very difficult, however. The classification ,sithe decrees laws the into of and such as originate in the theories and such as are traceable to the conditions is, namely, in A number practice not possible in the case of all of them. of decrees are the result of a mixture of both elements. If the effects are altogether or partially stimulating to the revolution or are hostile to liberty, and the people reacts accordingly, then one in the could easily get peculiar position of wanting to approve of 60 per cent of them and condemn 40 per cent. But a social revolution is no problem in arithmetic ; it is a question of whether



accepts of the revolution (and then also the unbeautiful things) or one does not accept of it at all. to undertake it is not at all necessary But for our purpose such an impossible analysis of social events by which we would part. It is not here, ascertain the percentage of every component in the first place, a question of criticizing bolshevism, but the question is of getting a clear understanding of the revolution in Russia and what it has given to us. The main purpose is that ^e learn this book is written, may revolutionary workers, for whom it, and that they, at the outbreak of a revolution a lesson from have the experiences of the Russian in their own country, may quently, revolution at their disposition. The purpose of this book is,consebut the If not counter-revolutionary revolutionary. description the true conditions in and exact workers after a of to a partial or entire rejection Russia should come ditions of such conto it be mean their own for country, allowed should not but only a lesson, how not to the a revolution, social rejection of This is do it ivhen revolution breaks out in their own country. the main purpose of this book, and the descriptions from Russia which I give, true to facts and without coloring or concealing, should be subordinated to this purpose. has If conditions in Russia are not such as many man a hoped, or as he had pictured to himself the advent of the social revolution, he should consider that the Russian revolution did not come at a time when the Russian workers and peasants in their great masses were prepared to organize their economic and politicallife according to the principles of liberty,but that the revolution found the ivorkers entirely unprepared. Adding thereto the comparatively low technical development of the Russian worker, one might thereupon ask oneself whether one had imagined that the revolution would come in the forms it took in the brain few theorists a or far-advanced revolutionaries. of Let us put this question to ourselves : Being that the Russian revolution did not bring what we had hoped for, would we rather Only an anti-revolutionistcould have wish that it had not come? But a every revolutionary must stand by the such negative wish. revolution like a soldier with rifleat his side, with his heart, with his whole feeling and sympathy. And how could we otherwise? We, who have always striven for, hoped for, and worked for the have now, we revolution, should we when she has come, whom in our draw from back her, like loveless sung a songs, about from a misshapen mother child? No, the revolution is here. It is not what we had hoped. It is a deformed, perhaps partly But it is our substituted child. child. We are the parents. It is to to us up recognize the child, to take care of it,to bring it up, to change its form and to make it into as strong and free and proud a child as possible. AUGUSTINE SOUCHY. Berlin in December, 1920.


Diagram of the Socialist and Anarchist Movements of Russiaand Ukraine

'Union y^laxi


ijj * 3he Proletariatof

into ^narcKists(i9P3)Divided

See chapter, "The Socialist Movement in Russia", pages 17 to 31 Movement in Ukraine", pages 129 to 1 also chapter 'The Socialist


book is worth reading it is worth



Workers and Peasants in Russia and Ukraine

Movement The Socialist

in Russia

the main purpose of this book is to give a presentation of the Russian revolution and the conditions It has created, the socialist parties or movements which exist in Russia it is necessary for an to the that extent will be described only understanding of Russian conditions and the revolution.


The Russian



in the beginning not was socialistmovement Even kind the of socialism that Bakunin represented social-democratic. had not arisen on the ground of social-democratic theories. It was a kind af socialism that grew out of the particular agricultural This the socialism called itselfthe country. character of This movement was a movement special of the Narodniks. in Russia, Russian school of socialism. Later there also arose under West-European influence,a special social-democratic school Pleckcmov, of socialism. Principal founder of this school was Marx his influence formed the views under of who and Engels. Thus there were formed in the year 1883 the beginnings of the social-democratic-marxist party. As this school did not fetch the corner stones of its theories from the tendencies of the Russian labor and peasant movement but from other countries and developed labor movement, particularly by leaning on the German its principles and theories will be familiar to the West-European workers and to the German workers in particular. It is Marxism. Under the rule of the Russian knout a revolutionary fighting sian them, like among spirit has, naturally,flourished among all Rusthey be as to were revolutionaries, compelled radical against czarism. The social-democratic party of Russia became, however, In the year of very early divided in a right and a left wing. 1905 it came to an open break and a splitbetween the two wings. The radicals were in the majorityand called themselves "The Majority"or Bolsheviki. The moderates were in the minority, in Russian Mensheviki. With the minority, the mensheviks, mained rePlechanov, and to them belonged also Martov and Abramo-


Lenin. Plechanov died vitch. The leader of the bolsheviks was Russian conthe the soon revolution. He was sidered outbreak of after the father of Russian social-democracy. The program of the m.ensheviks is similar to that of the left pendents. social-democracy or the right wing of the indewing of German the as They consider themselves of the same standpoint (U. S. right of the Independent Socialist Party of Germany. P. D.) interested in the program viks, We are here more of the bolshein has become is the because that party power ruling and is, is It their Russia. more program which consequently, party of if we cannot trace the Russian condieven or less realized. And tions turns out different as life always completely to their program, this the from the wording of the program, program still, of party has, without doubt, had influence on the development since the bolsheviks took the power, as well as on the present situation, influence that man if we can on exert social admit at all pick out the most important points in the bol^ events. If we now have in a sense we a criterion on, to what extent shevik program, ory the conditions in Russia are traceable to the politicsand the theof the bolsheviks and to what extent they are traceable to the revolution itself.

To the fundamental principles longs of the Russian bolsheviks bethe Dictatorship of the Proletariat, the conquest of political through the social-democratic party, which is falsely said power to mean through the proletariat; the confiscation of the factories, furnaces, in the industry as well as mines, shops, short, of whole the land, and transforming it into state property; the organizing It through the for life says word state. word of economic in their program: "The state power ceases to be a parasitical gins apparatus which stands above the process of production; it beto change into an organization which easily fills the function the economic life of the country." The suspension of managing of the politicalrights of the exploiting class, as well as all other curtailments of freedom which proved to be necessary for the establish of the dictatorship of the proletariat,the organizing through the obligatory membership of consumption of all citizens the in the Consumers' Unions, are necessary consequences. of state These are then state organs.

We have now briefly sketched the principles and the program of the bolshevik party, which later, after it had conquered the took the name power, of the Communist Party. According to Lenin's explanations it took the name of ("The Communist Party" because it wished to differentiate itself from the social-democrats the same time to draw and at over the workers which fore bewanted in the anarchist and revolutionary-syndicalist moveivere ment. We shall later have the opportunity to see to what extent the party has been able to impress its program upon the social life of Russia. 18



People's Socialist) or (National

of the Right


While the Marxists, the bolsheviks as well as the mensheviks, Russian soil,the socialism of the narodon are a foreign growth niks 'people." The Narod means Russian is a purely origin. of the socialism of the people, a special socialism of the narodniks was first One the and most prominent men of national product. Tschemitschevsky Lavrov. in this movement was also belonged is older than the Marxian to them. This movement movement. Later they called themselves also the Social-Revolutionary Party. While the Marxians, in accordance with their theory, ascribe a ary greater importance to the city proletariat, the Social-RevolutionIt more was a peasant Party was a peasant party. mainly As is Russia socialism than a socialism of the city proletariat. ,an natural that the Social-Revolutionary agrarian country it was the population, which to more Party was the most popular among than 80 per cent consists of peasants. To this party belonged the "Babuschka" Grandmother of the Revolution, Breschkovskaja, prisonm freed from Siberian imwas was as she called, who after she through the revolution, went abroad, after the fall of cause the Kerensky common with the government, and made American capitalists. As was the case with the Marxians, this party also developed left a and a right wing.

The right wing was in favor of the constituent assembly, i. e., it was parliamentarian, like the mensheviks. Its intellectual Tschernov. leader was They also had other things in common with the mensheviks, although they were not Marxians, nor are for a coalition government so yet. They were tional with the ConstituDemocrats they formed, together (Cadets),and with the Gutschkov and Miljukov and the mensheviks, the coalition cadets Kerensky himself belonged to the government under Kerensky. the Social-Revolutionary Party. According to the right wing of program of the social-revolutionariesof the right the National Assembly should have the power to decide over the (Constituent) constitution of the country as well as over socializationand all important questions. It was and is the program of a bourgeois democracy. The

Social-Revolutionaries of the Left

Different was the Left Wing of the social-revolutionaries. These revolutionaries were the old Terrorists against the czarist sheviks system. They are stillterrorists to-day but differ from the bolin this that they recognize only the personal terror but rejectthe systematic, organized terror. They are in favor of murdering a despot (the czar) but against the use of deterrent measures through a special institution formed for that purpose, as the Ochrana during the czar and The Extra-ordinary Comwas mission (Tscheka)during bolshevik rule. 19

The revolutionary process accelerated the split in the large vember, Social-Revolutionary Party. Even after the revolution, up to No-

1917, the left wing, the party opposition, took a stand it represented, principally, the against the coalition government; 1917, it coninternational standpoint, and, finally,in November, stituted Party the itself The Social Revolutionary Left. of

formed mainly by the active peasantry, This new party was intellectual leaders their of the strove to pull the masses and Social-Revolutionary from influence the the of peasantry away Party of the Right. Besides, it wished to pull those elements into the revolutionary process who were and which strange to Marxism Russian had mainly developed in the school of the "Narodnitschestvo" : federalism, the ethical viewpoint and activism. Up to the peace of Brest-Litovsk the party of the left social-revolutionaries worked in solidarity with the bolsheviks in all Soviets and in People's Commissariats it took over Of the seven the government. Agriculture, which is of such great importance in Russia, In order to carry into effect the law of socialization of the land.

the party, in connection with the peace of Brest-Litovsk, Imperialism, it stepped out of the could not agree with German the From time the party ceased to be a government government. dictated solely were party, the politics of the Soviet Government began the system of terror, the system by the bolsheviks. Now of forcible requisition of bread from the peasants, the supremacy of the police organs and the re-introduction of capital punishment. approved All these measures the Social-Revolutionary Party of the Left disIn July, 1918, as other socialistparties. of, the same Congress, V. time the Soviet the the of party already had 40 at At however, time, the that the party wished per cent of mandates. to turn with all their might against bolshevik co-operation with imperialism. This took expression in the act of murderGerman ing Count Mirbach, the German ambassador in Moscow.

This act gave the bolsheviks cause ment and pretense for a settlewith the competing party, and they started a system of persecution two years. which extends to the present, that is, over All party papers were were suppressed, many members shot and hundreds and thousands of soviet delegates who belonged to that party were excluded from the Soviets. The result of this was that became illegal, the party in came and their most active members prison, whereby the party lost the possibility of influencing the masses, especially the work-village. The active peasantry, which in the soviet representatives no longer saw representatives of their class, was driven to a course of desperate insurrections. But the peasant rebellions were suppressed with force and led still from the closer to the abyss which separates the bolshevik power village. I have given this description of the development of this party after the account of one of its leaders, who in the first period after the overthrow of the Kerensky government was a member the People's Council Commissars, Isaak Steinberg, of of who had


the People's Commissariat of Agriculture in charge. Also in the I shall follow his account. presentation of their program to this The sot-called period of transition does not appear party as an epoch which in principle differs from the socialist epoch. The period of transition ought not, in its initialforms, to realize any other principles than those which are intended for socialistsociety. If one speaks of "the dying out of the state," one lized must not allow state ideology and state compulsion to be reain the highest degree. One must not depend on the provisional character of these periods of transition, for world history has already often enough proven that the provisional has perpetuated


The Social-Revolutionary Party of the Left does not believe in accomplishing the social revolution by means nority, of a daring mithe standpoint It takes party. perchance a communist that, insofar as the social revolution means not only the transfer into the hands from the the means of one owner of of production but also a radical overturning of all hands of another owner, intellectualhabits as well as the remodeling of men, social and distribution, the result of the revthe process of production and olution of be made safe only by means can of the free and active But this does not mean themselves. participation of the masses It is, on the contrary, antithat the party is parliamentarian. parliamentarian and also opposed to the Constituent Assembly.

Nor is this party for the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat," but for the Dictatorship of the active majority. But in agrarian Russia, the foundation of the social revolution countries, such as must be a union of the active peasantry and the city proletariat, ant not necessarily in an arithmetic equality on the part of the peasin but form the equal with rights of participation of majority, these two main classes. In contradistinction to the bolshevik party the social-revolutionaries basis. The whole social of the left stand on a federalist structure of the transition period must be built on the principles of federalism, politicalas well as economic. The party is a soviet that the elections to the Soviets, which conparty and demands stitute the political axis of the period of transition, only take place on the condition of free elections for the working masses, and that in the activitiesof the councils the most far-reaching principles of democracy be preserved ; otherwise, the whole council or soviet system is, in their opinion, turned into a mockery of the will of the workers, as at present, and forces the working masses, in a sense of disillusionment, to again long for the universal and free franchise and all the other formal principles of bourgeois democracy. The function of the councils or Soviets shall only be to serve as an extension structure of socialistsociety, politically and in a general cultural aspect, and for that reason all branches of labor and all groups of workers must be represented in them. The economic function, the production and distribution of goods, should rest exclusively in the hands of producers and consumers, 21

unions. The party, which implies labor unions and consumers' does demand a nationalization of production, not consequently, it that means the on this only the turning over of ground and kind to the the the worst state and of state economic processes all The socialization of the means production and capitalism. of into the the transferof the same distribution should not mean into the common "ownership" of the state, but their transformation it in wealth o/ all the workers, as the party had outlined the land socializationlaw, which has been almost repealed by the The party advocates the creating of pro^ present government. But the distribution of ductive societies by the active peasantry. in be the the sumers' hands of workers' and peasants' congoods shall kinds federative these two The co-ordination of societies. the organs creates economic of social pyramid which connects the the activity of village and the city, through which economic the role of the state including the soviet state is arrangement zens. replaced with the active participation of all the organized citi" "

The party of the social-revolutionariesof the left has from beginning the recognized individual terror as one of the fighting methods, with the precaution that it be used with the greatest But it rejects care. completely terrorism as a system of government and as a system for the realization of socialism. For that it also rejects reason duced capital punishment, which was again introby the bolsheviks.

the international field the party wants to enter into connection with all organizations and social-revolutionary movements, ing which defend other than purely Marxian methods for the builda of socialistsociety. I have treated the program of this party a littlemore at length than that of the bolsheviks, because bolshevik literature has inundated all Europe, and hence it may be assumed that most know this of the politically interested hand and brain workers On the other hand, hardly anything is known program. about this party outside the boundaries of Russia, and it is therefore an act of equalizing justice. On The

Out of the great movement of the narodniki or social-revolutionaries during the grew, pangs of the revolution of 1905, ^there movement. the Maximalist At the congress of the social-revolutionaries 1904, a Riefkin, of wing, under placed itselfto the extreme left. It put up a maximum program and rejected not only the minimum program of the Social-Revolutionary Party, but also the program ist of all other parties, such as the then still united MarxAll the parties. other parties, present bolsheviks included, were then minimalists. Already at the congress of 1904 they wished to have nothing to do with the reform program the of other parties. They did

not want to be reformists, but revolutionaries,and demanded of a the that a the maximum revolution can realization of revolution bring. Already then, one of their theoreticians represented the the man idea of the Soviets. The maximalist Tagin was who put idea together the the forward anarchists he with of Soviets, and represented the most pronounced maximalism. to any unity with the the maximalists could not come minimalists, they cut loose from the other parties and foundecf an independent organization. But they did not call themselves a party, but a union, being that they did not believe in the revolutionary In towards tendencies a a power party. party, of qualities the are never ciple revolutionary prinallow always noticeable, which For that reason to full development. of freedom to come they rejected the centralist party and formed a federalistunion. When the start the maximalists took an anti-parliamentarian in the They took never part elections to standpoint. the together the Duma were, with anarchists and anarchoand syndicalists,the firstand most passionate adversaries of the ConThe Maximalist Union was recruited from stitutent Assembly. the ranks of the poorer peasants and the city proletariat. They have the qualities of a fighting class organization and are in the highest degree active class militants. They always emphasize with the greatest force the staking of the personality and differ on this point from the Marxists. They were also terrorists; they are still terror, but like the left social-revoluthe personal adherents of tionaries, they reject ror. governmental terror and the system of ter.



As already indicated,they are a soviet movement, yes, in fact, they belonged to those who first came forward with the soviet idea. They differ,though, from other soviet parties, for instance, from the ruling Bolshevik Party, in that they take exception to to the Soviets" party Soviets. One of their mottoes is: All power to the but to the class Soviets. They demand not party Soviets but power power, class not party while the bolsheviks, in their demanded for the party. Principally from opinion, only power these reasons they are also opponents of the Bolshevik Party. In the beginning of the revolution, after the overthrow of Kerensky, they had, in common with the anarchists, their greatest influence in such places as Kronstadt, Samara and Kursk. They were not organized according to centralist,but decentralist principles. In many the strongest one in the places their faction was soviet. But the faction was not tied down by party disciplinein the voting. Everybody could vote as he desired. This connects fact that they did not want to acquire the power. The with the bolsheviks, on the other hand, who for fifteen years had prepared themselves for the power, were naturally compelled to resort to a different,much more rigid principle of organization. The iron party discipline of the bolsheviks required absolute obedience to the party orders issued.This centralism helped and this discipline


by far not the the Bolshevik Party to power, although it was strongest party in every place. As the program respects coincides of the maximalists in many left, the the the of social-revolutionaries program of with Since 1905 the motto of a separate presentation is unnecessary. hammer, In was : the maximalists plow and thought lies unity of to the Soviets; no All power power and right, and since 1919: to the pcfrrty. power As, at present, during the rule of the Bolshevik Party, all they have retired to the place where parties have become illegal, it still is most possible to bring their ideas before the people, namely to Ukraine. Thus the maximalists and the anarchists, etc., had the best possibility in Ukraine to especially under Machno, other propagate their ideas. Besides the maximalists, there is stillanhave developed left also who social-revolutionaries, union of call themselves Barbists. The name out of the narodniki and now ers. "barba," struggle. They are fightfrom the name Barbists comes In principle they do not differ from the maximalists. The agrarian program of the maximalists and the barbists As far as possible the peasants rests on the mir-organization. land the on communist lines. The land of the large shall cultivate kulaks the land owners (rich and peasants)shall be delivered into The peasants shall thereafter the possession of the commune. it in the Where common. peasants divide up the land cultivate between themselves they shall not be stopped with force, but care than he himself can should be taken that nobody receives more The both those who cultivate a cultivate. peasants of village, land form their own and those who cultivate the land in common, They enter into exchange relations with other coma commune. munes In the far the so as and cities. exchanged objects consist of larger agricultural implements, agricultural machinery and so they go into the possession of the commune. on, The peasants be the independence, shall guaranteed greatest politically and eco^'

nomically. These currents have developed principally in Ukraine, and even the anarchists of Ukraine accept this or a very similar program, so that all these movements differ only in their shadings, but not in principle. They are all decentralist, anti tarian, -parliamenanti-stateand federalist.

The Anarchists
Besides the above mentioned movements there is still another belongs to the group which socialist world in Russia, namely the anarchists. If we disregard single personalities, such as Bakunin Kropotkin and and the Russian anarchists in foreign we can trace the definite establishment of the anarchcountries, ist in Russia to the year of 1903. movement As among the social-democrats and the narodniks, there are the anarchists. The Individualist also many currents among 24

The Communist Anarchists have no movement worth mentioning. the on Anarchists and the Anarcho-syndicalists , contrary, had movement. at the outbreak of the revolution in 1917, and later,a mass stroy But as they did not want to conquer power but only dehave to-day they it, in accordance with their principles, The anarcho-syndicalist tendencies again lost their importance. the working people, and the anarchist ideas are stronger among the peasantry of Ukraine. among gain a footing in Russia, anarchist-narodniks, that There was. and is now, is, the native movement grants. of the people, and the anarchist-emiin other as The ideas of the anarchists are the same countries. Of importance here is only the position taken by the in anarchists to the revolution. .The Tolstoyan Anarchists were taken have a the minority. The revolutionary anarchists very a in the larly particurole, prominent revolution and played active part in the beginning of the revolution, in its destructive period against self-evidently, against czarism and Kerensky. They were, the Constituent Assembly, according to the formula: All power to the Soviets; and all this before the bolsheviks adopted these In many places the anarchists began the revolution. mottoes. For instance, in Jekaterinburg in the Ural the anarchists had carried out the revolution earlier than the workers of Petrograd. Already on June 5, 1917, the workers demonstrated under the leadership of anarchists in Moscow and Petrograd against the to the Soviets. Kerensky government with the motto: All power The credit for dissolving the constituent assembly does not belong to the bolsheviks, but to the anarchists. It was the anarchist Anatol Gregorevitch Zelesniakoff who, in January, 1918, at the stituent head of the Kronstadt sailors, broke into the session of the ConAssembly the told gentlemen representatives that and talked enough and that they could now they had now go home, help to get them started on the road. First or the sailors would direct action of the workers and soldiers through they, the after faced with a fait accompli (an acwith anarchist leanings, were complis the parties accepted the situation,and subsefact), quently Lenin also gave this fact his approval. Zelesniakoff fell in the fight against Denekin's white guardists at Jekaterinoslav July 26, 1919, after Denekin had put a price on his head of on 400,000 rubles.

The Syndicalists
The position of the Anarcho-Syndicalists is best explained by their resolutions. In their firstcongress after the revolution, August 25, 1918, the following decisions were on adopted by the Congress of the Confederation of the All-Russian Anarcho-Syndicalists

1. To battle against the power

of state and capitalism.

2. To

co-ordinate according to federalist principles the in25


pendent Soviets and to break way for uniting the indeants. productive organizations of workers and peas-

to the workers the forming of free Soviets 3. To recommend sars and to combat the institutions of the Councils of Commisis inthat is People, this an the juriou as organization of to the workers.
4. To

the workers dissolve the military armies and arm time making clear to them and the peasants ; at the same the absurdity of the idea of a "socialist vaterland"; for the workers and the peasants can only have the world for their country. 5. To battle against the counter-revolutionary CzeckO'-Slovaks and all other attempts of the imperialists in the most forcible way, not forgetting, however, that the extremely revolutionary bolshevik party has become stationary and reactionary.
6. To

transfer the distribution of the food stuffs and other necessities into the hands of the organizations of the workers and peasants directly and to discontinue the these armed excursions into the country, for through the farmers become the enemies of the workmeasures ers, the solidarity between workers and peasants weakens, and the revolutionary front is played into the hands of the counter-revolutionists.

has been put up by the and fast program anarcho-syndicalists. In order to get a clear understanding of their standpoint one must turn to the resolutions in their congresses I have asked one and their publications. For this reason A. Shapiro, of the most notable anarcho-syndicalists of Moscow, for an explanation of his standpoint and here I will give the most important points:
1. Fundamental the present



rule: Outside the proletariat, the policy of state of society is anti-revolutionary and counter-revolutionary. Parliamentarism, consequently, is counter-revolutionary, while it lies outside the proletariat. The policy inside the ranks of the proletariat is in the most intimate manner connected with the economic life. Revolutionary economic policy and revolutionary proletarian policy are the driving forces of the social revolution. be

2. If

it must a social character revolution is to assume laid put on the broadest foundation, that is, the annihilation of the existing state machinery, the overthrow of capitalism and all its resources ; bourgeoisie, liberalism, phrase socialism, middle class; the organization of a new society must be worked out on the basis of economic independence under negation and abolition of the wage system. 26

3. The

dictatorship of the proletariat, so-called,must not be but a tool in the hand of the revolutionary anything is that it dictatorship people. Characteristic of every hides within itself the tendency to autocracy, in so far it is a true dictatorship. A dictatorship of the proleas tariat the When never can, class exist. consequently, the that to working class is such a stage struggle comes top and the other classes underneath, the other classes on fore, will always try to get their property back. It will, therebe a small part of the proletariat that carries the do this, neither a can no party responsibility. But ledge, an nor anarchist. The parties have the knowcommunist, the theoretical basis, and also the great ideals, but they have not the spirit of the transition. A party must with necessity always be dogmatic. lation social revolution is an economic revolution. The annihiindustries the the and all control of of capitalism, The life the through the enemy workers. economic of for little about the form of the state, it cares class cares system, the factories, etc. On capitalism, the economic this ground the most natural and best qualified carrier labor is the the organizations, revolutionary social revolution of Without the the unions. participation of these be successful. no social revolution can

4. A

5. On

ship this ground one could, at most, speak of the dictatorof the revolutionary labor organizations inside the proletariat. The deeper the revolutionary politicalparties the into the revolutionary proletarian mass, dive down be transition. the period of shorter will

6. It is not in the first place a question of the dictatorship of the proletariat, but of the building of a body which is of the created by the proletariat for the maintenance social gains of the revolution. The dictatorship of one the proletariat leads to a soul-less mechanism, party over being that the party recognizes the principles of discipline and not the tactics of true life. 7. Dogmatic,

tic, mechanical party dictatorship leads to dogmamechanical centralization, as a party is not able to the ner. control economic life of a country in any other manDogmatic centralism kills every and mechanical initiative and destroys more than it builds up. It is characterized by destruction and not by construction.

In building a house one first lays the foundation 8. Axiom: last! In Russia it was the the opposite and roof comes The there is to do. The way. central decides what falls to halfway up because there is no structure pieces below. The Industrial Councils responsive action from be tools in hands of a central body, they the must not


must be the initiators,and their activity should only be regulated by the central body.
9. The Soviets must not be tools in the hands of a centralist body but the real source of life in their field of activity. Russia teaches us through dearly bought experience that ist our motto must be "from the bottom to the top". Centraldictatorship is not necessary, and least of all for all branches of life. Every branch should itself decide what is to be centralized.

10. Political and economic activity must be melted together into one. When politicaland economic problems go hand is the hand, become in they social problems. Economics organization of the conditions of life. Social politics is in all the conditions the relations between man and man of life.

anarcho-syndicalists are also for the Soviets but against their resolutions on Soviets the Soviets of politicalparties. From learn the difference between them and the bolsheviks can one in this respect. Among other things they contain:
The "In consideration of the role which the Soviets play in the lowing struggle against counter-revolution, we have to note the fol:

1. That the dissatisfactionof the workers with the bolshevik tactics in regard to Soviets and other organizations is the increase. on
2. That


the dictatorship of the bolsheviks over the Soviets other organizations of labor is pulling the workers the side of the Constituent Assembly. on to have
on a successful a

3. That

it is necessary for the working masses clear understanding of the Soviets to carry revolutionary struggle.

"The anarcho-syndicalists declare themselves for the Soviets, the purpose of which is to destroy the present centralist form of the state. We the contrary, the Soviets of on reject, the people's commissars, as these are in contradiction of the essence of the Soviets and paralyze the workers in the true Soviets of the workers and peasants. "We are "for the Soviets of the active population who are tories elected under such conditions that the workers from the facand the peasants from the village are directly represented that the delegates are no and party politicians, who cause the soviet meetings to be degraded into talking orgies. "We are for free Soviets, who make their decisions only in accordance with the wishes of the electorate. Hence, the decides that all anarcho-syndicalist fellow workers congress

shevik have to take part in the provincial Soviets in which the bolparty is not yet the ruling power, and where it is still possible to act in freedom."
these Besides also the anarcho-syndicalists there are Anarchist-Universalists and the Pan- Anarchists, who have come into development first after the revolution. These two tendencies are represented by the brothers Gordin. These tendencies arestillnew and unripe, and it would be too early to describe these ideas in this connection.

The "Nabat"


Besides those already mentioned there is in Ukraine a special into existence since the which has come anarchist movement, means Federation. "Nabat" alarm or revolution: The Nabat blast. In their last conference, which took place in trumpet Charkov in the beginning of September, 1920, they formulated their standpoint as follows:
1. The

statement of anarchist deserters that the Russian of anarchist revolution has corroborated the weakness the foundation. On theories, is completely without doctrine fundamental the contrary, principles of anarchist being confirmed through the are remain unshaken and test they have gone through in the Russian revolution. The experiences confirm us in this that we remain strongly to form to power any capitalism. and of opposed

2. The

denied that between the first anarchists have never days of the revolution in the anarchist sense and the is final purpose of anarchism, or the anarchist commune, a period of time during which the rest of the old servitude forms of a new slowly disappears and the new society into life. These gropingly struggle periods, full of faults and uninterrupted efforts towards perfection, and errors be given different names: the period of gathering can in living experiences without masters, the period of deepening the social revolution, or the first step to the One may anarchist commune. also call it the period of transition, in order to denote the characteristic features which lead from the imperfect to the perfect form of We prefer, though, not to use this demarcation, social life. because it has already acquired a distinct meaning in last 50 the socialistmovement the the With years. of "period of transition" is connected something term The expression "period of transition" and stiff. statistical in the program of international social-democracy Is so by the histpric-marxian penetrated spirit of slowness and historically conditioned predestination that it is unacceptable to us anarchists.


not of the opinion that the anarchist-communist be preceded by a syndicalist step, as a must system state to- anti-state anarchistperiod of transition from In the theory of the syndicalist order, which communism. ble in the place of the Soviets, is plainly discernishall come the influence of the orthodox, Marxist theory of the according to the relentless iron stepping stones which laws of social development must follow upon one another.



4. We

'dictatorship of the expression also rejectthe use in the labor," some comrades efforts of of spite of ' 'dictatorship it. This to us of accept who advise the labor" means than the of else widening nothing formula "dictatorship of the proletariat", which is now It must, finally, so conspicuously gone into bankruptcy. the masses lead to the dictatorship over unavoidably the the the a party, part of proletariat, officials and of leaders. It is impossible to co-ordinate anarchy some with a dictatorship of with any kind of dictatorship, even if it the the class-conscious workers over others, even in the interest of the others! We are were agreed that be the period of deepening of the social revolution may designated as the gathering of anarchist experiences the dictatorship of labor, on the or, if one so desires even ground that in this period the interests of the workers will stand higher than the interests of the parasites. One could just as well call these periods "the period of "dictatorship dictatorship the consumption", of of by some "dictatorship of agreement" or justice", other We are equally foolish name. compelled to exclude the "dictatorship". With the idea of contents of the word dictatorship is connected the idea of Ludendorff and Rennenkampf, the idea of unbridled brutal force and The introduction of the idea of the power. government dictatorship into the anarchist program an would cause unpardonable confusion in the minds.


5. The revolution that anarchism strives for, the revolution in which the parole of no rulership and of communism determines the course of events, finds many obstacles to its development. The strength of the active resistance on the part of those who are interested in the maintenance of capitalism and power, the inertia and the ignorance of the broad masses of the workers, can create conditions under which the rising anarchist commune will be driven far from their ideal. To concretely fix the eventual social forms of the future is impossible for the moment, because we cannot foresee the quantitative and qualitative contents forces which determine the reality of the future. the of For this reason we consider it useless to elaborate a program which should be applied to something that we do not know. We do not come forward with any minimum 30

but step upon the ground of present events with full rights and full conviction before the working masses, in order to show them the ideals of anarchism and in their purity". communism

These anarchists are also strong opponents of the Bolsheviks and not only declare that and the present soviet government to be have the bolsheviks revolutionary but stamp themceased openly as counter-revolutionary and reactionary. The "Nabats" they have, on the are movement; not identical with the Machno in taken contrary, another resolution quite strong exceptions him in to Machno but not an a see only revolutionary and They fought are also vigorously and persecuted by anarchist. illegalwork, and many in prison. the bolsheviks, recommend are


The Land


abolition of private property in land is perhaps the deepest change which the Russian revolution has brought into the social life of our private capitalist age. It was this that gave the Russian revolution the character of a social, or an economic, tion revolution. The German revolution has not shaken the foundafor reason that the of social order of private capitalism and did not go beyond the boundaries of a politicalrevolution. Now the Russian revolution has shown us that, on account the poor knowledge of of the Russian workers on the technical field,the expectations of the socialistsof all shades that private It has also property could be abolished have not been fulfilled. for that as supposes, precommunism shown economic equality, such is further required the elimination of the organized power of the capitalistsand the taking over of all these functions This, however, cannot happen in a through the proletariat itself. revolution of one or two years but requires a period of time, the length of which depends upon the development and the the the ability of proletariat of country. But the first and principal step has been taken by the Russian revolution. The land no longer belongs to the large land owners. In an agrarian like Russia, land is the the country most important one. question We will therefore start with this question. The taking away of the land from the owners of great it demand, was did not an that estates such elementary peasant to to them it. theories induce On the require any socialist contrary, the peasants were glued to the land. Frequently they did not wait for the law, which was to transfer to them the large selves. land owners; they confiscated it thempossessions of the Already during the Kerensky regime the peasants started with this confiscation. In Russia, before the revolution, the land tenure was different from land tenure in Germany. The peasants still had to a great Mir the had common They extent remains of old organization. still common Part pastures and similar economic interests. of them land, but had to pay such great taxes to the also had their own Czarist state, as well as rent to the estate owner, that they, in spite of it, lived in very poor circumstances. Nevertheless, 76.3% of the total arable land belonged to the peasants and 23.7% to the estate owners. In Ukraine only the land belonged to the 55.5% of peasants and 44.5% to the

In Ukraine the power was of the land owners estate owners. Russia. in than the rest of stillgreater When the revolution of 1917 broke out, the peasants took the largest part of the land of the estate owners and divided it between themselves. In Russia about 90% of the land fell into the hands of the peasants through the revolution while the state (1920) 96.7% of the arable land belongs obtained only 10%. Now In Ukraine 96.2% to the peasants and 3.3% to the government. of the land belongs to the peasants and 3.8% to the government. The land which the state took over was changed into government formerly the owners an Where of estate ruled, there rules estates. form is more the state. In many cases the present now agreeable to the peasants. Frequently the fine mansions of the former estate have fittedthem owner are in the possession of the peasants, who halls into as as up well meeting and amusement schools. But put at the disposition quite often these gentry mansions are now their summer vacations there or of soviet employees who spend have been their there. Others changed into homes send children for children,and according to the nature of the new arrangement If it is at their own the peasants are satisfiedor dissatisfied. their children's disposition, then they feel satisfied. But if or the "Sowbur", as the peasants call the soviet employees, have taken possession, then the peasants are dissatisfied. In some these of mansions children's colonies have been established,as already stated. In the gouvernement of Saratoff a large estate was In large buildings the nationalized. and gardens 120 children have been accommodated. Nearly all are war orphans or children of red soldiers.The children are well taken care of and are given schooling which according to Russian standards is good but, compared to German standards, deficient. The form of nationalizing the estates is, to be sure, no ideal Under the circumstances (war, the of socialism or communism. faith in however, it peasants' authority, demoralization, etc.), have been more difficult to drive through a different form. would According to the account of an Armenian secretary of the organizatio in Saratoff the fact of the of agricultural workers that the agricultural workers, matter, in that gouvernement, was driving the owners away after of the estates, took no pains to maintain agricultural production. They sold part of the took or for them their own mplements along personal needs; "urthermore, they did only as much work as was for necessary own itself compelled ;heir maintenance, so that the state saw ;o take the estate under its centralisticmanagement, it desired as to obtain from this gouvernement, belongs to the which most fertilein Russia, the grain which it required for its army this arrangement the agricultural and for the cities. Through before. The workers are certainly no better off than they were only difference is that formerly they were exploited by the owner by now the in estate and stafe. Thus the Armenian question ended his story. I may remark in this connection that


belonged to no party and, consequently, did not look at this man through things any party glasses. All agricultural workers who labor on these soviet estates are organized in the union ofagricultural ivorkers. In the gouverSaratoff this them 70 among union has 7000 members, nement leaving 50 20 comare communists, of whom state employees, munists the real agricultural workers. among
Through their union the agricultural workers receive their implements furnished by the state, when and other use-objects there is anything to be had. The ivorkers on the soviet tire estates the only country laborers or peasants who are industrially organized. All other peasants are unorganized.
In the whole gouvernement of Samara there are 120 soviet an there are 100-300 workers on average estates. On each I No. 6. There, 100 are estate. visited estate workers employed. Of these 7 are office people. The estate is 500 dessiatins in area, but only 200 dessiatins are cultivated (1 dessiatin 2.7 acres). The permanent 2000 are workers paid rubles per month. With "bonus" they may to 4000 come rubles. Day laborers receive 100 rubles per day. The working day is 8 hours. In the summer, however, they worked 2 hours overtime, for which they were hours 3 in this neighborwages. The buying power paid of money hood is: a pair of new 16,000 a shoes rubles; pair of old shoes 8,000 rubles; an earthenware teacup with saucer 750 rubles.

The Economic

Position of the Peasants

land is not to be sold, but under the formula: each one land as he can receives only as much cultivate, shuffling can take place. Thus: in the districtof Seelman in the German Volga the dessiatin for 6 Ibs. land one poor peasants give colony, of They need food stuffs. Land they can of butter and 10 eggs. if they always get again, only want to cultivate it. The German colonies on the Volga have existed for 163 years. The capital is Katrinenstadt, but is now re-baptized to Marxstadt. The second, i. e., the soviet revolution broke out there 3% months later, in February 1918. There also the peasants of the whole land took the from the large land owners before the colony decree was issued which adjudged them the land. Already under Kerensky they took the land unto themselves. two other forms Besides the government estates there are the First, land. there is the personal of possessing and working poorer ownership. There are richer peasants and there are in Germany there as are peasants, exactly smaller and bigger have the so-called artels. An peasants and cottagers. Second, we a artel is a Russian workers' partnership. In this case it means inside or a commune a peasant village. partnership, mostly There is stilla third collective form of working the land. In the spring and the fall the peasants work the land by mutually assisting


with plowing, sowing 34



bolshevik-communists oppose this form of possessing and the soil. In their VIII. party convention during the working in which they past year they have adopted a program specify : their position on the peasant question, as follows

"Considering that small peasant husbandry will continue to Party of Russia is trying exist for a long time, the Communist for have their purpose to increase out a series of endeavors which belong the the productivity of peasant labor. To such measures the the peasant's soil (discontinuance cultivation of regulation of strip field, of the three-fallow system, the narrow etc.)." in the standard Inequality of wealth and the difference of the peasants. They living is stillby no means evened out among did divide the land between themselves, but, according to my observations, the individualist tendencies of the peasants were more munist conspicuous in this partitioning of the land than the comtendencies. In the village of Riliensko, in the gouvernement there was land when the government of Nischni-Novgorod, revolution broke out. The peasants divided this land so that each peasant received one dessiatin. This proves that they preferred possession. In the village of personal possession to communal in the gouvernement Wuskristiansk of Samara each peasant has now land than before. A family of five persons more receives 4 dessiatins of land. This village has 10,000 inhabitants. Among these are 250 communists, while the social-revolutionaries littlemore a are numerous.
That there are stillrich and poor peasants in the country is traceable to the circumstance that the richer ones have rescued larger a for their stock of cattle and agricultural implements from own The "kulaks" times. were the part pre-revolutionary had in a the rich peasants who generally store village and became more well-to-do than their neighbors. But the cattle was fixed certain rules the government not confiscated. Although the about permissible maximum and requisitions what was above the maximum, the buying and selling of horses and cattle continues. A peasant, whom I know, bought a horse in the gouvernement for 300,000 rubles, while in the gouvernement of Tambov of Moscow it would have cost him 500,000 rubles. In the above mentioned village of Riliensko the peasants are allowed to keep from 3-5 sheep, 1-2 horses, and several cows, according to the family. In the there that are of size village peasants who still have five cows.
In the village of Novo Djevitsch, in the gouvernement of Samara, with a population of 5,000, there are 7,000 head of cattle and 120 horses. A further reason why some peasants are getting along better than others is, that the formerly well-to-do But the poor still have satisfactory agricultural implements. have peasants, who nothing, and can get nothing from the state, are compelled to lean on the richer peasants. The rich ones lend them their implements, but require, in return, labor from the


In this in some other manner. compensation village there is not a single communist. the peasants which is created The social inequality among in wealth is still further accentuated the difference through lack the through articles and of all kinds of manufactured industrial products. The- misery of the poor peasants is on the to get to the if they happen increase. Plows and harrows, is on are, very seldom, account of their scarcity, village, which not distributed to the peasants personally but to the communal happens that a rascal hides under the If it now management. keeps, of the two plows conhe signed commissar, mask of a communist to the village,one for himself and the other he gives to the but "communists" were any missars. made comwhole village. Hardly

foregoing is an which I have observed. actual case place in the village of Strokino in the gouverneThe commissar Moscow. other similar nuisance causes ment of In the Marxstadt district,in the German things to happen. from Volga colony, there are commissars who requisition the cows in barn. them own What to in their the peasants, put order the the government can peasant of manufactured articles is give the most insignificant that it in no manner covers even so In Novo Djevitsch each peasant obtained, in pressing needs. 0.88 American three months, not more than 1 Ib. (400 gram; 4 Once they Ib.)of salt. also received archins of cloth (1 archin equal to .71 meter or 2 1-3 ft.). The Russian peasant's hunger for manufacturedarticlesand industrial products is insatiable. Furthermore, the peasants are turn to to the over their state. In the village of compelled grain Novo Djevitschthe peasants must every year surrender 32 pud of 20 of flour. For their own needs they can keep a minimum taxes. Besides, 34 the Ibs.). peasants must pay pud (1 pud equals The taxes are, generally, very low. In the villages the taxes are delivered mostly in natural products. The paper of the communist 12, 1920, about the Volga Germans party among writes on May trict" an "Order for collection of the natura tax in the Marxstadt disDistrict tive Executo 'decision Marxstadt the : "According of Committee the natura tax for the year 1919 shall be collected from the villages of Strassenfeld, Otrogovska, Morgentau-Sujedino (and 19 others)."
The It took

Besides these taxes the peasant must furtherdeliver certain 9 appears 83 of the same a paper of May products. In number decree, signed by Lenin, as president of the Council of People's Commissars, by manager Bonch-Brujevitch and secretary Fotiticle Arthe butter delivery jeva,concerning and eggs. obligatory of 3 of this decree reads:
"The butter quantum prescribed by the People's Commissar Foodstuffs Commissariat for the year of 1920 for all rayons of the European Russia, of which have no dairies, amounts on an aver36

The total of to three Ibs. of melting-butter for each cow. the disposition the butter delivered and placed at public organs of fixed the for be prices. points at receiving at paid shall "Careless or slow delivery of the prescribed Article 9 says: to the strictestmeasures the state to take recourse duties will cause loss as of right against persons guilty of such neglect, such to their share of goods, exacting of a double quantum of butter, to persons in order to turn them over requisition of their cows, duties, their arrest of the who have punctually complied with guilty and his turning over to the local courts." A good deal has been said about the bad relationship between the soviet government and the peasants as a result of the requisition heard have I the very much, also government. policy of from the Not Moscow. in it counter-revolutionists, but much, of left from the archists maximalists, and ansocial-revolutionaries, partly from themselves. the communists and partly also But I shall say nothing about it, except what I myself have The other information, perhaps, can learnt from direct sources. by but by be proven myself. For the cases that I state, not others, I have no other proof than that I can refer to the fact that the peasants themselves have told it to me. than For the cities and the armies the state needs grain more industrial The textile peasants products, need anything else. But the state hardware, etc. articles and goods, manufactured has it because them these, nothing or next to cannot supply with But it cannot allow the soldiers to nothing for the great needs. that account. Hence it is compelled to demand the on go hungry from the peasants. It pays them a maximum price for it. grain is in proportion to the This maximum price of the government for industrial ant products. If the peasprice government's maximum industrial the ment products from the governneeded could obtain he would, no doubt, give his grain to the state without delay. trial The peasant must buy the indusBut such is not the case. products in open smuggle trade in the open market at usury prices. From the government he receives 100 rubles for one pud of flour. But for a roll of yarn he has to pay 3,000 to 5,000 rubles and for a pound of soap from 800 to 1,200 rubles. In order to buy what he necessarily must have, he is compelled to also Then he sell his grain or his flour at usury prices in the market. for a pud of flour.That enables him to cover receives 20,000 rubles his most pressing needs.

The peasant is, consequently, not inclined to turn over his for this we have justseen. They grain to the state. The reason are obvious. But as the state must have the flow for its existence, it sends soldiers into the villages who requisition the grain The from the peasants, waiving the question of right or wrong. peasants hide their grain. If it is found, then one may often say: "May God have mercy We have previously quoted a them." on decree of Lenin's, which deals with punishment of the peasants. Not infrequently it happens that the requisitioning soldiers take



It is also easy to understand rights than the decrees give them. honorable is that it proletarians which form not the most the requisition companies, but it is mostly the worst elements, Finally, the peasants which have been brutalized by the war. no themselves are aestheticizing philosophers or pacifists,but it frequently to a comes and as a consequence naturally coarse, best, in the come out second peasants generally collision, which or they are either unarmed as poorly armed. Single instances may be picked out at will. Although these do not give a whole picture, they can serve as illustrations of the Volga German the district In the Seelman colonies, of events. 2,000 soldiers made their entry into the villages about the end before the of May, in order to take the last grain supplies away Novo there In were harvest. the new Djevitch peasant village of ilar riots three times, each time suppressed. I have also heard of simin the Ukraine. cases for peasant rebellions or discontent is the Another cause By means law about mobilization of labor power. of this law the peasants can be compelled to fell trees. Frequently the peasants do not want to go. They prefer to go after their work in the deputation to a village in which a government fields. I came had justarrived, in order to make the peasants start felling trees. The women were also required to go along. They did not want to do it,and they began to cry. But finallythey went. The peasants fell time, they trees to some were at other said, but willing it they that then. But to was easy would rather understand not not go at all. And why should they? They reaped no advantage from so doing. The pay which they were to receive for it is so insignificant, that they do not want to work for the state.

On the other hand, the state has succeeded in considerably improving the fuel situation through these energetic, frequently In the cities of Moscow and Petrograd quite draconic measures. it has this winter (1920-1921)been a good deal better than it last year. The city dwellers, including the city proletariat, was viks the ones who are benefited by this, and not only the bolsheare but everybody else concedes that the providing of fuel now is somewhat improved. Nevertheless, there are many viks, non-bolshe-

ists anarchsuch as mensheviks, social-revolutionariesand even the tactics through which the bolsheviks have exacted who reject these performances. The precarious position of the cities and their dependence the country for provisions and, partly, for fuel leads to upon opposition between city and country. The peasants are hostile to the cities. But above everything they hate the requisitioning soldiers, and they are no friends of the state, as they get nothing from the state, or as good as nothing, while the state wants to The opposition, and in a certain get a good deal from them. the hostilitybetween the peasants and the state took exsense, pressio from the side of the peasants, in hostility to the city. There is a danger lurking in this fact, which, however, will be

the state (which to the peasants means the industrial them again supply with products. city) Through all these circumstances and through the distress in he has lost his inclination to which the peasant findshimself, tensive cultivate the soil. The peasants no longer cultivate the land as inThe has as diminished. in When before. productivity Germany it is said in influential government circles, that only intensity the labor the can German save work, only raising of of it true. life, is The the very capitalists, economic of course, mean labor of wage slaves, while the socialists, who can also accept this formula, mean the work of the whole population, with elin" ination of the capitalistcoupon clipper,snobs and idlers. But this to Russia. For, Without doubt, applies in stillgreater measure Russian economic life is a hundred times more disarranged than German as the German economic life. Just as little proletarians for intensive labor but, on the more their obey government's call intensity decrease the contrary, rather where possible, so the Russian workers also do not think of any increase of production. Like the German proletarians they say to themselves : "For whom? fruits The of this do not go to me." be recorded that the cultivated area in Russia Thus it may has considerably decreased. According to the reports of the the in the gouvernement soviet government cultivated area has gone down of Charkov 65% in the year 1920, in the Jekaterinoslov 40%, in the gouvernements of gouvernement Poltava Odessa Cherson, 15%. But it is to be noted of and that in the gouvernements of Jekaterinodav and Poltava large have been by the the cultiwar parts operations, and still covered vated has in decreased the Charkov district, area as as much not beaten, has been free from every kind which, since Denikin was invasion from are and of armies. These figures of extra-ordinary importance. Unfortunately, it has not been possible for me to get figures for the other gouvernements, particularly from Central Russia. The decrease in the cultivated area on the part of the peasants to in the falling the dustria inthe corresponds productivity off of workers and the city proletarians. But, while in regard to the proletarians we in poor must seek the principal reason in the general nervous break-down after years nourishment and of war-like efforts,that is,in unconscious factors, and only partly in conscious will,springing from revolutionary class consciousness (with the Russian proletarians it is almost exclusively the first we the named causes), must seek it elsewhere when it concerns Only to a by are they down breakpeasants. small extent affected The principal and indifference due to many years of war. reason lies in the simple words: We have nothing to gain by it. To all this comes another circumstance : The shortage of seed In drain. many villages the peasants use up the seed grain or tne seed potatoes for other purposes. Frequently the government was compelled to requisition the seed grain of the peasants for other gouvernements. removed
as soon



by means of the it bad, that Russian so worst sample of organization, could not bp worse even under czarism. Russian bureaucracy is a chapter but the distribution of the seeds interests us in this of its own, gives the connection. The bolshevik paper "The Ural Worker" 19, following picture of the conditions. In an article of May "It is 119, the paper writes, under the heading: 1920, number impossible to delay any longer" :
supply the need of seed grain of the farms there is needed According to the reports of the district committees, 2,910,487 pud of grain (1 pud equals 34 Ibs.), outside of committee vegetable seeds and seed potatoes. But the gouvernement has delivered only 26.25% of the seeds, that is, little than one quarter of the quantity needed. Of this the more district Schadrinsky has received 9.5%, the districtIrbitsky 17.5%, but the district Kamischlovsky and Krasnoufimsky How can 51%. such an unjust and unequal distribution of The writer of the article seeks the the seed be explained?" in the incompetency reason sons and lack of good will of the perthe distribution committee. on As a matter of fact there obtains in the Food Stuffs Committees of the gouvernements (these committees are called "Gubprodkom") a terrible bureaucratism, which in the most intimate manner connects with the system of centralism. "To

But the distribution has been undertaken

The paper further relates that in the gouvernement of Jekaterinburg in Ural a total of 461,136 pud of seed potatoes were available only required. Up to May 9 there was 10,000 pud, or about 2.2%. But even this insufficient quantity it in but divided was was a way, regular not all sent, to four districts, the 2,600 exception of pud, while six with districtsreceived nothing. Of the remaining 2,600 pud the took 1,000 pud for its consumers* society of the commune the bolshevik own (Since part. victory the consumers* societies in Russia have been made state organs.) The figures finds quoted show plainly in what position the government itselfwhen it comes to ability to deliver and distribute seed
grain, particularly seed potatoes. "I shall not look for the causes of this bankruptcy, bu1 must point out that the 'Gubprodkom' in its present composition has leaders to whom momentary effect is the main thing, instead of organizing the work rationally. The measures hind adopted by the leaders of the 'gubprodkom' stand far bethe real needs in the place concerned."
a committee of the Food Stuffs Commissariat before the council of the firstlabor army, of May, 1920, No. 1743.)

(Quoted from the report of

The author of the article sought a way out of the dilemma by allowing the collective peasant organizations, the partnerships as well as other organizations, to buy the seed and the communes, 40

in open trade. grain and the vegetable seeds and seed potatoes this Petrograd, He refers to the gouvernement where remedy was of In the gouvernement found. of Petrograd permission has been tions vegetable gardens, the soviet organizagiven to the communal and other organizations to practice free buying of seeds, and better results have been obtained. More than 10,000 dessiatins supplied with seed grain. of land were livery deFrom these reports it is evident that the unsatisfactory important is an cause of the unsatisf of seeds and seed grain the soil. cultivation of

I am not here concerned with criticizing Soviet Russia; that sian thing a which we in the present period must leave to the Rusis here to depict the workers themselves. What interests me That this the condition is not peasants. economic conditions of The Russian peasbrilliant the descriptions given have proven. ants but less for ivant of food than dire are want, want, suffering for want of industrial products. If the Russian revolution, the dustria party ruling at present, succeeds in appeasing the hunger for inproducts, then the revolution will develop into freer forms, then no reaction can any longer interrupt its progress ; but, if not, then the fate of the revolution is in the dark.

As I am writing down my experiences not that they may merely to an archive existence as dead matter, nor in be condemned order to give the counter-revolutionaries water on their mills, nor in order to call on the German workers for a spiritlessand apelike imitation of the Russian bolshevik and revolutionary policy, but rather have been inspired with the sincere desire that the revolutionary workers should benefit from the experiences of the Russian revolution and learn from it, I cannot abstain from pointing out that the world's hand and brain workers, as well as the peasants, must guard against turning over the organization distribution to a soulless and even lifeless state bureaucracy of it be bureaucracy. a Revolutionary workers! You if communist from the examples of Russia that the state was see not able to the the the get seed grain and vegetable seeds and seed potatoes to the peasants, through its organs! You have also learnt that the peasants, when they had a free hand to supply their own needs themselves, as happened in the gouvernement of Petrograd, solved these problems quicker, easier and better. May this be an admonitio hint fo"r a the to trust too much and world's workers not to the state and its omnipotence. Even a communist-proletarian is no state exception to this; yes, in such a state it might be still more because, to begin with, the workers are not trained difficult, and accustomed to organizatory state work, and because the old bureaucrats will sabotage as far as possible. This is also what they did in Russia. Besides, the state is compelled, in all urgent cases, to turn the matter over to free organizations or private persons, who are then better able than the state to find the right way and complete the organization. With this we will not say that the private initiative of the capitalistought to be restored"


important although this also is done in Russia, inasmuch as more important for the army matters and other similarly purveying to private parties ; we turned over were only wish to point out that there is no \more incompetent apparatus for organizing the try to mainbolsheviks The than the may tain state. economic life as often as they please that it was not possible to organize to as long as it was necessary all this in a satisfactory manner, being the but war that the now, on war, concentrate all power the economic side of reconstruction can begin. The fact that over, time, when the state made its greatest efforts to during the war its throat and on solve all problems quickly, when the knife was it was it did not shrink from any measures, not able to solve the it, but the that most difficult matters placed confronted problems individual persons, is in the hands of free organizations or even it cannot a striking proof of the incapacity of the state, for when idealism is in is it time a strongest, when when make good at danger, then it is stillless capable of doing it in less dangerous times.

Conditions of the Peasants The Political


life is of great significance for the the economic one can out easily admit withpolitical form, that is something Thus, taking possession of the land by being a -Marxist. than one respect an economic and a polthe peasants is in more itical The time. new the the same form, act at of political life, intimate in manner the most connects with Soviets (thecouncils), vided the economic transformation.In many places the peasants diIn order to divide this in the property of the landowner. between themselves, and for the purpose a just manner of arranging as the new well relationships with neighboring villages as its relations to the whole country, they elected councils. Here The building of we already have the roots of the soviet system. the this soviet system could, naturally, not be the same among The the as city proletariat. peasants could not elect peasants with their Soviets by the factory. They elected them by the communes by the districts. They did not elect them according to ecoor nomic units but according to territorialunits. The state soviet however, also elect according to their agricultural communes,
occupations. The local Soviets, the smaller district Soviets and the gouvernehad, have, the tions, ment Soviets of peasants and mostly economic funcif we except a few educational and school questions. It is a question of regulating traffic, roads, transportation to connect the for trade with purposes or, speaking socialistically, cities for exchange, and similar things. The economic and politicallife here very intimately connected. are But all these things have to do Although nothing with party politics. most of the peasants belong to no party, they still have elected their Soviets according to party. This, of course, done in party interest,not in the was

interest of the peasants; but that springs from historic reasons. the peasants frequently elect non-partisan Soviets. Still, the peasants Naturally, all the parties tried their luck among has the Russia in For he in the beginning of the revolution. who sheviks bolthe Thus peasants behind him is building on a strong power. the peasants when Lenin gained great sympathies among Later they lost these sympathies made the peace at Brest-Litovsk. to into the the by requisition villages soldiers sending again grain. To-day the peasants are no longer so much interested in the in the beginning of the revolution. They are parties as they were for the Soviets and will probably always remain in favor of still them, but the parties are not of such a stable nature as the soviet selves idea. It has often happened that the peasants have showed themhusbandry or Socialism, rather, communist against all parties. as a the peasants and mode of living, does not strike the Soviets are not identical with For that reason party matter. libertarian communism Still, think. as many workers communism, For kind has always been connected with a of council system. their own when the peasants or the workers in a place manage or their they then Soviets, which councils, always elect affairs, decide' on all matters that cannot be decided by each one separately. At the present time there are in Russia many peasants but who take a stand for the soviet who are not communists The system. soviet system is then for them only a form of direct politicalrepresentation with elimination of all interferences from toric But, as in the hisa central body in the local self-government. the the the parties still revolution outbreak of moment of power of attraction over the peasants, we have to exerted some note that one party finallysucceeded to gain and assert influence and power in the councils. But to the extent that the party sueceeded in gaining poiver and control in the Soviets, to that extent Of course, the larger the party the freeSoviets lost their power. is, the less this loss of freedom is felt. If most of the Soviets then the consist of representatives elected as party members, feel correspondingly free, provided they agree party members the tactics with and politicsof the party. But it often happens that the peasants have not put any party listsin the fieldfor the stances soviet elections. Particularly in the Ukraine have I found inhave I been this. the of present at several meetings of Sovexecutive committee of the districtSoviets and gouvernement iets, in the as well once the congress of gouvernement all Soviets ,as in Samara. The deliberationsturned upon the economic situation. But I noticed that the economic policy was determined in accordance higher bolshevik the The party. with the program ities, authorof such as the Council of People's Commissars, issue decrees through the different People's Commissariats and their department for agriculture, for education, for trafficand transportation, and the Soviets are the organs which have to carry out these decrees or see to it that they are carried out.


iet At a meeting of the Executive Committee of the District Sovtwo in the province of Charkov on Sept. 13, 1920, there were discussion: the The army, (1) provisioning of matters under According to the decrees and (2) The procuring of fire wood. of the Council of People's Commissars, each precinct had to deliver a certain quantity of wood and provisions, according to its possibilities. A representative reported how the peasants in one precinct refused to help out with the wood cutting because they He thought it would be necessary to, at least, received no pay. give the peasants promises of delivery of goods to them, after which they would probably help out. Without such help of the peasants it would be impossible to obtain the required quantity of wood. bands Another representative spoke of the fact that there were for difficult the in the men wood cutting woods which made of induce the to be It the peasants. necessary peasants to would drive these bands away, but this the peasants do not want to do. that (The reason why the peasants did not want to do this was "bands" belonged to these There was them themselves.) many of also a speech by a delegate from the department for care of the wounded soldiers from the Polish and the Wrangel fronts. He in lurid colors, in order to described the misery of the wounded of prevail upon the representatives of the Executive Committee life than on a the Soviets to send them the means of greater scale before. From these accounts it is evident that the business and the politicalfunctions scribed of the Soviets are limited to a certain circumit For biggest the field cannot go. part it outside of which is no longdr an to the the bottom organization working from top, but, on the contrary, from the top to the bottom', and it could hardly be otherwise for a state with a war-time administration of its national husbandry.
the peasants this administration from above frequently proves oppressive and disagreeable, not to use a more powerful to This comes in term. the mune, plainly expression soviet comin the is in hands cases the many where administration not but in the hands of a of a locally elected soviet or manager, or person selected by a Supreme Council of National Economy, an The feel thus agricultural commissariat. peasants anything but free. To begin with, the estate is in the hands of the state, have already shown. as we The peasants do not feel as owners the they In the second place, the appointed of cultivate. soil frequently manager carries on a regime comparable to that of the old land owner. Thus we read in the "Pravda," a well known bolshevik paper, of July 1, 1919, No. 141: "The manager ("Sovchos")is often like the dog in the hay who does not eat it himself but won't let anybody else eat it, either. The whole establishment is in a state of collapse. (It refers to a soviet establishment in the gouvernement Tver.) The manager, an ex-land-owner, is a dirty, run-down old man of melancholy aspect, who seems already to belong


The peasants feel only hatred towards to another world. In every gouvernesuch a "sovchos" or "spez" (specialist). hear local one district or may angry attacks on such ment an The gravati agrarian policy is an agmanagement. result of such of the strained relations between the peasants and the soviet power." It is clear that when the "Pravda" writes this it also -has for so doing, as it is calling the attention of the governreason ment has, of course, terest inno to these conditions. The government in aggravating such conditions, but, on the contrary, in removing But it appears from the numerous them. attempts that it is very difficult And we must not blame it on lack of good will for the leaders of or gouvernements, on the part of the government the soviet republic do not lack good will, but the cause of it is the system of nationalization, the system of indirect relations of in working the the peasants to the soil and to the management

soil. The ideal of the peasants is to feel free and to work on free soil.But that is also the ideal of all socialists. Under the conditions described, the Russian revolution has not yet come to a realization of this ideal, as the quoted lines from the "Pravda" show. It is not to be wondered at that Russian revolutionists make the to these ideals nearer question whether they would not have come if different tactics had been adopted. The social-revolutionaries the t he the left, anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists, the maximalists, of as "Yes" well as part of the Ukrainian communists answer to this question. Above everything they are against the requisition policy o/ the government and, according to their agrarian comprogram, against the nationalization of the land, for a more munal pendence, form, for a form that ivould give the peasants more1 indefor such a form of possession and cultivation of the through Soviets soil as would give the peasants the management, by themselves. elected Against this the bolsheviks declare that they also are for these principles, but that the realization of them is so difficult" the peasants delivered nothing to the armies of the government ures. and the cities that it became necessary to resort to stern measThe decree policy of the bolsheviks is in their opinion correct. Lenin says on the question, in a speech on "the position in of the bolsheviks to the middle peasantry," made in Moscow March, 1919: "Fundamentally decrees on agricultural economy our are We have least the disown to deplore or correct. not occasion But if these decrees in themselves are corany of them. rect, then it is absolutely false to force them upon the peasants with violence. In not a single decree is there any mons question of this. They are conceived as guides, as -a sumto political activities." But these words of Lenin could not prevent that the practical enforcement of these decrees meant the use of force against the peasants. That is what constitutes the difference between 45

theories and rough practice. Although fine-polished

bolshethe viks ing knowgive the peasant question the greatest attention, well the them, for death peasants still that it is .a question of life and It the the thanks government. of attention repudiate with crees he says that these decannot be denied that Lenin is right when but have us, He fundamentally right. added for are should interest of the in is the decree The the for policy peasants. not the is, above mentioned anti-state consequently, only state. It in principle. But as the decree the policy parties who reject and liberty is possible only realization of socialism, communism in a the through the abolition of change or improvement state, them more satisfied, the position of the peasants which would make is attainable only in the anti-state direction. For these ideals the wishes of the people, cannot be banished from the efforts and of the article by Trotzky and Radek in which not even by means they try to inform the workers and the peasants that free labor is charis a bourgeois superstition. But the anti-state movement acterized by the cancelling of all decrees. Along that road the is being pressed through the striving of the soviet government These endeavors peasants for self-government and independence. tendencies the harmony in of the are anti-state with also the the social anarcho-syndicalists and also maximalists, tionaries -revoluthe peasof the left. // the endeavors and movements of better a the tendencies the get anti-state socialists sants and of press fonvard to victory, then first will the footingand finally being realized. program of the social revolution have a chance of in which everyThe peasants do not desire any state communism thing is accomplished by order from the top, they want comif you so want to call it, mimal self-government, communalism, freedom to regulate their own affairs after their own which means desires and wishes. But this liberty they do not have under decrees. As long as bolshevism, in spite of all well-meaning this most important of questions, the peasant question, is not solved to the satisfaction o/ the peasants, we cannot consider the first even stage of the social revolution completed. First when this happens, the foundation is created for a peaceful development upward of social life. Under the present conditions, created by bolsheviks, the the suppression of one layer of the people, or class, by the other is still a living fact, carrying with it armed, violent Under the uprisings. rule of the bolsheviks the Russian revolution has not solved the peasant question but only complicated i1 But that should not cause more. us to be astonished, for th" still bolshevik party is a Marxist, a city-proletarian party, and it i; natural that the conquest of the state through a part of the citj proletariat in which the peasants have no part cannot brin^ them liberation. The emancipation of the peasants can be accomplis only by the peasants themselves. Without doubt the social-revolutionaries of the left or the maximalists would, a* peasant parties, have dealt with the question with more standing underthan the bolsheviks. The latter are the least fitto solve the peasant question along socialist lines. 46
^ "

The City and Industry

The Development
of the Unions
the peasants the principal feature of the revolution was taking possession of the land. For the proletariat of the to take possession of cities and the industries the aim was The problem transportation. means the factories, mines and of knowledge than because more no was easily solved in the country, for the cultivation of the soil (in Russia before was necessary but in not yet introduced), scientificcultivation of the soil was difficult. industry the situation was more But in In the country the combination of things was easy. industry the combination was complicated. In the country there intermediate stages. Taking possession of the soil was were no the immediate aim. In the industrial centers another effort came to the surface in the firstperiod of the revolution and demanded a solution, namely, workers' control, control of the industries. This rallying word was sounded already during the Kerensky It to the attempts of the workers to overthrow period. corresponded autocracy in the factories as well as the czar's autocracy in politics. Democracy desired in industry as well as in ecowas nomic life. The workers felt that, to make their emancipation a reality, the revolution in political life would have to be followed by a revolution on the economic field. That the workers did not immediately demand the turning over of the factories had several For this purpose reasons. the Kerensky government would first have to be overthrown or compelled to resign, but even in a condition to conthen they did not feel sure that they were duct its in the owner, production entirety without private who in many cases the technical leader. Finally the workalso was ers were probably influenced by the circumstance that they felt that the czar ruled over the people but was of the not the owner he that in did was but the people, and sovereign not own state is the state. Nor a general the owner of the soldiers but he rules Authority, consequently, is not always based them justthe same. on if private thinkable that, even property. The possibilitywas property in the factories and in industry was abolished, mastery could stillcontinue. In fact, this instinct of the workers was correct, for at present private property is, on the whole, abolished in Russia, without giving the workers cause to feel that they are or the controllersof production masters of shop. The decree creating individual management the is the cause of this. Conof shops



trol of industry in the shop is an essential part of proletarian The proletariat must, consequently, first of all conquer. democracy.

Control of industry, which was the demand of the workers in became so strong that it resulted the October days of 1917, finally in control over the employer. After this, taking possession of the a as matter and began soon shops came after. But of course is the the factories onfy the taking over negative sidd; the of First in the managing positive side is their management. of them In the country the case begins socialistor communist economy. is similar, but there it is much simpler. the question which forms The most burning question now, is : What organization will underthe very center of socialization, take disposal the the manuthe raw to procure material and factured of the workers with products, and what organs will supply Only when the workers have created the necessary means of life. can the taking over of the factories this purpose organizations for The misfortuneof the Russian workers was meet with success. that they, under that they had no such organs at their disposition, to in a the rule of czarism, were create such organs. position not It was this rock that socialization in Germany exactly on tion days of 1918. The theoretical foundastranded in the November kind. this On that trade was the German not of unions of point only the French syndicalist unions have fought themselves through to a clear understanding of the role of the labor organizations for the realization of the social revolution. The German if not always syndicalists also have taken this standpoint, even 1919, Christmas, they adopted so clearly,but in their congress of Up to the present time they are the only labor a clear program. find a clear program can we organization in Germany with whom for the taking over the sumption and organizing of production and conby the workers. The lack of a clear understanding of hoiv the different industrie work hand in hand, as well as the lack of proper organizations for the purpose, had for resultthat the workers, who had idea no ods, of these things and only knew capitalisteconomic methidea kept the these on retained and running along capitalist of lines. But when they had taken over the factories they found themselves in the place of the single private owner, the factory owner, or the capitalist stock companies. That means that they divided the owners' now them. But between did not that profits abolish capitalism ; it had only been changed from private ownership form Capitalist comanother, collective of ownership. petition, ^into the cheating of consumers, the more favorable position in demand or more of the workers who produced goods more important, all this remained as before, and under similar circumstances it will be the same in any place. The workers of the world must keep this in sight. That the idea has not yet broken through in the labor movement that the workers are not only exploited as producers but also as consraw48

The that depends very likely upon the influence of Marx. been which calls itselfMarxian has never whole labor movement directed upon the carrying on of a struggle against the exploitation There was not sufficient tion attenof the workers as consumers. The workers called to this circumstance in their propaganda. but also in are not cheated and exploited only in the factory, the satisfying of all their needs.

Economic life consist of two parts, production and consumption. In the capitalistsystem both parts, naturally, a chance offer For the that the reason for the workers. ers work.exploitationof should combat both these kinds of exploitation equally, if they want to annihilate the capitalist system and replace it with a But they did not do this, and they or communist system. socialist it Even doing their struggle is directed more to-day are not yet. field of production. Only as producers against the exploitation on the have they created class struggle organizations, and only as producers are they fighting the battle against capital. The consumers' not class societies,which existed in Russia, were Nor Even if Germany. they in are so struggle organizations. have there are consumers' as workers societieswho only members, they stillare only class organizations, but no class struggle organizat Towards the end they also began to function as by taking care of workers in strikes. Evident as such a little, this matter is, equally regrettable is it that the workers neither have nor had any class struggle organizations on the fieldof consumption. It can be understood because the workers were, and directly exploited only as producers. But as consumers are, they indirectly exploited. The direct exploitation the workers can are easily see and understand, the indirect exploitation they discern difficulty. The socialists made use with more of this circumstance. They showed the workers that they were exploited as producers and called on them to organize and to fight. But this is quite unpardonably thoughtless. It was the duty of the socialist to to the propaganda point out workers that side of the exploitat which was equally important, although not so easy to It was, of course, see and understand. easy to induce the workers to struggle for a higher wage. But what good did this one-sided battle as producers do them? No good at all! Even if they won the struggle and got higher wages, the capitalists always had the the the other side of exploitation open, side of which the workers had not thought. The capitalistraised the price and of his wares thus rolled the wage in other increase on the consumers, or, increase the exploitation was minishe words, through the wage not diby one iota.

With impetuous force the Russian workers fought for the abolition of private ownership of the establishments by capitalists. And they succeeded. If they had fought with the same petuosit imthe kind field the on against second of of exploitation, But this they could not do ; for the Russian consumption, then workers the abolition of capitalism was equal to the abolition of


emthe capitalists. They had embodied the exploiter in their own ployer. But the exploitation through consumption was a son pernot A system, hoivever, can not be removed by a system. ; it was This was also verified on the removing or driving away persons. sofieldof production. An economic system which in the human ciety fills the functions of supplying the population with all the for life,cannot be removed except by things that are necessary means of another economic 'system, and only to the extent that this new system is capable, in each single instance, of stepping into the breach of the old.

development of the Russian revolution shows us this on every workers point. The German and the workers of other They have learn from this to build must experience. countries in a their up organizations, which steps socialisteconomic system in the place of the capitalistsystem. If they do not do this and a politicalrevolution breaks out, then the revolution will remain diately. they should begin with it immeonly political. For this reason The workers have to organize themselves into consumers' or create unions which on the day afterthe revolution are unions tions capable of taking consumption into their hands. Such organizathe "Bourse du Travail" (laborexchanges), are or "Arbeiterboerse," as the Germans call them. Without such organizations the Russian workers did, errors as they will commit the same door out through one and capitalism, which they had thrown had because its thought they conquered politicalrepresentative and into evidence again from all has been made powerless, comes the socialistbeginnings, until corners and crevices and overgrows the workers are able to make it superfluous through their own to put error new-formed economic organizations. Bu\t it is a fatal into hands this new the the economic system state. of We left the Russian revolution at the stage where the workers took possession of the factories and, partly at their own expense, produced for themselves without attacking the capitalist German system of consumption. This is by some social-democratic theoreticians, among them Kautsky, being described as "syndicalism." There is nothing more false than such a statement, which they either make out of ignorance or intentional deceit. A glance in at the declaration of principles of the syndicalists is sufficient to A this. thorough this one any convince of refutation of order error or deception is,however, beyond the scope of this book. That the Russian workers undertook nothing else and were in no position to do anything else is traceable to the circumstance that they had no organization for the purpose. They lacked the unions which as the embryonic cellsof the new socialisteconomic system develop the required abilitiesand organize for the tasks which enable the workers to crowd out the capitalist economic system with a socialistsystem. The Russian unions date back only from the year 1905. After the victory of the reaction they were again dissolved and had mostly to lead an underground existence. After 1910 they The

but during the years of the war they started to develop once more, fought most strenuously by the czarist government again and suppressed. After the overthrow of czarism in March 1917 the unions in began to push forward in a powerful manner, so that, when July a conference of the unions took place in Petrograd (the were third conference), represented already 1,475,425 members by 220 delegates. At this conference it became apparent of Two different Russian the cies tendenwere. unions what character were and one right. The left wing took represented; one left the stand that the unions should repudiate every thought of class conciliation and of the possibilityof co-operation with the bourgeoisie. But this left wing lacked about 15-20 votes of a majority and its propositions did not carry. But resolutions were adopted calling for a greater taxation of the owning classes,for the introduction of maximum prices o"n the most important products, for control of production, for direct participation in the affairs of the state by the most important branches of production, for rigid bank control, for compulsory syndicating and trustification, for reorganization of the organs of state control. At the same time a declaration was made that the process of control were for the proletariat to take over, alone or in prepontoo difficult derance.

From the stand thus taken by the unions it will be seen that, \ in consequence cupied of the revolutionary situation, the unions octo the front even themselves with problems, which came in the German 'revolution, production, the right control over to in the a engaging and discharging workers, of workers voice have occupied themselves with In they Germany so on. and also democratic demands, with the transplantation of democracy into industry, something which the capitalists resisted under the "master of the house". In spite of all the they that were slogan that this workers' control signifies,it stillis nothing progress than the introduction of democracy in the economic life, else but it is not the socialrevolution in itself. Even such organizations which are not in principle for the social revolution may put up for joint control, as for instance the German such demands "free" unions did, unions which were free only in the sense that they did not stand in the service of any socialistideas. later the October revolution broke out and ended in When a bolshevik victory, the bolsheviks, as a radical-democratic party, to the place of work. The wished to carry the revolution over themselves workers also,naturally, wanted to make the revolution into a social revolution, that is, altogether eliminate the capitalists.


then it became evident that this was not so easy as Because And the why not? expected. workers of Russia were in a not position to abolish capitalism, in the hands of which the whole economic life had rested up to that time, without exposing economic life to the worst kind of crisis.The social



with tasks to which they revolution confrontedthe workers in But were as a party which their first not eqvjoii onrush. could lean the on only working class and on no other class (on the had the power in the state, this peasants only conditionally) to had take the over party also responsibility for the economic life, if it did not wish to either leave the capitalists in their on the economic field or again give up its position of power But they power. political could undertake nothing without the they had as no workers, state organs at their disposition for these purposes. They, consequently, turned to the unions. The workers strove for economic liberty, for elimination of exploitation by the In cases they chased the employer to the devil; many employers. 1 1 irany he left his factory or his works in the lurch, from cases despair, or from the hope to be able to sabotage production by this means, that the workers, who would then understand so their own incapacity, would call him back again. In a number it has also happened that to-day the old employer is of cases leader of the establishment. Not with the old right of the again ownership, it is true, but as a so-called specialist,who is far better off than the worker. As the workers now industry, they elected started to run that for purpose committees, so-called factorycommittees. These the factories. But as the state factory committees took over it the into indirect products needed contact with created^ entered the factory committees through the unions. With the factory committees themselves the state could not do business, because for that purpose a large apparatus would have been necessary. The unions thus received the role of negotiating production for the state. The ruling party soon recognized the important role which falls to the unions on the field of production and on the whole economic field in general, and, as many of the party belonged to the members unions (itcontinued, after all,to be a party mostly composed of workers), it sought, through its members, to place the unions under the influence of the party and the best way for make them subordinate to the party. This was the ruling party to secure control of production and to place the whole of production in their service. The bolshevik party also declared in their program that "the organization apparatus of industry nationalized must firstof all rest upon the unions." The factory were, committees consequently, children of the revolution^ sprung from the needs of the workers to create organs But the workers could not help but of managing the factories. soon perceiving that this alone was not sufficient. If they did not want to remain in the capitalist economic system they were to an compelled place consumption also upon organized] basis. But for all these tasks they had never fellowship prepared themselves. All this was so new to them that they, to begin with, had to go through many experiments, many mistakes. Instinctive^ ly, or from very obvious reasons they turned to their unions. In


had to look for their natural agents and representatives further strengthened in their confidence They were that the new in the unions through the circumstance ruling to turned the the to more or, state, also plainly, party, speak errands and wanted to use the unions for unions with the same a As the unions still were the same of too new purpose. functions they to which confronted with structure and were were unaccustomed, it is easy to understand that they leaned less on the state and recognized as leader for support more or a the party which sat at the rudder, especially as it was in their own ranks. But proletarian party with many members its disposition, the the party, with all the power state at of in the ranks of the unions, in began an intensive propaganda order to get greater influence. And in this it succeeded, but the the unions greater the influence of the party became, the more the lost in independence, the more they came party whip. under To the extent that this development progressed, the rights of the factory councils or committees were circumscribed. The party, which desired to get control of production through the unions (and it succeeded in getting it) wished to make production as abundant and profitable as possible. But production did not rise; on the contrary, with the decreasing supply of foodstuffs it fell more The party's policy towards and more. the peasants was determined through the grain monopoly. In to deliver all grain to the accordance with this the peasants were to disputes. state. The peasants did not want to dp this. It came The state began to requisition the grain. But the grain deliveries were not increased through these means, and the workers did not bread. This had a tendency to diminish their receive enough factory committees were The productivity. not energetic enough, the It took the management took to other means. out and state hands it in the hands the the committees and placed )p/ of of individuals. The managing councils had thus played their role as managers of production to the end and lost their right
these they

of self-determination.

the period of czarism and capitalism the Russian in part, organizations similar to the German "free" unions but deal a good more unions, radical. Their radical position was evident already from the persecution by czarism. They were compelled to be not only relief organizations but also fighting organizat In how far they served this purpose, we best can learn from the third conference, already mentioned, which took 1917. place during the storms of the revolution in November Already then managing councils were recognized as necessary the workers. But during organs with the function of control over this period the unions were still class struggle organizations. Later they changed from class struggle organizations to productive organizations. The change in the character of the unions was compani also acby a change in the form of the organization. While


became they were formerlyorganized along craftlines,they now form industrial the doubt industrial organizations. Without of as serve for is best the one shall which unions organization organs of production. For the workers organized along industrial lines are better in position to manage production than the craft in America. The organization of unions. This has been shown this is also built on World the the Industrial Workers of to take intends it over in theory accordance with its principle, as doubt, the forerunners of this The I. W are, no production. .W. Party of But the Communist form of union movement. modern to the Russia ( the bolsheviks) acceleration of this contributed the above development. It had, through process, mentioned in that their the influence so more more unions, obtained and later Through congresses. resolutions always went through at the the the overwhelming influence party the uwiions government of became more the the tools more made state; they were and of into state organs.
The formal decision to make them state organs was in 1919. January the the congress at unions second of


There it says : "that the nationalization of all the means of production and the organization of society on a new socialistfoundation requires slow and persevering labor with the rebuilding of the whole state machinery, as well as th( organs of accounting, and organs for contro] creating of new of production an" and regulation of the whole system distribution. This requires of the unions a more energetic and more active participation in the exercise of soviet power, through direct representatives in all organs of the state. The whole process of melting the unions together with the organs of state power, must take place as the unavoidable result of their most intimate co-operation."

fluence that the unions have inwould, consequently, mean the policy of the state, just as, inversely, the soviel have influence on the unions. I was thai told in Moscow organs that had the case, the this was and unions representations ii the different commissariats. Thus; the president of the AilRussian Central Council of the Unions, M. Tomski, is also bers commissariat. Besides, there are other memmember of the war the Central Council of of the Unions in other commissariai through which arrangement the fusion spoken of in the cong] decision and the changing of the unions into state organ* i s (Verstaatlichung) secured. But this is not so to understan" that any union member become a member can riat of a commissathe Council In People's Commissars. of of order to hav" this possibility he must first have been elected to the Council To this Central Council of the Trade Unions. of the Unions onl\ the Communist Party be elected. can (bolsheviks) members of I know before th" were old revolutionaries who communists itself bolsheviks the social-democratic party of communij called


also intelligentand surely them have all the qualities which make suitable for the Central to this come Council of the Trade Unions. But they can never Party. Thus they long as they do not join the Communist as can never participate in the work of the Soviets, and the sotheir unions is through called co-operation of the workers the for the ruling party. Not the unions of members possible only as who are in the unions, such, but the communist-bolsheviks have the right to co-operate in the state organs. be admitted that the revolutionary party could It must use not make of all workers or employees, organized into the and, particularly, not in the unions, on all kinds of work in For the and is now, unions there were, responsible positions. on the are many principle and who, who revolution against if they had been made use of, without doubt would have done everything to retard and hold up revolutionary progress. But cause this should not have been done with revolutionaries, only bethey had a different opinion or because they belonged to that the bolsheviks a different party or That means movement. seek to monopolize the revolution, that they want to claim the right to the revolution for only one party, while there stillare several revolutionary parties in Russia. The Industrial Union is an advanced form compared with the guild or craftform. The industrial unions of Russia were was organized on centralist lines. Thus the soviet government best in a position to use the unions as their own apparatus. In the mad tempo of the Russian revolution the unions were too unripe to be able to choose their forms of organization. In order to come to some sort of order in the general disorder, the bolsheviks tried for a short while to eliminate the unions and only created Councils, Central Councils or Factory Councils, but these experiments have gone out of fashion They disappeared after a very short duration; after the unions in their first congress, in January, 1918, had liquidated these central councils of the factory councils, as they neither wished to have nor could have any only led to competing organizations which laid thing was the mutual provocation and quarrels, whole into the hands of one central body which was given great Through body this the place authority. central state could now its hands on the smallest body, the outermost points on the circumference. Thus, the form of organization of the unions in Russia was born in the hour of need and carried the stamp of the process upon itself.The unions have lost their independence, they are tools of the state. Trotzky is not so very wrong when in his anti-Kautsky book he says: "After once taking the power one cannot accept certain consequences and repudiate others." From the possession of power, which they wanted to keep, and had to keep at any cost, one thing followed the other, and the workers are again ruled over. While the industrial union form is the most proper form of


belong to the unions. They





the centralism union for the workers, even of other countries, still, the industrial unions, which made subordination of the of these possible, was union under the party and the soviet government to be traced to that particular circumstance. But if the Russian forms of organization to transfer their own bolsheviks want fatal error. a the rest of the countries, then they make upon As, the peculiar form of organization called "Labor Bureaus" in arose out of French soil,and as the Industrial Unions arose America, so there grew up in Russia under particular circumstances the dependence the party. Just as of the unions upon it would be a failure to transfer the French form to American it is to try to carry over a so the Russian failure also conditions, in to the as form other countries, statutes of the provided for Third International. In Sweden, for instance, the local samorganization is a far better form for that country, not only as a fighting organization but also as a future foundation for socialist it would be difficultfor the centralistic production. Anyhow, leadership of a politicalparty to work its way into control of such a form of organization, in fact, it is inconceivable.


Organization of the Unions

The building of the Russian unions is partly done from ti Bu\t their top downward and partly from the bottom upward. We functions take place exclusively from the top dowmvard. therefore get a better picture of the general activity of the time serve as a regulator of production, unions, which at the same their we growth outward from the center, as the consider when in the unions is obligatory In Russia, membership rules prescribe. for all industrial workers. There are 4% millions of organized in Russia, (1920). workers Every

organization must be practical, that is, its form must As the present function correspond to the functions it has to fill. is industry Russian the to manage of unions and to fill the tasks given it by the Supreme Council of National Economy, which has production in its hands, the unions must be so organized do justiceto these tasks. The shops that they can furnaces, mines, transport and distribution facilities) (factories, longer in the hands of private employers but in the hands no are in the hands of private the the shops stillwere of state. When employers, a union organization of the kind that exists today was for capitalist production. But when everynot necessary thing thus was became the a nationalized and property of single owner, this single owner, (thestate) , also had to be in the position of being able to supervise everything from one central point, We best illustrate this if we can imagine a great capitalist company, which does not either belong to any single person but still all threads run together in one central point. Everything is conducted from this central point. Everything must again back to that point. come


Council of The manager of production is the Supreme To production belong two parts: men National Economy. and is the things. The organization of the human part unions. For Economy National Council Supreme the this reason must act of through the unions. The manner of procedure is this: The are managers appointed by the S. C. of N. E. of the factories after nominations by the unions. Furthermore, representatives of the S. C. of N. E. have a seat in the councils of the unions. Besides, the unions have a representative in the Commissariat of Labor. The commissar at of Labor, who of the Commissariat People's Commissars Council time is a member the same the of of is put on this post through the jointselection of the unions. a) The Central Council of the All-Russian Unions consists of 120 members and is elected from a congress of local district committees, gouvernement committees, local district councils and The gouvernement councils. president of the Central Council of the All-Russian Unions is Michael Tomski. The members of the Central Committee besides A. Tomski: They are are, eleven. W. Kossior, E. Holzman, H. Ziperovitch, N. Ivanoff, A^drejeff, N. Bucharin, P. Rutzutak, J. Lutovinow and W. Schmidt.

sit in the Council of People's Commissars (Sownarkom), with a deciding vote, Schmidt, as People's Commissar of Labor, and M. Tomski with a consultative voice. Besides, Tomski takes part in the Committee of Defense of the Soviet Republic, with a deciding vote. Both are communists, members of the bolshevik party, to which also all the others mentioned belong. Non-members of the bolshevik party cannot be elected to the Central Council of the All-Russian Unions.
these, two


The functions of this Central Unions are:

1. Regulating

Council of the All-Russian

the work and the wages (sanctioning of the Dividing into three the wage groups, workers of scale). by means of which the qualified workers, the premiums and the rations are determined. The establishment of a scientific institute for calculation of the workers' expenditu

of energy. 2. The establishment of a labor secretariat to include all unions, 25 instructors are sent to the different gouvernefor the carrying out of this measure in the ments provinces and to fix membership contributions. At present the contribution amounts It is to 2% of the wages. is from deducted the wages. obligatory and 3. Culture department: Representatives are sent to the presiding board of the Commissariat of Education, in leadership to the order organize, under of that commissariat, for the continuation schools working youth and for all workers. establish evening courses 4. Participation in the work of the Supreme Council of National Economy. 57

Besides the above mentioned presiding board of eleven there is a general session of representatives of the persons This Central Committees of the various industrial unions. consists of 40 persons. mit b) Gouvernement or Provincial Councils. In order to transcil CounCentral the these functions to the ranks of the workers, of their own making) , as well as the sends its decisions (partly the or Council of National Economy decrees of the Supreme or to the gouvernement provincial Commissariat of Labor to as as industries, or in the well Councils of all crafts unions Unions. Industrial the central committees of the ' These 'gouvernement councils" consist of 7-15 persons. They The gouvernement are elected by the local districtcouncils of all unions. the workers of all occupations in a councils comprises all The functions of a gouvernement council are to gouvernement. carry out the decisions and the tasks referred to it by the Central Council of the Ail-Russian Unions which are worked out on the basis of the functions outlined in the above mentioned four paragraphs.
The Local District Councils. They are elected by all the local district (in German of the whole organized workers 5-9 They "Kreis"') members. Their tasks are to carry consist of by the gouvernement to them the over union out work turned



d) The Central Committee of the Industrial Union. Besides the above mentioned organs there are the Industrial Unions. The central committees of these industrial unions have a membership of 15-21. These central committees are elected by the local district and provincial committees of the unions in question. The functions of these central committees of the industrial unions are about the same as those of the Central Council of the All-Russian Unions, they are speciallyadapted for the particular industry such as only or food stuffs.They occupy themselves in particular metal, textile, information and propathe tariffs, serve as with elaboration of ganda have bureaus, charge of the central supply of the special kind of working clothes for the workers of their calling, which for the work, and send instructors to the lower are necessary boards or sub-committees. There are also special commissions by these in preme Suthe central committees elected connection with Council of National Economy. Such boards formed, with the corresponding departments of the S. C. of N. E., the Central Committee of the Industrial Unions of the foodstuff industry, the machinery industry, the electricalindustry and all those which had charge of the provisioning of the country. It was the duty of these boards to take part in the provisioning. In January 1920 there were 32 Industrial Unions and an equal number of central committees. At the last III. congress it was, however decided to undertake amalgamations which will reduce the number to 23.

The Provincial Committee is the next organ with which tions. the Central Committee of the Industrial Unions has direct relaa prohas Each vincial 5-9 such It consists of union members. the unions There is a provincial committee of committee. This provincial foodstuffs the etc. the workers, metal workers, of committee is elected by the local district (Kreis)committees and_ the shop councils. Its functions are to carry out the instructions Unions. To given it by the Central Committee of the Industrial omy this provincial committee the Supreme Council of National Econhelp the committees in also send a representative, in order to their work. f) The Local District Committee is in its functions a Each union daughter organization of the provincial committee. Thus, there is one for the has such a local district committee. industry, etc. The local for foodstuffs industry, the one metal by the shop councils or factory comdistrictcommittee is elected mittees.


Committees. The lowest organs of the unions, also called cells,are the factory committees or shop which They Their tasks or funcare tions councils. elected by the workers. 1918 by the Central the were middle of worked out about Council of the Ail-Russian Unions, which consists only of party communists and were announced to the workers as decrees. They read as follows: 1. The shop councils, according to the decision of the central the take for desirable measures council of unions, all together the an welding workers and employees of prise enterinto a productive organization. 2. They establish the workers and employees a strict proletarian disciplinedetermined by the union.

g) The


3. To watch over the rigid of all measures and enforcement by the Commissariat Labor for the protection of rules of the worker and to devise ways and means of improving the conditions of work. 4. They investigate whether the establishment has enforced crease Council aiming at the inall the rules of the Supreme the ness busiof production and maintenance of

5. They enforcestrictlyand exactly the mutual observance of the tariff agreements and normal productivity. 6. control over the work. exercise full 7. They undertake the supplying of the workers with the stuffs articles needed, in accordance with the rules of the foodFor that purpose they enter into conauthorities. nection the with corresponding organizations and establish people's kitchens, consumers* 'unions, etc. They

8. They

execute the decisions of the workers




mittees and the punishments measured out by these, in accordance with the tariffagreements. 9. They and discharging of participate in the engaging to the decree about workers and employees, according labor exchanges and the instructions of the union.

to-day the functions of the shop councils. Thus, are here must add, that the workers no longer have the right to the manage establishment or to say a word about the process of 1920, position was production. In the third congress, in March taken the this expressly workers, on the ground against right of belonged to the unions as a whole and not that this right now But it is not even the unions who appoint the to single groups. it is the tional Supreme Council of Nathe managers of enterprises; Economy, has this the which right, after recommendation he who is becomes the of the unions. Manager establishment of N. E. In C, decision by the March, S. 1920, the appointed of of it says:

"The shop committees are hereby established as the local units of the unions, with functions analogous to the unions, with retention the higher the of responsibility,and under report sphere of instances of the unions, and they are hereby from in any enjoined manner ness; meddling with the conduct of the establishment's busifor the elimination of parallel work in the offices of the management and the unions of an establishment all production commissions of the shop committees are hereby disestablished." Hefre is, as we see, quite openly expressed, that the workers have no right wJiatsoever in the \management of production on the place days of work; yes, even the control, ^vhich in the first the has was been a popular demand, revolution such suspended. of It says plainly that the workers must keep from any meddlii ivith the conduct of the business. Nor is the right tioned of engaging and discharging workers menin Article 9 saved to the workers. Through the "Law of Mobilization of Labor Power" the workers are compelled to go to the place of work to which they are assigned. If they leave that place without permission ished. of their superiors they can be punAnd that happens often. The idea with this is to hit the bourgeoisie, all labor power being registered. But, as the Moscow in Moscow 312,papers related in the spring of 1920, there were 000 unregistered persons, which were by this decree, not affected or only in an Among these 312,000, few are unsatisfactory way. workers, most of them belonging to the bourgeois element. This instance proves how difficult it is to hit the right ones and pull the bourgeoisie out to work. Now it is attempted to combat this by means It is to be hoped that this will be sucof work-books. cessful in now future, the in order that the burden of the and workers may be lightened. But if we consider the form of organization by itself and it with other upiions,we findthe form used by the Gercompare 60


Here also we syndicaliststo be most like the Russian form. its o"r industrial have two poles, the groupings, craft union with in this that difference The Bureaus. Labor the only consists and the Russian unions have not fully carried out the idea of Labor trict In Russia we have only the local disBureaus (Arbeiterboerse). council (thiswould correspond to the labor bureau of the or provincial councils. ~Iir German and gouvernement syndicalists) the "labor bureaus" the Russia there is no federation of all of AllCouncils the the Central to falls function This of country. time is expected to Russian Unions, which, however, at the same be, and is, principally a centralisticgrouping of the Industrial Unions. But as this is a centrum for both functions, its function one. must with necessity be a difficult A further difference consists in the very nature of the two the organizations; the Russian unions are absolutely centralistic; to have they to have no self-determination; right single parts to the the decisions the central councils carry out and orders of limit. But in Freie Arbeiter-Union Deutschlands (Free Labor the local Union of Germany), that is, the Syndicalist Movement, longing Bureaus individual the Labor as as unions bewell organizations, to the industrial or craft federations have the right of tion as a foundacomplete self-determination. The idea which serves to mental fundais the the Russian or as, same similar of the unions idea of the German syndicalists. Both wish to be the have to solve the problem of production and organizations which in the socialist society. consumption These tasks which the Freie Arbeiter-Union of Germany has theoretically,the Russian unions had an opportunity set for itself, to put into practice,although under other conditions and with But it has not yet been possible to comthe use of other means. through the unions. Lozovpletely grip the whole economic life the one of the Central Council of the of presiding members sky, Ail-Russian Unions, says in a pamphlet treating of the Russian unions, that this is an ideal to which they would, without doubt, approach in the future, but that it is not possible for the present. The provisioning is stilllargely handled by the nationalized Consumers' Societies (Centrosoyuz), who co-operate with the Food Stuffs Commissariat and have a branch in each locality. This branch supplies the workers with foodstuffs through the shop councils or factory committees. For the rest, the supplying of food stuffs is not in the hands of one single organization. As the food stuffs are so scarce everybody is bungling with it. Lo"in that measure the same as the unions are perfecting zovsky also says functions life, the themselves and fill the economic all of in bolshevik disappear. In theory the are, Soviets will Soviets tranintended sition, the consequence, weapons only as of the period of the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat, for the breaking down of capitalism.


The Opposition in the Unions


tions have now the form and the funcdiscussed the program, have taken I to Russian the pains also ascertain unions. of whether the Russian workers are all satisfied with the present condition of the unions or whether there are tendencies which are in opposition. And I was able to observe an opposition coming two different first from the menshevik camp, and, camps, from second, from the camp of the anarcho-syndicalists. The opposition of the mensheviks has taken root principally in the ranks of the It is of the printers. It takes the standpoint of democracy. opinion that the workers should co-operate with other parties and tions classes, as only then a continued development of economic condiwould be thinkable. Earlier this tendency stood for the that the assembly has ceased to Constituent Assembly, but now fait that they accept accompli. Nevertheless, it demands exist, have the the unions, as in the capitalist right to state, should strike and that they should be free from the state. The opposition of the anarcho-syndicalists shows itself in these we may mention: the several different unions. Among Moscow as bakery workers' unions in well as several clubs of function as propaganda centers inside anarcho-syndicalists, which the industrial organizations of the workers of alloccupations. This is a trade union opposition, whose form of organization corresponds to the Danish Trade Union Opposition. The position of this trade union opposition towards the central unions is not like The leading that of the mensheviks, but of a radical nature. from ideas the come this anarcho-syndicalist world opposition of conception, which against Marxist bolshevism raises the theory the theory of libertarian socialism, and against state communism they this On ordinati ground combat the subof anti-state communism. to politicalparties, generally, and to the the unions of state in particular. They point to the workers' loss of interest in their unions, which has resulted from the changing of the unions ment into state organs. This change tends to destroy the free developcording the to is dangerous the social revolution. Acworker, and of to them the workers have, through the change of the under the control of the ruling unions into state organs, come the the sense social revolution is that the workers of party, while Briefly, against the "statifying" be masters. economic should of the unions they propose the syndicalization of the state, i. e., the dissolution of the state functions into functions of economic organizations. (In principle the bolsheviks agree with the syndicalist this point, f. i. Lozovsky in his pamphlet on the Ruson sian unions. But they hold that this should be deferred to a later time; now, during the dictatorship, it is not to be thought of, in their opinion.) But as they thought that the rise of such tendencies would weaken the rule of the proletarian party, they see a danger in it and combat it. The syndicalists, consequently, see a danger in the

"statifying" of the unions and the communist-bolsheviks see a danger in the syndicalization of the state. But the bolsheviks in which admit that development is bound to go in the direction ideas the These the syndicalists are driving. of ists anarcho-syndicalists The industrialindustrialists. by are also supported so-called the the over to the unions and supremacy state of also object demand self-determination and autonomy and independence of the quite strongly represented state. In Petrograd this tendency was the 1920, this summer presiding officerof the Petrograd and of ecutive Soviet, Zinovieff, who is also known as the chairman of the Exthen strenuously Committee of the III. International, was tendency. combatting this The union demand for independence from the party as well as the party-communist of the state lately showed itselfalso among in the summer At the of 1920, unions. railroad workers congress the was Executive Committee ing elected, consistof union when the the half for independence the 20 men, one unions, of stood of that is,they favored giving the unions the last word in union affairs party and not the party. And stillall of the elected were Party cannot Persons not members of the Communist members. be elected to the executive committee of any union. As this executive to elect a chairman, they could not agree, was committee now being that ten of them belonged to one tendency while ten were of the other tendency, and each tendency, naturally, wanted one As will appear from this the averas a chairman. sion of their own crease. inis by the being on a men the party ruled against union of But in the same measure as this takes place the syndicalist the and industrialistideas gain influence, and these demand for from independence the the party unions. absolute Due to the sovereignty of the party over the unions, no actions are permitted the unions which are against the party. As it also is the party which has the rudder of state in its hands, every attack rected of the unions which is directed against the party, is also diagainst the state, and vice versa. Thus there was, as an instance, a strike of bakers in Moscow. The bakers demanded a larger bread ration. Up to that time they had had the same quantity as the population of Moscow, that is, 1 Ib. or 400 grams daily (.88Ib. American weight). But the military bakers had 4 Ibs. of bread daily, that being the military tion. ramand deNow the other bakers demanded Their as just much. justif they had taken the stand that would have been more the military should also have received no more than 1 Ib. The bear testimony high does level. The governa not strike ment, of moral naturally, did not accede to the demands of the bakers, and the bakers struck. It is to be noted that the secretary of the union lov. an anarcho-syndicalist, by the name of the bakers was of N. PavThe measures took in the matter are which the government in 19, 1920, "Pravda" June in the following manthe ner: reported of "The plenary meeting of the unions took up the matter in their capacity of a government Comrade Melnitschansky, organ.


the chairman of the Moscow Council of the unions, reported on the case and said that the investigation had shown, that the influence the among strongly apparent of the anarcho-syndicalists were bakers. A complete report by Comrade Melnitschansky appeared The meeting thereupon adopted the in No. 125 of the "Pravda." following resolution: Due to the systematic abuse and breach of of the union committee of the union discipline by the members cow Moscow bakers, it was decided to dissolve the section of the Mosbakers and include the bakers in the union of the foodstuff of the former committee of the section of workers. The members Vurgov Nuschenkov, Kameschov, Pavlov, the bakers' union, N. and shall, and Komsnitzov are excluded from the union movement board. They furthermore, be held to answer before a judiciary lose their right to speak before any assembly and can never more be elected to a responsible post in the unions."

in the union movement, Naturally, other conflictsoccur such But the mentioning of one coninsubordination, flict etc. strikes, to make us understand that friction and conflicts is sufficient in the Russian unions, and firstof all,also between even can occur the individual unions and the government, just as in other capitalist states. But which of the different tendencies shall finally to say; very plainly the one gain the upper hand is not difficult that uses the slogan, that in the unions all power shall belong to selves themthe unions, being that the workers want to finally make dency independent and establish the rights of labor. The tenin the that the unions shal state shall go up which says finally conquer, because the workers feel most free through su"

dustria anarcho-syndicalists, anarchists and inii have as well as all other revolutionists every reason the world to work on the unions until the whole system answei th( we the demands of communism, forget must not for a moment have implied in the fact that the workers come so fc progress to organize the work through their own as organizations a/i thereby the whole of industry. The progress lies in the victory o) the idea, and even if the idea has not yet been completely realized, the firsl have not the right, as friends of progress, to reject we imperfect beginnings. In comparison to the idea of czarism, th( tive offensive taken by the labor organizations, the unions, as producimportance the forward, big is a of step organizations, quite To the to-day real set appreciate. sufficiently which we cannot In for future the manner same is this on generations. reserved value that we look at the French revolution at the end of the 18tl century as a gigantic step forward, in spite of the despotism o1 Napoleon, which was not surpassed by the despotism of Louij XVI., for the fruits of the revolution, the abolition of serfdom, could not be undone, just so we greet the Russian revolution, spite of the rule of the bolsheviks. For, after all,the bolshevil for th" are not for the Russian revolution what Napoleon was to comif the French revolution; but they are, we accept want

victory. Even if the Russian

tarian parison, the Russian Jacobins, with a strong admixture of prolelives in the But the progress spirit of realization elements. organizations, of the idea, that the workers can, through their own themselves form a society which is based on labor. As revolutionaries Russian the we freedom revoapprove lution, of and champions of have be the labor to idea that the the approve unions of guides of economic life,and will guarantee that these ideas shall be realized with ever greater perfection. Thus shall our ideal, a society based upon labor, attain its realization.




socialization is fine, it is a often very especially where question of industrial undertaki When to the land it is simpler. In Russia referring tinguish the whole speak of a socialization of the soil. Its diswe on can land belongs the the to that are peasants personally, marks but that they have not the legal right to sell it. That this happens here and there, in spite of it, only shows that new forms introduced decrees life be through of economic alone. cannot Leases and rents have ceased to exist, and the only thing that remains are taxes, principally in kind. Part of the former large into state ownership, and in the case of estates have passed over these one might speak of nationalization rather than socialization. What applies to these state lands also applies to the nationalized industrial undertakings. The state monopolized the ("statified") mines, the means of transportation, the larger part of the big factories, commerce and business houses. While formerly these belonged to a great number undertakings of small industrial knights, and partly also to a small number of big "captains of industry (comparableto Stinnes in Germany), all day of it belongs toto one owner, the state. But here we have before us something more had than a simple nationalization. In Germany we the Wilhelm already under regime nationalized railroads and to a great expostal service. Even in America the railroads were tent But this kind of nationalization nationalized during the war. differs from the Russian kind in this respect that private per* have economic interest in the same. sons The state issues notes and debt obligations and the owners of these obligations or bonds an income without work by collecting interest, etc. The state enjoy has here, so to speak, taken over the role of a capitaliststock company. is often the case with municipalization. In the The same latter case the municipal authorities of the cities play this role.

betiveen nationalization and difference

This has been abolished in Russia. The Russian Soviet government writes out no obligations and has cancelled all capitalist claims. In relation to" foreign countries the procedure has not been altogether consistent. Through the present concession policy to the capitaliststates, the soviet republic has right or wrong back to a more gone primitive form of private economy.
" "


between the nationalization in capitaliststates The difference 'SovietRussia is plain. But is this difference so great that and in it runs into socialization? these questions we must firsi In order to be able to answer is be to understood by socialization. If make up our mind what ization the economic life is completely cut off from the state as an organthe But we can then speak of socialization. of power, English guild social problem may be stated differently. To some the consumers under com ists the state is the organization of for industry pletely independent democracy or self-government the Hobson, G. S. as To other guild socialists, state is an in such life, not even stitution which has nothing to do with economic we For that reason cannot say that the guik with consumption. but wha for a Verstaatlichung) , nationalization ( strive socialists is that a transfer of production an" they want is a socialization, to the organizations for production and consump consumption tion. // we\ put on this measuring stick, then we cannot speak o any socialization in Russia as yet, but of nationalization (Ver tation, of transporstaatlichung) When the factories, mines and means industry, Is not that is, what is included under the name directly in the hands of the productive organizations but belong to the state, then we must speak alization nationof a ("Verstaatlichung") it is in if it is of a different kind from even what the capitalistcountries. But looked at from another side we must refrain from considering the economic system of Russia as a socialist system. Nationalization changes nothing in the wage With the system. thought of socialization we connect at the same time the abolition have the wage system. of the wage system. But in Russia we still The circumstance that they pay is partly in kind and that an attempt is made to further develop this pay system may be traced to the enormous depreciation of the currency. They made a virtue out of necessity. With the abolition of the wage system social is But this or, more equality strictly speaking, attained. social economic equality we do not find in Russia as yet. We can, consequently, not speak of socializationbut we must speak of nationalization


last expression is being used by the bolsheviks themselves. But this expression is not altogether correct. For justas there are national states and nationalities,so there is also a difference here. In the large country of Russia, there is not only one The wealth consisting in land and industry, nation but many. is by many which worked eignty nationalities,is put under the sovera the bolshevik From this point of of state, government. View, also,the expression "Verstaatlichung" (statification or statis the most exact. ization) One question that here interests us more is whether all establish factories, shops, mines, means transportation, of



ing business houses, etc., are included in the nationalization. Accordas as ing accordwell to the observations I have personally made, in this the success Soviet the government, to the statisticsof Thus, according to statisticsgiven by Milregard is only partial. tional Supreme Council of Naa member of presiding board of the jutin, to Economy, the number of nationalized establishments up In the stone industry 437 establishments withFeb. 1, 1920, was: na106 109 workers. Against these stood 561 establishments, not tionaliz In mining and smelting nationalization's carried out that are only six small establishments of almost completely. There Against are than 480 workers employed. kind in which not more 39,880 together workers that 81 these stand establishments with

nationalized. In the metal and machinery industry, on the other hand, the to-day are privately owned even number of establishments which is particularly great. There are together 601 establishments with lay 29,417 workers not nationalized. But these statisticscannot longs Moscow in foundry know of a which beclaim to completeness. I in included find Pirvitz, which I do not to a private owner, 106 workers are employed there. Against the statistics. And still which these private establishments stand 553 nationalized ones 156,146 workers. employ In the food stuff industry there are 638 establishments with 3,532 workers which are still privately owned. Against them stand 1,799 establishments with 151*699 workers that are nationalized. In the establishments for manufacture of animal products over in private servindustry are ice. still one-third of the workers of that 10,711 workers, working in 2,226 establishThey number ments, tablish while 32,979 workers are employed in 195 nationalized esbelonged In the textile industry, which before the war to the highest developed industries of Russia, there are in private hands, 232 now establishments with 36,664 workers still 337,346 workers are nationalized. while 615 establishments with To these belongs also the ready-made clothing branch. in all Russia, According to the same statisticsthere are still 985,413 workers ivho work in 4,237 state establishments and 84,853workers who work in 4,609 private establishments. From these statistics we can ments gather that the larger establishare mostly nationalized while the smaller are still privately however, industry These or proto duction, statistics, apply only owned. but say nothing about the business houses. These were stillsee shutclosed nearly without exception. To-day one may Moscow in in Petrograd, whose show winand-sealed stores dows and lies as it did before it was everything still confiscated. The so poorly organized that it is still not known exactly confiscation was has been Frequently what confiscated. articles of clothing booked as hardware, or kitchen utensils as furniture. But are the worst is, that even in case of the most urgent necessity the can people get nothing. Thus a fellow worker in Petrograd asked me to get him a rubber nipple from Germany for his little daugh-


ter's milk bottle. He said: "We have this article in our confiscated it is impossible but The to stores mensheviks get anything. tionali also reproach the bolsheviks that they undertook the so-called naThey say that the without thorough preparations. were stores were created which could closed before other organs have undertaken to supply the people. They themselves, the mensheviks, deliberate and slow way. would have done this in a more They are not so radical but more moderate. A little was exception made for vegetable and delicatessen There few are very stores. of the latter. But the former one finds in every block.

Trust Building



monopolization and nationalization of industry abolished came the competition existing in small capitalist industry. Industry beinto concentrated and centralized. Great state trusts came Compared the private capitalist enterprise, in with existence. which production for the profit of individuals or stock companies is carried on in quite meaningless and unregulated fashion, production is to be if it is capitalistic, by a single organization, even greeted as a step forward, because it can then be carried on in a The advantage is so much more greater if the rational manner. but the needs of the nation. motive of production is not profit, that care But here it must be remembered should be taken thai the liberty of individuals, of the producers, is not lost,for in the that liberty is infringed upon, progress is impeded. Yes, measure for service it may go so far that, through unequal compensation the trustias in as a society where well nationalization, rendered, faction of the whole national industry has been fully carried out, it may even go s" while the production for use is the basic plan is far, we say, that the position of deep layers of the workers no1 better than it is under private capitalism. Or, expressing it in different manner: The introduced press( state socialism (through the premium system such as is used in Russia) th" down in the same disagreeable position as capitalisi workers did. This system may be called state capitalism, and historicall: it may be pointed out as a higher stage; but as for the workei who labor in the factory the social revolution must bring th" improvement an in their position, for the aim of the social rev" lution is the liberation of the working class.

The workers who" by means of the revolution desired to realize their own felt instinctively that they must direct emancipation, their efforts on taking over il production and managing They according to their own principles. also elected shop committees to manage the shops. The shops independently managed those workers ivho work in the shops, that is how the Russiai. workers first pictured to themselves the socialization of industry, or the realization of the social revolution.


Party of Russia considered this tendency But the Communist firstand lowest form. On Dec. 5, 1917, the as of the workers only The founded. was Council of National Economy the Supreme thereafter more and more of the factories was management tional Council The Supreme hands. twisted out of the workers' of NaN. E. Economy took over this task. This S. C. of should the but the be establco-ordiriationof all anything properly not ishments pendent from the bottom upward, with retention of the indewas by the workers. But what came shop management institution is manE. N. an S. C. The ages which of something else. the industry of the country from the top downward. The Supreme Council of National Economy sons. consists of 11 peris Rykoff. He is appointed by the The president's name The rest of the members are, All-Russian Executive Committee. finally the Unions by Council the Central in part, nominated of and People's This Council Commissars. by Council the of appointed decisions the time can Commissars People's the at any cancel of sars, of the Economic Council, so that the Council of People's Commisa politicalinstitutionwhich ists, consists principally of communSupreme the cil Counhas the last word. Miljutin, a member of mentioned in an interview with me that of National Economy, ple's important questions must be submitted to the Council of Peoall Also there are tendencies to stillmore Commissars. centralize the council,instead of decentralizing it,after the end of all thus allowing the state to get a grip on the whole economic wars, life.

Council of National Economy has a special departmen for each industry. There are 50 of them. Each one of these departments manages a separate branch of industry. Miljutin described their activity as follows : They carry out the plans of production, distribute the raw materials, keep account of what is being produced and finance the undertakings. Besides they engage discharge the The the managemanagement and ment of shops. of such an industrial department consists of one, three or five persons, which are appointed by the Supreme Council of National Economy, the after consultation w'fbh unions. It would take us too far to follow up the various functions more or local districtmanagement. closely into the gouvernement They are all built on the same for principle. And it is sufficient the principle. But the principle is consistently carried us to know be seen from the above. The as may out from the top downward, organization from the bottom upward does not exist in industry, there is no talk of self-government. The and for that reason have direct influence,yes, in practice they have no inno fluence workers at all,not even indirect,over the management of industry, or the shop and the factory in which they work. The workers get their wages through the Finance Department paid the Supreme Council National Economy. Even the of of prices are set on the goods by the S. C. of N. E. and thereafter made into a law.
The Supreme 69

Council of National staff of officialsof the Supreme is in Moscow, which is the centre for all Russia, and consists to the are, Besides there 20,000 ments statepersons. according of 35 local councils and each one of these has of Miljutin, This would give a total of 90,000 employees. 2,000 employees. According to the figures given before there are in the nationalized one industries 985,414 employees, or in round numbers million. There is, consequently, 'about one official for each ten workers. This apparatus, as at presently constituted, works heavily it cannot be used. purposes rather than elastically. For many And we at this. A political body, which should not wonder mittee, in the last instance depends upon the All-Russian Executive Comfield like a purely economic cannot function on the economic in hand brain are workers, which organization of and one line one or another. another alongside of with straight to feel that way in Russia, so that they They have also come it is a question of work that turn to private undertakings when requires quick and prompt attention. In pointing this out, I am facts, but proven merely stating nevertheless, it is by no means that capitalism is indispensable or has any advantages. It only that this kind of state socialism, which was proves started in tc Russia under such unfavorable conditions, has not the power forms live; there might very well be other socialist economic 'which are so much the more in Russia fact that But the rational. the few private undertakings have a superior capacity for work, be traced to the circumstance that the private undertakings can pay their workers better than the state enterprises. In the already mentioned iron foundry in Moscow, belonging to Pirvitz, the workers are a good deal better off than in the Soviet shops. A commercial and technical employee, a Miss Wegener, receives, for instance, free board and lodging, the usual Payok (foodstuff like Moscow, the free all people of apartment and ration)and, 15,000 rubles. According to her own statement she is far better formerly working, and off than in Soviet service,in which she was interest. The thing same works with greater applies to the workers. Another case may to illustrating what; contribute stillmore have said. As the supplying of fuel did not work satisfacwe torily in years past a certain official He was given free hands. engaged private persons and workers who under better conditions got the necessary railroad cars ready much quicker, and as a result the transportation took place much quicker. Stillmore such examples could be cited. The bolsheviks themselves constantly complain of the slowness of their apparatus, and particularly the last party conferences as well as at the soviet congresses, complaints are piling up. In consideration of the sad condition in which industry fin" itselfthe dissatisfactionof the ruling bolsheviks is easy to undei stand, and if they give the ideas of syndicalism such great coi Council of N cessions as to have for chairman of the Supreme tional Economy, Rykov, a representative of the syndicalist ideasThe Economy 70

and that is the case not with him alone but in most of the leading circles this can largely be ascribed to the bankruptcy from which theories of state socialism have suffered, their own and which is most evident in the organization of industry. Already in the year of 1918, the firstyear of bolshevik power, Mnogin, the commissar of the textile department of the S. C. of N. E., wrote in No. 40 that the Russian Soviet Republic did not need of the "Isvestija," but any unions only small factory committees which had to carry dustry To-day, when they see that inout the orders of the government. cannot get into a flourishing state through "governing," finallyfound the road to the unions. As cheering as this have they is, so regrettable is it, on the other side, that through the state tendencies of the state socialiststhe ruinous way of nationalization was entered upon, and is in practice stillfollowed. If industry is not to suffer further collapse,the bolsheviks must soon recognized theory, turn over production make a reality of the now in their unions, to the productive organs the workers possess ployed under complete self-administration of the factories by those emin by the there, and not by individual managers put Supreme Council of National Economy.

comes with the expectations of finding communism little get very satisfaction from the conditions in Russia. But improvement he, even of economic life who only hopes for a little to cheer him in Russia. Those in will, as we have seen, find little tion for this the long durapower at present repeatedly give as a reason Without doubt and the civilwar. of the war, the world war But as this is being sung so often this is one of the main causes. fashion by the bolsheviks, a repetition would and always in a new be tedious. For it is equally certain that other factors of principle, tactics and organization play a role in this respect. One of these factors is the principle of politicalcentralism, ciple, which is given such limitlesspraise by the bolsheviks. This prinwhich is being lauded by Radek, Trotzky and all leaders of bolshevism as the best ripened fruit on the tree of socialistdevelopme has, nevertheless, had a truly devastating influence on economic life,and this is the case up to the present day. For that the songs of praise sung to centralism by the bolsheviks reason must with necessity wind up in a lugubrious wail due to the facts of the economic collapse. And the most sparkling dialectics of Radek and Trotzky cannot hide their character of hollow demaI cannot here keep from using the words "hollow demagoguery. goguery" when reading in what a dirty, genuinely Marx-Engels Radek way, attacks Bertrand Russel in his provoking effusions: "Bertrand Russel's Sentimental Trip to Russia." In that work in fact, find nothing but pure demagoguery. one can, Against Russel's sincere descriptions Radek brings up no facts, but only writes about "Russel's slippers by the hot stove." With this he be able to impress his Russian worshipers, but not thinking may This people, and certainly not the working class of the world. to the tactics the bolshevik theoreticians has here reference of





been made only to show what value should be put on their arj ments. We need not enter into a theoretical discussion of the prii ciples of centralism. It is sufficientin this connection to show how, with the principle of centralism as a fundamental principle of organization, the economic life does not prosper, how the free development of private initiative is completely suppressed and ner. how economic life has suffered from it in an unspeakable man-

Already in treating of the agricultural question we have seen from examples quoted that, through the policy applied by the Party and the situation resulting therefrom, the area Communist of cultivated land has diminished. At the VIII. All-Russian Soviet Congress interesting proofs of this were added. In industry it is not much better. Of the 1,191 metal works in Russia only 300 Only 20% of the pig iron of peace production is are running. being worked. The food stuffs industry has also gone down considerabl before the war In a steam mill in Samara there were 18,000 pud of flour milled per day, but now only 5,000-6,000 pud. 60 million pud In the whole Samara there were gouvernement 20 before but the war, now grain produced million pud. These only figures show an extra-ordinary decrease of production, to which we may seek the causes where we will.




and Their Co-operative Societies or Artels

Besides the nationalized establishments which are managed the structure Council of National Economy, by the Supreme have already considered, there is and functions of which we a second kind of socialized production. These are the jointlabor societiesof Russian peasants and independent home workers, whicn industrial home are worker, a called artels. The ku"tar is an gether poor peasant or a small artisan. These small people band toin a joint labor society,buy their products in common and deliver their finished products to their societies. This society or artel takes over the selling of the products and supplies the artisan time with raw at the same material and working tools. As this society in no way can be considered a capitalistcompany but purely as a banding together of voluntarily working individua bolshevik the has been unable to destroy government these jointlabor groups. Peter Kropotkin takes a friendly position towards these labor societiesand wrote for their paper, at the time I was in Russia, several articles and letters for their congress. These joint labor societiesare no exploiting organizations, but during the czarist period they had to suffer from oppression by the big capitalists just as the factory workers did. Now they hit by are the Soviet the also compulsory policy of government* Thus, in Moscow, the central of all the artels was dissolved, and just in the stage of liquidation. when I visited it, it was

But a number of artels still have their joint organizations. to the [n the Moscow enrolled. Affiliation society 98 shops were families A 9,000 total are by is done the family. of about irtel enrolled in the artels. They make a total of 24,000 productive All sorts of these are 700-800 larger shops. workers. Among in The these artels. product consists aandicrafts are represented furniture, brushes, toys, boots, leather combs, saddles, pf goods, textile jewelry, goods, metal goods, papier-mache goods, wagons, leds, valises, school material, books and similar goods. For the is delivering raw materials to the present the Soviet government The limited least to a extent. society supplies, for inartels,at tance, lumber to the cabinet makers and distributes it to the to the different shops differs in nature, ifferent shops. Payment finished have their ome articles sold by the society for their acpaid them and turn the sellount, others arrange to have wages to the society without reservations. This latter is the ng over in some ase get of the same of the larger shops. The members wage of from 100 to 1,000 rubles daily. But in paying the wages has property t is taken into consideration whether the member little farm are the is to owners a Thus, r poor. cite examples, of it less than those who have nothing. By this means aid "a little the inequalities of wealth. In the gouvs sought to bridge over there are many rnement of Moscow peasants who are members f this artel society. The

first artel in Moscow into existence 20 years ago. came have the been in existence since other gouvernements artels 890. So far, such artels exist in the gouvernements Moscow, Jaroslov, Nischni-Novgorod, Vladimir, Thula and Kostroma. The tried to these The oviet government nationalize artels. artisans however, opposed to this and peasants belonging to them were, nationalization. They objectedto have their central exchange made into a state organ, and as most of the members of these force in uses no artels are the poorest peasants, the government to a carry order out compulsory nationalization. The work the of artisans belonging to the artel societies to 50 amounts railroad cars of goods per month, which have a 250 value of million rubles. The society pf the home workers, the artel of the "kustarin Russia, is apiece of socialistlife. True, it is no large nije" industry, and as small handicraft it has something edly narrow-mindpetit-bourgeois over it.But in socialism we must not include only the technically highest developed large industry. Socialist life is not tied to the forms of large industry, and it is entirely absurd to wish to force people, in the name of socialism, into economic forms which are considered best for the welfare of the state. Socialism means, velopme under the present forms of technical dethe elimination of wage slavery, economic equality and equalizing of interests. The development of the method of production to more rational forms can thereafter take place without hindrance, but under no circumstances must we force it into ex73

istence at the cost of the liberty of the workers, for that is exactly what the capitalists do. Socialistlife consists in the side-by-side Such an association activitiesof voluntary associations of workers. is the Russian artel. If it is not yet ideal, stillit is a start made by the workers, by the poor who work for their living.


that the quantity of goods It is a truism of politicaleconomy In conformity used depends on the quantity of goods produced. herewith the economic doctrines of a Marx, principally, have laid If the chief stress on the conquest of production by the workers. through their orthe producers are in possession of the products ganizat to distribute the prodthen it is also in their power ucts justly, under the supposition that they are justice-loving, socialistorganizations. for socialism. But there is another way of paving the way It is true that the working class as a whole cannot obtain more than the quantity of products that is turned over to it by the class the capitalists weaken the that is master of production. When buying power of the workers through high prices and low wages, When the workers they diminish their power of consumption. find consumers themselves as ways and and means organize keep the prices low, then they are also in a position to increas" Besides, the organization of workers as consumers their consumption. if it Even the a second advantage. carries with quantity depen" of products which the working class as a whole consumes they employ upon the monopolists of production and the means the workers can still obtain a justdivision of the products throu[ And this also is a piece oJ their organizations of consumption.

socialism. The workers have in fact organized themselves in both din They have trade w. that is, as producers and consumers. tipns, unions, or co-operative societies,as t'l nions and consumers' are ulso called. That is also fully the case in Russia. But not only the workers and poor peasants have acknowl edged the necessity of organizing consumption in the interest oJ forced to it through the need of the houi all; even the state was As the food stuffs became ever scarcer as a result of the war, th" led the into longer war, no tolerate thai state, which nation could the necessary food stuffs remained objectsof speculation. The result of this would have been a stillgreater famine than the: already had without it, and this would have had a bad influenc" on the defense. From these causes sprang national husbandry b\ The governments force.^ in sue! of all capitaliststates,who were a position,used this means. Even the Russian Soviet governmenl itselfcompelled to resort to such steps. But as they, in saw ordei to consistently carry out husbandry by force, would have beei compelled to have a large apparatus, which It was not able


this purpose the stamp out of the ground so quickly, they used for societies societies. The consumers' already existing consumers' were nationalized. In Russia, conditions are on many points entirely different Thus, for example, the Europe. from what they are in western opment consumers' reached a stronger and higher develunion movement This is caused by Ihe than the trade union movement. fact that the consumers' tions organizaunions in the firstline were for had no The the consumers. organizations need peasants of had they but sumption. need of organizations of conof production, And as over 80% of the population of Russia are peasants, were so also, in perfect coincidence herewith, 80% of the the consumers' societies peasants. of members No party and no union in Russia was before the war so The Siberian butter producers powerfulas the Co-operative movement. Russia in to or common in to butter their o"rder sell united, large had sumers' conforeign There a to we even already countries. later, it grew larger, also as the peasants, union of which This was a uniting of all the itself with other products. occupied These Siberian unions had in the year above mentioned artels. of 1907 a turn-over of 957,000 pud butter, of a value of 160,000,000 rubles. (1 pud equal to 34 Ibs.) "coAll these consumers' unions or distributing artels or operativ were united into a central body which is known under the name To the Centrosoyuz belonged in 1914 Centrosoyuz. of 13,500 affiliated distributing artels with a membership of 1,500,000 and a turn-over of 300,000,000 rubles.

the war broke out the consumer's veloped unions of Russia dein no other country. There are principally two circumstances back of the mighty growth of the Centrosoyuz that attract our itself did not worry attention. First, the czar's government food to the that so very much about supplying stuffs population, the workers and peasants had to help themselves and since that time the workers in the industries also have joinedthis movement, while it formerly comprised mostly peasants; second, the prices that the working of food stuffs began to rise in such a manner in order to joinedthese societies, population of the citiesin mass the means life. So procure more the numnecessary cheaply of ber consumers' in the year 1917 to 20,000 ; societiesrose of single to 25,000 in 1918; to 50,000 in the year 1919. At the same time the membership^ rose to 7,000,000 in 1917, to 10,000,000 in 1918, and 15,000,000 in 1919. In the year of 1919 the turn-over was not less than 15 billionrubles (15,000,000,000). these unions were Politically, or less neutral charof a more acter. But as they grew ever more powerful, their influence also, naturally, became noticeable in politics. After the growth of the there was a division into two movement parts. One agricultural distribution one society, consisting of peasants, and society, consisting the the After the population working cities. outof of




leaders of both kinds of societies of the revolution some But in doing so they had entered the provisional government. As economic life influences given up their political neutrality. their economic political life, so these co-operatives had, through the factor important become an politically,with which power, was compelled to count. government In the course under the Centroof development there arose soyuz even productive societies,which produced goods which the peasants could not create. The co-operatives distribute not only food stuffs,but also garments, cloth, silk and other articles. After the outbreak of the October revolution, the co-operatives fore, developed with considerably greater rapidity than beOne figures the the from of given above. ,as will appear Tugon Baranovski, a friend of Peter Kropwas most active men unions had only a otkin's. But these newly arisen consumers' decree the Through life. the soviet government short of March of 28, 1918, the consumers' nationalized, unions or co-operatives were selves themby the founded the consumers' workers unions and all of inserted their independence deprived were among and of the state organs. The vicarious chairman of the executive committee of the present nationalized "Centrosoyuz," P. L. Voikoff, related in an sheviks interview which we had with him on June 22, 1920, that the boldesired after the outbreak of the October revolution the existing co-operatives as organs of the new use state for th" for the cc arose, distribution of food stuffs. But difficulties active resisl operatives, represented by their old leaders, made to the nationalization. But the government, ance which desi] into to lead the consumers' th" new unions channels, removed persons executiv" which stood in its way and installed a new intentic the men who carried out committee)which consisted of This new of the government. executive committee consists of Party (bolsheviks) members, who all belong to the Communist

According to the opinion of the old, dismissed leaders of th( Centrosoyuz, the consumers' associations of free citiunions were zens, but the tendency of nationalization was against the charactei desired to "democratize" th( of the organization. The government they For it. as the whole populatioi this unions, purpose called had to enter into these unions. The government issued a decree, according to which every citizen had to be a member of the cc sumers' By decree March the 18, the union. of old committ( forced by the state to call in an asof the consumers' union were sembly ; in this assembly a new committee was elected. In the elections for this committee the whole population could take whether they were members of the old consumers' unions or not each one had the right to vote. This is what they called "demon cratization." This committee, which is to be found in all localities, in every commune, a to district a comelects representative


of the elects the members mittee, and this district committee Centrosoyuz. the executive committee of This is, however, the case only theoretically,for, according to the statements of the vicarious chairman already referred to, the executive committee was, in practise, not elected but appointed munist by the government, by which process only members of the ComParty were picked out. One representative of this Centrosoyuz is Krassin, and he is not only ,a representative of the Centrosoyuz, but, the Centrosoyuz being a state organ, he is also an officialrepresentative of the As such he was Soviet government. ernment. received by the English govinterests the Krassin of the commercial represents the Soviet government, and for lack of a different apparatus government the Centrosoyuz the is using this Centrosoyuz. Through Soviet government will carry on import and export business with foreign countries. But if the Centrosoyuz is an official organ of the government domestically. is foreign as countries, such not the case regards is the Food StuffsCommissariat. The official organ government But as this proved itself incapable of handling the provisioning sumers' makes use of the conof the population, the Soviet government

unions. to every function of such a consumers' union are known In Russia they were similar to worker. organized west-European unions what they are in the rest of Europe. The small consumers' for the purchase of goods. When they did not collect gathered money they received the necessary means as a loan enough money, from a bigger union affiliated The goods with the Centrosoyuz. they divided among In the peasant cotheir members. purchased operati is individual, have dicated as we production mostly already inin the chapter about the Land. The co-operative societies of the peasants embrace only consumption, not production. The peasants must deliver to the government everything that they do for themselves. The not need organ for this purpose government is the Food Stuffs Commissariat and the consumers' unions. Thus, the has two while government ways of obtaining goods, the peasants have only one, namely through their co-operative societies. The purpose the in government sumers' nationalizing the conof First, : it unions or co-operative societieswas ivas twofold desired to disestablish the unions as being "{ capitalistic undertakings'^ done by conwhich had their own private banks. This was fiscatin the larger productive undertakings of the societies; second, it ivas desired to discontinue private trade. The supplying of the people should be done exclusively through the organs of the state. The most important question for us is : Has nationalization have the co-operative societies had a success, proven the capacity of their service increased through nationalization, and can an imitation of these tactics be recommended? The Sucherevka market in Moscow, the fish market in Char^


kov, and similar markets in all the citiesof Russia give the firsthas not sucto this question, namely, that the government answer ceeded in regulating the provisioning of the population through But even its measures. when there is only a small market in a that the population is city, such as in Petrograd, it only means ground underother more provisions in some procuring the necessary Today the co-operative societies no longer have manner. the service capacity which they had 'before nationalization. Why? The societies no longer are unions of peasants' artels, in which the peasants leave their products to be sold, but the government has rather taken over the task of handling the agricultural products. The peasants How this takes place we have already seen. for 100 rubles per pud. are compelled to part with their grain handles this Whether the organs through which the government Commissariat or work are called departments of the Food Stuffs to the it same thing, for comes Centrosoyuz, departments of the all if the peasants refuse to deliver at those prices, they are forced to it through the military. In each case the soldiers requisition the grain. The societies also receive their products through the than they receive government and cannot distribute any more But as this, for reasons from the government. mentioned, is not before the nafar than less the societiesare tionali serviceable sufficient, The societiesare to-day no longer free institutions, but, according to the words of the vicarious chairman, the population And it is clear that a comforced to become members. are pulsory free The as a one. soas cieties well organization cannot work to-day less capable of supplying the population witl are the necessary provisions, and for that reason everybody tries t" is through missing. private channels what supply
of the co-operative societieswere established by the the trade with unions in the factories, government conjunction and these committees conduct the distribution of the products. Ii that manner the workers thei] receive through this committee factory. directly in bread the But factoi the oftener pound of committee, elected in the factory, performs this function. But must here note that in all factories which I have visited" an" in Russia and Ukraine to 20 they amounted the workers complained of not receiving a sufficient ration of food stuffs. In chocolate factory the girls cried and complained that they hac not received any bread for three days. In a textile factory they were justreceiving bread when we visited them. They started harsh language and complained that they were use not receiving full weight. The manager, who showed us the factory, wanted prove to them that they were mistaken, and he went to the scal" and weighed portions of the bread, and, in fact, there was The soldiers,however, receive much gram missing to the pound. On Volga a richer rations. steamer the sailors, beaming with joy,showed us the great quantity of bread and sugar that the] received. As the reason for the low productivity of the workers we





the lack of food stuffs. One would think that the food shortage was general, as the workers could not themselves and it would lead one to procure food stuffs in a different manner, a shortage in the market where. place, or everythink that there was were the While is the case. But such unable to workers not for the obtain sufficientthrough the organs of the government, that there was thing not enough, it is possible to buy everystated reason the in the market. Besides, workers organize small circlesin low the factory, and send one of several of their felpool their money from the buy to in the peasants. provisions country workers out These provisions are thereafter divided between the participants. Thus, the workers have again created new, voluntary, small unions, although of only a temporary co-operatives, or consumers' societies no longer character, because the nationalized consumers' their to cover were needs. able Just as littleas the state was able to acquire the whole of it little was so sumption possible to force the whole of conproduction, just into the state organization. Economic lifecannot be forced into the compulsory forms of the state; if it is tried, the impossibility of it comes to light. Centralism is always greatest in governments during times of war, and this applies also to it was Russia. While during the war not possible to force the it was into*the life centralist mold, after the war whole economic less possible to handle everything by means of the centralist still loosen up the to it being the then necessary state, apparatus of little,if be a catastrophe tight reins a shall not conjured up. Society and social-economic life are a an not machine, nor But bolsheviks to the seem an them as apparatus. conceive of to their daily vocabulary belongs the word "apparatus," apparatus for the single parts of an apparatus or a machine are dead things. But the separate parts, of which human society is The mistake inherent in composed, are beings with will power. bolshevik theories bolsheviks are all and which all always making, is that they do not sufficiently And that is also this. count with the reason why all their organizing and "apparatus creating" so far has been so imperfect, as they themselves admit, while they, for the organizations naturally, do not want to use any other name born which are out of their autocratic world conception. In the future it will be still impossible than in the three past years more bolshevik lay to hold of rule of everything by means of various kinds of apparatus in the bolshevik sense, by means gans. of state orLeaving out the fact that the bolsheviks degrade the individual to a will-lesstool in the hands of an apparatus, they can never reach what they are striving for by such means.

put down


have already seen that outside of the economic organizations of production and consumption maintained by the state, the workers help themselves, and that a large part of the economic activitiesof the country takes place outside the limitations fixed by the state.



In order to get an special chapter in Russia is shuffling. viks the to to is it it, idea of statements of the bolsherefer sufficient Moscow munist themselves. Thus, as an example, the paper "ComLabor" writes in the second half of June, 1920, in regard to goods which had been located in several sections of Moscow, is, as goods and which could be labeled as shuffle-goods, that been entered, and which consequently had which had nowhere In been shuffled to one side by "responsible soviet employees." found 1,546 lots of were the Rogoschevsky-Simenovski-Rayon 59,149 Among these were pud (1 pud equal to 34 shuffle-goods. 25,071 pud tin; 237,076 pud Ibs.)nickle, 30,135 pud aluminium; zink; 18,332 pud lead plate; 921,857 pud brass; 535,979 pud steel; undetermined quantities of wire; 18,000 two-handle saws; 20,610 32,330 pairs of boots; 5 million archins of woolen-goods; axes; 110,566 archins (21-3 feet) of linen; 20,426 pud coffee and tea, other things that are mentioned in the paper but which and many it is useless to enumerate here, as this already is sufficientto show that through the centralist system the biggest kind of conscious are possible. It remains to mention that in another shufflings found 1/2 million pairs of stockrayon, among other goods, were ings This would, of and 47 carloads of agricultural machinery. be impossible if a decentralistic,that is, a federalistic course, or the system were applied, and the workers of every rayon the goods. As it is now, workers handling it, had control over under the centralistic system, only one central needs to know the belong, where goods and all other sub-departments have to follow the order of the central. Through this system nothing is easier than that shuffling will sneak in, for if there is only one shufflerat the central, goods to the value of millions can be shuffled, because the workers who are handling it are only the horses that pull the chariot of the Central. Another example given by Zinoviev himself shows how wonderfully the "apparatus" of the centralistic organization of national functions. At economy of the Communist ,a conference Party of Russia, which was held in Moscow in October, 1920, Zinoviev spoke of the shortcomings and weaknesses of the party and in the organizations created by it. He related that, on the Murman coast there is, as is well known, a rich run of fish, but particularly so in recent weeks, when the season had been at its height. The comrades there say that the fish is so plentiful that it is sufficientonly to pull about three times in the water with a stick with a hook attached, in order to catch fish. But in spite of that the Murman railroad workers and laborers do not get a single pound of fresh fish and are compelled to live from dried fish, at best. How does that come It arises from the fact about? that we have a fish central ("Glavryba'), which says: "First you must catch the fish,thereafter register it on the books and throw salt on its tail," and only then can the workers receive it But the workers try to get in touch with the fish central, the latter tar out of range." Another example quoted by Zinoviev: "I A


In Ussoljeimmense supplies want to tell you about another case. stored up. The peasants asked for permission to fetch of salt were the salt quantities due them on their own wagons, trol under the conof food stuffs authorities. The chauncery nag began its trot, the river rose above its banks and licked up but in the meantime do What the you expect the peasant to say to this? Fifty salt. all miles from the Baku the workers and the peasants are without petroleum. And there in Baku is the main spring of petroleum! That is due to the shortcomings of our organization." So far Zinoviev. I have myself heard of numerous such cases Peter Kropotkin, in Russia from different people, but if I refer to Emma Goldman or Spiridonova, or other pronounced anti-centralists who have gathered together much material, it would probably to some that these tales are colored. But it cannot very appear from the mouth it comes be when well received in that manner the to happened What peasants of of the arch centralists. innumerable happened to Ussolje, peasants about wood, other also it so the to Petrograd will always go workers, and and also and must go as long as the system of centralism rules in all economic organizations. It is not only a few shortcomings, so, Zinoviev ivouM have\ you believe, bu\t it is the principle itical of polI the blame further illustrate on can falls. centralism which this through a personal experience: A female friend of mine in Moscow to procure some asked me antiquarian books for her. After a long search I happened to see the books in a soviet book store, and I stepped in and wanted to buy them. But there my troubles began. Yes, I could buy the books but had firstto obtain permission from the book central, "Centropitschatsch." I took the address and went forth. But the place was at the other end Upon arriving there (one has to walk, for the populaof Moscow. tion I found it closed. cannot ride in autos like foreign delegates) longer The next day I went again, but I was told that It was no there but in a differentlocation. Finally finding the Book Central, I first came to a lady who sat at a desk. She ordered me to fill to the next office. There another blank out a slip and sent me had to be filledout with the names of the books that I wanted, I further blank this was sent into a different room. and with There it was sent back to the second room registered, and I was the Now blank. the with order order blank was signed, and now I could go to the book store and get the three antiquarian books. But now I saw book in the store, which I would have a German liked to buy for myself, I was for me told that it was necessary to again get an order blank from the central. By this time I had In order to buy enough of this and let the book lie where it was. a couple of antiquarian books, one needs, consequently, two days. No wonder if life gets clogged and dissatisfaction over it grows. But these are not merely some shortcomings of the organization, but the whole system is wrong.


bureaucracy, the intimate friend of centralism, prospers under such conditions is clear without further argument. And


bureaucrats in Moscow as there are worktwice as many ers. these finds According to a Rosta poster one often stuck up the walls in Russia the following are the population figures on given for 1919-1920 :
" "

400,000 250,000 105,000 233,000 312,000

children under housewives,

16 years,

workers organized in unions, soviet employees and officials, persons of the bourgeois element.

Total 1,300,000 inhabitants in Moscow.

Although it is compulsory for all workers in Russia to belong to the union, there are no more than those workers in Moscow There are, consequently, only 105,000 workers, here mentioned. but 233,000 soviet employees. But the remaining 312,000 parasitic that is, together with the soviet officials, elements also "work" Naturally, in trade. they are engaged some not sort of smuggle in be this ner, mancan very much work of productive accomplished it reacts on the food stuffs and provision and as a matter of course situation of the country.

The Life of the Workers

in the Cities

The workers cannot live from the food stuffs that they receive. They are, therefore, to to resort compelled and self-help This is not said in order to paint something in black to smuggle. colors, but only in order to illustrate the situation which arose from a complex of different circumstances. Street railways handle they are stillscarcer, very littletrafficin Petrograd, in Moscow susand at the end of October the whole street car service was pended. The workers must, consequently, often walk over an hour to their work or their soviet office (if it is a soviet employee) For lunch they remain in the factory or the bureau. They receive their noon-day meal at the place of work, in the soviet officesor in most of the factories. It consists almost exclusively this meal is very poor of soup and "kascha" (mush) In Moscow but in in some Charkov everywhere, places comparatively good. For a worker one must consider the meal even quantitatively insufficient. Besides, they receive other food, the so-called as "payok." This also is unsatisfactory. But in the fall,when there are apples or wood at the bureau, then everybody must bring home them his or her back which may on hour. require an When he comes home he is, of course, not able to do anything. And stillhe lacks every convenience in the house. Having to do everything himself, his whole activity is expended on a lot of petty things, so that he can do very little productive work. The product turned out by the ivorkers in the factories is minimal, as one can understand from the standard of life. But this is frequently regarded by the government as sabotage, and 82
. .

it, the communist cell in the factory, which has to watch over often denounces the worker for sabotage. For this they are then punished. The rations (payok) to which the workers are entitled in a locomotive repair shop which I inspected, are, per month: 25 Ib. Ib. American or Ib. equal to 400 gram flour (1 Russian .88 tobacco; 2 Ibs. weight); 1 Ib. oil; 8 Ibs. fish; 5 Ibs. groats; li/2 sugar; 14 Ib. coffee; 1% Ib. salt. But the workers do not receive I visited the factory, the shop comthese rations regularly. When mittee was just in session, and they complained that during the the workers had not received any oil and not previous month enough flour.

If the workers do not get enough they try to procure more through private channels. The bakers take dough with them in their long pockets. home Their women make small cakes them in it the The bread out of market. and sell carriers steal the ready baked bread ; I spoke with one of the carriers, who told me quite openly that if he did not do this he could not exist. The thing other workers do, who are employed in other branches same industry. Everybody tries to pull through in ways that are of permitted or not permitted. Perhaps many a person will ask the question why the workers do not buy what they need. This is not exactly possible, because they simply cannot pay the prices that are asked in free trade. The workers receive from 3,000 to 10,000 rubles per month. The meal in the factory is not expensive; its costs only about 20 rubles. Similarly the prices of the things which they receive Also the prices for everything in their rations are very cheap. from the are very low, so that, if the workgovernment ers received from that they would get along very source, received sufficient yes, they even could save a good deal of well with their money, But is because they the reason money. receive such a high wage the rations are not sufficient. When they are compelled to pay 500-600 rubles for a pound of bread in the market and from 5,000-6,000 rubles for a pound of butter, then they would have to 100,000 rubles per month if they want to*come earn out right. Of the mentioned 312,000 individuals of the bourgeois elements, to Rosta found the to be are which according statistics in Moscow, there are also many wretched persons, which deserve but bourgeois. In the summer, any name visitors to the second lying congress of the III. International could see men and women in the streets at night, sleeping. If you asked these people why they slept in the street, they answered that they wanted to be the firstin the morning when the bureau was opened to get their allowance travel. These then to" the people went of railway way railand traveled to the surrounding villages,in order to buy milk and, if possible, other things which they later sold in the Moscow At the railway stations one can later see hundreds of market. ragged persons, who have traveled a long way for from two to five liters of milk (1 liter equal to 1.76 pint), in order to sellit

small gain, and, too, always in danger of being arrested. Milk distribution is so poorly organized that thousands fetch a liter a piece from the village, instead of one bringing a thousand liters of milk, as is done in Berlin. In spite of the overwhelming have been to they this. arrange centralism not able Disregarding this highly irrational supply system there is not a spark of the socialist spirit to be seen in it. The bolsheviks have for a communal even not yet made arrangements milk supply, is introduced in Berlin for children and for the sick' and such as then they want to talk about communism and call themselves con"! munists

later for

Nor can designate as communistic we the wage policy in force. There are two standards by which to size up this question: (1) The land, the nation, the state, perhaps also the class; (2) the workers and the individual.The firstis the starting point to munists" the state socialists, the social-democrats, the bolsheviks, the "com; the second is the starting point of the anti-state socialists. If we think of the welfare of the country, the state even if it is a proletarian state or of the class, then we will do everything to defend these. That is what the bolsheviks do. When the in this sense that they had to defend revolution broke out, it was the revolution. They had to keep the industry of the country had to mands even the they if going at any price, give up principal deAt the there present equal wage. of socialism, namely in Russia 35 wage are steps or wage classes, the academically educated people, the engineers, the technicians, the organizers, etc.,are in the highest classification ers of wages, the trained workin the middle classes and the unskilled workers in the lowest classes. Furthermore, consideration is given to the question whether the workers labor in establishments which are important for the war and against the counter-revolution. They have even to the proposed of 1920, the tariff railwayman,in the summer laid in before them 1912 during czarism, but which was which was then declined. We are, consequently, forced to say that Russia has gone to the dogs on the wage question, no matter what beautiful Lenin may put forward to defend it. phrases or important reasons The bolsheviks were driven to this wage policy, which we have just designated as anti-socialist, through an important turn of the conditions. The workers ivere not in a position to take the industries. They were over not prepared for it and they had not organized themselves for the purpose duction. of taking over proIn Russia this was certainly not possible. The revolution did not come when the workers or a group of revolutionaries were their ready with revolutionary preparations, or when the technically so well prepared that they could take workers were over production without friction from the capitalistic leaders (whether they be technicians or organizers), but the revolution in Russia before the workers were came in a position to prepare for it. When too, a politicalparty takes the power, then, naturally, from it. One need not, consecan come nothing socialistic
" "


the fact that the bolsheviks did not quently, be astonished over carry through a socialistwage policy, but, on the contrary, there for have been reason astonishment if they had worked out would such a wage policy. The bolsheviks had thus been compelled to retain the bourgeoisie tion, which had been the leader of industry before the revoluin their employ, either by means of physical force or through The last method proved to be the best extra-ordinary high pay. the one, wage policy was continued, but at the same capitalist and to time they explained, and they do so yet, that the aim was further develop the workers, in order to make the bourgeoisie by them more workers. superfluous and replace

had such bad luck in Russia, that the revoluBut if they now tion found the workers unprepared and in no position to take production then we must at least out of the hands of the capitalists, For the bad thing about it is that the draw a lesson therefrom. workers who, naturally, are no political economists and do not tionary understand the connection of things, put the blame on the revoluhappens to be in power. party or organization which This time it happens to be the bolsheviks, but if it were the syndicalist or the anarchists or any other revolutionary government, lyre they would be compelled to play then it would be the same on, and the workers would consider them as their rulers, justas bolsheviks. the they now consider

This lesson the syndicalists drew already long ago, insofar the workers to prepare and develop themselves as they admonish that personally, as well as their organizations, in such a manner from breaks a out, when various economic, psychological revolution it finds the workers culiarl Peprepared. and political reasons, teach this decried the are enough, and syndicalists who "accused" by the same bolsheviks and party communists as reformist Thus, things are being put on their head. Instead of the bolsheviks saying to the syndicalists: "Yes, you are right; if the revolution and socialism shall not become entirely discredited before the workers, then we must strike out for this road," they say to the syndicalists that, "if revolution breaks out we will either put you in jailo"r stand you up against a wall." That is what they have done in Russia at all events, where many anarchosyndicalists have been put in jail.
cannot entirely cut loose from this doctrine, which on one side is promulgated by the syndicalists and on the other side also by Eugen Duhring in his book "Social Salvation" many the doctrine is smuggled into the years ago, and for that reason theses of the III. International, where a great role is assigned to the trade unions in the conquest of the politicalpower and in the But the principal role shall, economic up^building of communism. be played by a political,communist party. of course,


In spite of all this obscuration and veil-pulling it is not possible to hide the fact that the social revolution shall be so much


successful, that is, social equality shall be the sooner realized, the better the workers are prepared for it. Whoever wants to be an adherent of the social revolution and does not set his eyes chiefly on this, but on the conquest of political power, he shows that in his innermost self he is more of a rioter, an than a socialist. But such are adherent of violent phrases rather in Russia the the bolsheviks parties in all politicalcommunist and munist, other countries. The principal task for a real socialistor comself, if you so want to call them, lies just in preparing himthe ecofor on the workers and the peasants nomic, social equality, the intellectualand the moral field;but he must be a syndicalist to do this. Still another circumstance must be added, which contributed to the development of the 35 wage grades or to the fact that This was the the bourgeoisie is better paid than the workers. he does "Who the use eat" as not work, neither shall motto: of a theory this sentence is a commonplace a tactical principle. As if or, we want to be ironical,of biblical propaganda. of socialist, does not wo"rk, neither shall he eat. It is correct and just:Who that he who has But this must not be interpreted so ,as to mean, from this time before on now shall not worked get nothing to eat. is an The social revolution through which act of social justice, done The a re injustices away social with, and not vice versa. the

social revolution must give everybody something to eat, no matter what he has done before, even if he has done nothing at all. This not only from the standmethod is,however, to be recommended, point from b ut the of justice, also standpoint of revolutionary tactics. That the bourgeoisie of Russia was given nothing or less to eat than others has revenged itself. When they later were for the organization needed of technical and industrial life they had become stillmore embittered enemies of the working than before, through these class very tactics. From this, also, we have a lesson to1 draw: Not to support the negative tendencies, not to give free vent to instincts of revenge in ourselves or in others, but to combat them and, on the contrary, do everything to make the birth of the social revolution an act of equalization and social justice.Or, putting it in more common duty words : To give bread to everybody must be the first the social revolution. of

When formerly,


in pre-revolutionary days, socialists,syndicalist or anarchists imagined their ideal society realized or thought of such a thing painted it before themselves, they never insurance as labor laws. For or the German workers' anarchosocialists or syndicalists such things always had the flavor oJ Bismarckian politics. Social law-making against unemploymenl sickness, accident, etc., in behalf of the workers was conside] necessary only in the capitalist state while already the funt 86

lawmental principle of socialism is mutual help, so that social the in the old capitalist sense of word could not be making thought of. That workers' insurance is being introduced in Russia only have not to do with a social revolution proves again that there we impressed deeply has but with a politicalrevolution, which itselfupon the social life of Russia. Private property has for the largest part been abolished and the revolution might develop into if other countries far-reaching sense a social revolution in a more also are entangled in the revolution. That influential, revolutionary, bolshevik circles in Russia first of all thought of introducing the progressive measures time for some which had been realized in the rest of Europe sheviks past, should not be counted to their discredit. Thus, the bolKerensky had law-making which carried out the social larger scale. True, a much on a small scale, but on commenced Kerensky that for the thought, defend one would onself cannot longer. in he had remained thing if have done the same power This policy of social law-making gives us the impression of a Up then to tendency. all social law-making had certain reformist to the struchad the significance of an addition or improvement ture But the on one judgment pass cannot of capitalist society. basis of this single point; we must rather take into consideration sian the whole achievement of the bolsheviks and the whole Rusthe Such us that a revolution. general consideration shows half politicaland one half social and Russian revolution was one later development even in i.ts partly inclined to reaction. This the development we curves cannot yet consider of all constitutes

ended. In the realm of the czar, workers' insurance was only poorly developed. Up to the year 1917, including the brief Kerensky in all Russia 1,457,503 workers insured. In period, there were the year 1919 the number grew to 3,009,510, and in the year 1920, according to the statement of the Commissar of Labor, there were 6,000,000 persons, who were all subjectto insurance. But in a 120,000,000 this is still very small. Besides one population of must consider the whole insurance, in the present situation,to be more on than carried out into reality. paper The institution which has worked out the insurance system is the Commissariat 'of At the head of it stands the PeoLabor. ple's Commissar of Labor, Schmidt. But this commissariat has to care for not only the workers without an income, but also for the active ones, that is,it has to"give out the work to the workers. The commissariat has five sub-departments. The first branch handles the distribution of the work and the workers ; the second, protection of the workers ; the third, the tariffservice ; the fourth, labor statistics; The Commissariat of the fifth,a labor museum. Labor has sections in every city.If workers are needed in a place, they are sent from a central in Moscow or from a provincial division. This institution the negotiations and arrangealso manages 87

merits with foreigners who wish to immigrate into Russia. The missariat workers must labor according to the conditions fixed by the comthe trade by in is As the commissar labor office put of unions, the conditions are in conformity with the wishes of the Executive Committee of the unions, and the tariff, etc., statistics, in the by Commissariat the are unwith ions. worked out conjunction kind be the erecis to as When a job of some tion started, such of a building, the Commissariat for Building Construction to the Supreme Council of National Economy for addresses itself Just the as to the Labor Commissariat for workers. material, and has to supply the material, Supreme Council of National Economy has Labor to so the Commissariat supply the labor power. of
These measures of labor protection include motherhood insurance, child insurance and the bringing up of children, invalid and sickness insurance. According to the statements of Labor Commissar Schmidt the basic support for all needy is 1,200 rubles for workers, for unemThis is the minimum per month. wage ployed, in husbands for women the are army, etc. Of whose red is that the workers actually employed practically all the and workers included in the unions imum about one-sixth receives this minkinds, five-sixths wage; of all receive additional payments through overtime, through piece work, through premiums, so that the worker comes to an average of 4,000-5,000 rubles per month. Workers under The wage is paid partly in kind, partly in money. 15 years are allowed to work only 6 hours a day.

So far Commissar Schmidt. But in the factories I have found that many than the sums qualified workers earn much more given here ; they come 10,000 to 15,000 rubles per month. as high as from In the factories I also spoke with 16-year old youths, who had already for four years worked 8 hours a day at the turning lathe, so that the protection of the youth, which now exists on paper, has not yet been carried over into reality. It may be that the decree on workers' insurance is partly carried out, but that it is by my observations, not completely carried out ivas proven

National Finance
In another place in this book we have already discussed the question whether we in Russia have to do with state capitalism or state socialism. The financial problem shows us this question in new light.

When the November revolution of 1917 broke out and went to victory, all large land owners dispossessed. The were banks were Interest on was money nationalized. abolished, private capital was changed into national capital. All mortgages were annulled. Tho government made great efforts to collect on but received only 4 all the money outstanding mortgages, that head. million rubles under The most important feature of the revolution on the cial finanfield is the depreciation The money. government printed of


These paper bills without regard to the gold reserve. they are no no are credit certificates; national debt certificates, has no borrow does The but itors crednot and paper. state nothing ing bearinterest is, like the capitalist states. Capitalism, that issued by the bolsheviks capital, is abolished. The money it is debt deemed not intended to have it reand represents no national by the state. The security back of it is the wealth of the country, the land, which has become state property, the forests, the mines, the oil springs, the factories and the machinery; all sheviks these are the assets of the state. We have also seen that the bolin their commercial treaties with other countries pay with in form of concessions which they turn over natural resources, to the capitalist states for exploitation, seeing that they have with thereIn consonance themselves. no possiblity of exploiting them does not carry the legend "Loan the bolshevik paper money Certificate" or "National Bank Note" or a statement to the effect that the state pays the amount upon demand, but in 6 languages it has the words: "Proletarians of all countries, unite!"

This is nearly a precise verbal account of an interview with From this we can see that it has Minister of Finance Krestinsky. as many not been possible to abolish money, socialisttheories come teach, but that interest was therewith abolished and also the inthe fell their to ownership without work, which rich through By ever, howthis means, papers. of shares and other valuable income is form one though of only without work abolished, it is the most parasitic form. Through the retention of paper notes it was possible to make the notes themselves into merchandise as just well as other goods. In fact, there are in Russia a ish, Swedgreat number of currency speculators. They buy German, Finnish, Esthonian and Russian money and afterwards sell it Naturally, a with good profit. speculation is heavily punished, but it is an old truism that punishments do not protect us from foolishness. The form or of parasitical income, misdeeds second i. e., trade, is, consequently, not done away with, and money keeps right on existing. Third, through the retention of money, the standard by which the value of labor is measured continues to be money, and it is for this has independent reason that money an exactly magnitude and significance. The circumstance that no private person can draw money or from bank for has the that the a other values note, and state stepped into the place of the private capitalist,is of far-reaching importance. The private person no longer has the right to demand in the form of inheritance, etc.; any material values whatsoever these values belong to the whole people, to the collectivity; to the is Thus the or financial state. system collectivistic part of the business, in to the capitalist states, where state contradistinction there is private economy. We have also seen that in Russia there is no private financial system, but a state financial system. The answering of the ques89

tion whether we can speak of state capitalism or state socialism in this connection, depends on the definition of the word capitalism. interest bearing values, sums mean of If with capital we Russian the can soviet or only speak of money such, then we the mean by if But we as capital state socialism. regime total of the values of land, machines, the means sum of production total of the accumulated and the mines, etc., in short, the sum values, not of the individual, but of the whole collectivety, by using the word state then we would strike the right meaning capitalism. With capital and capitalism, however, the socialists, disregarding all mo-re or less scientificand hair-splitting explanations, have meant the power through which the workers are being of private property and the wage exploited, through the medium system connected therewith. But that the wage system exists not only under private ownership but also under a collective or state ownership, is demonstrated to us by the municipalities, the stateowned railways and the nationalized post offices,as well as all nationalized undertakings in the capitalist state, on the one side, and in the Soviet republic on the other. But for the worker who is employed by the municipal administration, the state railways their employer, even if it is the state, has the and the post offices, Thyssen or same significance as the private capitalist Krupp, Stinnes. As long ,as they are wage slaves they feel the ruling the themselves. Just as little over power of capitalism and state it would occur as to the workers employed by a state employer to consider themselves as members of a state socialist system, just so is it in the case Russia. From Soviet now on we must with "state correct. By so recognize the word capitalism" as more doing we shall in no way paint the actual conditions worse than they are, but have only found a more definition, correct which in a designates the conditions with a single phrase. concise way And that is state capitalism. More important than this purely formal definitionis the nature the financial As the a of system. result of revolution, the the nationalization of private property and with cancellation of the national debts of the former governments came the colossal Russian the In the is This no new crash of phenomenon. ruble. French revolution of 1789-1793 the assignats had comparatively a stilllower value than the present soviet ruble. In Moscow (1920) you could for a German mark obtain 100 soviet rubles from speculators, and for a Swedish crown 500-600 rubles; the the are (paper) rubles of old regime generally valued ten times as as a Czar much soviet ruble. and Kerensky rubles are not permitted to circulate,but in spite of this prohibition one finds them in trade.

increased cost of food stuffs which resulted from the the crash of ruble, is not by far proportional to the fall in the money value, and the food stuffs, such as 1 Ib. of bread for 500 dearly bought than formerly at 5 kopek. rubles, is to-day more The soviet ruble has, justlike the assignats, not sunk in this manThe


the purposes olutiona of the politicians but through the revpreciat debolsheviks declare that the the When now situation. ishing banfor the was purpose of of money splendidly suited the spirit of capitalism from the thought of the people, they are only trying to make a virtue out of necessity. Looking have stated may at it one-sidedly, a physician who treated me, the matter correctly when he said that to-day, with an income before with 300 as of 30,000 rubles he did not have as much not particular about getting paid in rubles, and that he was to but money, get his pay in clothes, and what else would prefer the desire for he needs in order to live. Speaking subjectively if killed. is money not altogether certainly curbed,


the workers do not receive sufficientfood stuffs and other articles of use, they are compelled to continue the use of The only difference between the in their daily economy. money and where present and past is that one counts with greater sums, 1,000. The they formerly strove to get 1 ruble, they now need in this thinks that one only of each spirit of capitalism consists himself and does not worry of his fellow about the weal and woe But I must admit that I have not seen very much more man. of disappearance the posite, of this spirit and its replacement by the opthe spirit of mutual aid and of socialism, in Russia than in Europe. Western On the contrary, one makes the observation, stance, in that the people Russia, generally, are more greedy than for inin Sweden. But this we must blame on the long war, has demoralized as people, which well as on the economic distress. Poverty brings misdeeds and depravity, but prosperity restores things again. But

The depreciation of money with, and above all,in connection therethe shortage of goods, has brought this with it, that the more the peasants, prefer to exchange products workers, and still if they have the know for that, even they against products; it is they they cannot get what money, not to be had in need, as the country. This explains why they will exchange a hen for a glass of salt, and the like. But, as already indicated, we must tion ascribe this direct exchange of goods, not so much to the depreciabut lack to the money of rather of products.

is ever more in Of late the policy of the Soviet government the direction in the kind. money wage with the wage of replacing This would be equal to the abolition of money if it were carried out completely, but for the present it has not gone so far. It is possible that they will arrive at this stage, especially if a similar in But if movement starts other countries. capitalism in Western and Middle Europe keeps alive, then this hope is very The concession policy which Russia now follows will again poor. life into the money in new Soviet Russia. Foreign inject system American, English is capitalism, and which stronger than Russian was, capitalism ever will step into the latter's place. Of all the in the results obtained revolution there will then remain only the labor laws pertaining to insurance and workers' relief. 91

The Soviets (Councils)

It always comes up wherever council idea is not new. try to ordirectly themselves the masses ganize working people, the life full independence their tion eliminaand with with The times in between-hands or middlemen. of unnecessary times when into the this are position which people mostly get is,In times being that tion. of revoluoverthrown, old authorities are During the great French revolution the Parisians elected in their sections the organs which we to-day would call councils or



Soviets. But disregarding the fact that the council idea always has risen to the surface in revolutionary times, the anti-authoritarian the ones who stood socialists,anarchists and syndicalists were ignorant idea. Only an person could take nearest to the council the notion to deny that this is so. This springs from the antiThe authoritarian world conception of the doctrines mentioned. anarchists have always proclaimed the formula: Peasant, to you belongs the land; factory worker, to you belongs the factory; miner, to you belongs the mine. The syndicalists made it their for that purpose no councils aim, not to conquer politicalpower but to take were necessary possession of the economic power, the land, the factories, the mines, the means of transportation, In order the workers there employed. are etc., through who to carry this out, the workers and the peasants must manage these establishments. But not all can do this at once; for this they must elect trustees in the factory, on the countrypurpose in And there we have the council the mines, and so on. estate, idea. The workers in the factories elect factory councils; in the country, peasant councils; and for regulating the affairs in the in fact, that the see, community, community councils. Thus we socialist labor movement which from the beginning renounced parliamentarian representation and for the realization of socialism and communist anarchism chose the direct road through the the most qualified,yes, we may was even say, the only workers If idea. in the the present revolutionary times carrier of council besides even others, anarchists and syndicalists,are in favor of the direct way, the direct action, such as bolsheviks and communists, then they can also, of course, claim to represent the council idea to the same extent as they uphold the direct method. to remind the "November But it is necessary socialists," wh" before and during the war for the largest part social patwere riots pose as "the only representatives of the counand who now cil system," of the priority of the anarchists and the syndicalists, in order to bridle their imagination a little. The Spanish anarchists have really for decades propagated the council idea, so that it is possible to even point out concrete examples. It has also been shown that the soviet or council idea is no\ a newly invented patent of the Russian bolsheviks, but that 11 emerged from the Russian revolution and was represented by all
" "
" "


revolutionaries, not only the bolsheviks, but also the left socialists. revolutionaries, the anarchists, the syndicalists arid the maximalWhen the October revolution broke out and the workers there were elected to elected their councils (in Russian: Soviets), the Kronstadt soviet 105 maximalists, 95 bolsheviks, 76 social revolutionaries, and 12 anarchists. But the latter had, according to a statement of the maximalist leader, a great influence. In most sheviks cities the workers and the peasants elected Soviets, and the bolin the majority. by no" means were always

Originally the soviet formation was quite spontaneous. Later a system was created out of this sudden movement which the anchoring then was anchored in the constitution. In Germany of the council system in the constitution meant the annihilation the bourgeois constitution of the free councils. But in Germany "Reichstag'; Parliament was retained. In Russia the with and (not the bolsheviks alone but all the revolutiona revolutionary workers dissolve the to had the power constituent workers) (by us called the national assembly) and to lay the assembly in the basket of the soviet system, not only as an ornament bourgeois parliamentarian constitution, but made it the sole foundation The for the building of the whole new state structure. Russian Socialist Federative the Soviet Republic constitution of is, as the name indicates, exclusively a soviet constitution. The decisions providing for a soviet constitution were adopted on July 10, 1918, by an All-Russian Soviet Congress.
The Russian soviet (council) constitution is so built that in the citiesthe workers elect a city soviet from their factories,bureaus The Moscow or shops. soviet has 400 members, and the president is Kamenieff. In the country, gouvemement Soviets are These half year in congress. elected. gouvernement Soviets meet every In the Samara are 3% million electors, go"uvernement which are represented in the congress by 300 delegates. The AllRussian Soviet Congress consists of representatives of all the city Soviets, who send a representative for each 25,000 electors, and of the representatives of the gouvernement Soviets, who send a for 125,000 representative each of population. These rules will be found in the constitution of the Russian republic, Article 25. This All-Russian Soviet Congress is called in at least twice a year by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee is elected by the Afl-Russian Soviet Congress and consists of at most 200 members. This executive is the highest authority outside of the congress. It committee forms the Soviet (Council) People's Commissars, be of who may to the cabinet ministers in the capitaliststates. There compared 18 different People's Commissariats. are
functions of the individual commissariats I have already reported here. But whoever wishes to study these matters in detail will find it in the flood of bolshevik propaganda more literature which may be obtained in all languages. the



to point out here what 1 to me important it seems have observed in Russia in regard to the functioningof the present in find bolshevik the does is one not something Soviets, which literature mentioned. Then we must first call your attention to the circumstance that the Soviets have lost a good deal of their independence and freedom through the so-called soviet constitution. The Soviets were mixed up with the state. The Soviets are a revolutionary institution, but the state is and remains, in spite proof the most beautiful recitations of the bolshevik about the letarian be It therefore, institution. a not will, reactionary state, has become reacthe that tionary also original council system surprising it was in the same measure as mixed up with the state. That will appear already from the elections. The bolsheviks may assert ever so loudly that it is principally the workers who elect them and that the course ers of the revolution shows that the workturning to the bolsheviks, as can be seen from more ever are the elections,that the majority in all Soviets consists of bolsheviks. But this changes nothing in the fact that the bolsheviks are in th( majoritybecause they themselves make the majority. Without for a moment allowing myself to be intimidated b; the loud outcries of the bolsheviks, who brand everybody making these assertions as a counter-revolutionary, I must mention som" munition factory, the name examples. The workers in a Moscow have forgotten, I their representative in th( as elected of which Moscow in the firstmonths soviet the anarchist Gordin. This was sheviks not recognized by the bolof 1920. The election of Gordin was for factory H( this were new elections announced. and was again elected. Because his electors as well as he himself stood fast by the election he was arrested and given two months in prison as a "demagogue/' Such names they have always al hand. But the workers of this factory did not elect any othei and remained during that legislative soviet member out period withrepresentation in the Moscow soviet. Besides this case the] are cases the election has been declared many, many when by the rence and void ruling pa\rty. As this is an every-day occurthe people no longer get excited about it. As Gordin tol" his case in the presence of many me witnesses, he laughed over il I In found the Samara there is a munitioi case amazing. when factory which at the outbreak of the revolution employed 23,00( to the Samara workers. These elected members soviet. When factory May 21, 1920, the on there were only 1,600 peopL visited there. A year before the bolsheviks had dissolved th" working executive committee of the Workers' and Peasants' Council of th" Samara, because they did not have the majority gouvernement therein. The opposing parties, however, did not want to undertake because the rich peasants were jusl anything at that moment a counter-revolutionary making attempt, and thus the dissolutioi of the executive committee of the soviet was accomplished without friction. But in the same year only 1,000 people worked in that factory, because they were out fighting the Czecho-Slovaks More


in the neighborhood of Samara. who had taken Kasan and were The bolsheviks did not hold any new elections to replace the city 23,000 workers. was The reason soviet elected while there were that in that soviet the bolsheviks had the majority. Through such in check, but it was illegalities they held the whole gouvernment did not reflectthe real conditions. a representation which But, apart from these cases, which are not by far exhausted with the above related ones, the bolsheviks have another method of securing the majorityin the soviet. The bolsheviks are the The paper is nationalized; the printshops, ruling state party. fore, the houses, in brief, everything belongs to the state and is,therein the hands of the bolshevik party. Thus, only this party is in a position to carry on an election agitation; what wonder then if they receive the most votes and the most seats. And in spite of all that, it happens that the mensheviks or the left socialof votes. revolutionaries receive considerable numbers lic From all this it is evident that in the Russian Soviet Repubthe Soviets only to a small extent are the expression of the free will of the workers and the peasants. A peculiar light is the government on thrown Soviets of Russia by a resolution anarchists of the "Nabat" in adopted by the Russian-Ukrainian their last congress, held in Charkov 3-8 September. It says, among other things, about the relationship to the soviet power: "In the beginning of the soviet power we extended to it But the o"ur after revolution-born soviet great confidence. had become a powerful three years, power, in the course of it has the throttled revolution. It developed state machine, into a dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie, into a dictatorship of one party, and of a small part over the the whole proletariat, over the whole of proletariat time this dictatorship working people, while at the same Through this throttles the will of the broad working masses. the revolution lost the creative power by which alone it was possible to solve the differentproblems of the revolution. The to the is, therefore, a lesson and a warning soviet power to the This conference proposes workers of all countries. to boycott the administrations and Soviets which comrades are and to devote all their controlled by the government the lower strata to this purpose among powers of propaganda illegal We groups and gather must start with of the workers. us." material around all revolutionary the situation in Russia," we Besides, in the "report over

read: time as world imperialism convulsively "At the same clings to each opportunity to strangle Soviet Russia, as the ing home and the source of revolutionary infection, there is takthe decomposition itself Russia a in revolution. of sad place Instead of the united mass of workers which in the October days of 1917 fought in Russia for the conquest of


into division of the working masses masters and servants, governing and governed, rulers and The party of the so-called communists, which possesses subjects. the forms an ernment centralized soviet govunlimited power, district its and city, with all central committees, The the workers and gouvernement committees, etc. right of From the peasants to elect free councils has become a fiction. community soviet up to the Ail-Russian Congress of Soviets, free, nonfrom the congress of the unions to the so;-called but everything partisan peasant conferences there is nothing free, is undermined by the party. A Gigantid system of espionage has been established. Under the pretense of a struggle party has with the counter-revolution, the communist laid its hand heavily upon the working population through its "Partkom" (party committees which are formed everywhere). The press is strangled. There is no free exchange of opinion, either in the street, or in the house, or in the (extra meetings, or on the job. In the street the "Tscheka" ordinary commission) is spying; in the house the "do\mkom' (house committee of the communist party, if a party com munist lives in the house); on the job in the factory th( "fabkom" (factory committee of the communist party) Far far from the lower strata of the workers the "Sovnarkom' (Councilof People's Commissars) has formed a strong gov The governmen ernment, which rests upon a strong army. has changed into a body whose interests are opposed to those of the revolution." bread,
we now


descriptions of the situation offer extremely valuabl" for the understanding of the present character of the material Soviets. From all this we must draw the conclusion that the Soviets are thing, bul and the soviet government not one and the same two different things, of which the first one is the natural expres sion of the revolutionary people, while the second one is the hard frozen forms of a clique that has come into power. As a liberty loving revolutionist one can very well accept the first but must look upon the latter very critically.In view of the circumstance that the bolsheviks and communists always call attention to one it the is proper for the syndicalists to show side of soviet power, up the other side, in order that all workers in the portentous hours which are immediately ahead may be able to draw a lesson therefrom and with Argus eyes guard their own freedom anc their elected Soviets. It would mean in the garden charge putting of the goat if the workers of other countries, afteradopting the to see a soviet system, were road to the realization of their economic mid political freedom in a political government Mark that we here only speak of the revolutionary and progressive workers and not of the bourgeoisie. Factory councils for the managing of the factories; peasant and agricultural workers' for the management councils of agriculture; community councils 96


finally,federations for regulating the affairs of the community; industrial as the as of unions; but also well of the single unions federations of the community councils or labor bureaus. These be the organizations of the revolution; but they must never are into the absence a state, for only through allowed to converge in is the freedom spite all of well or ill-meant state guaranteed, of the bolsheviks the assurances letarian necessity of state or proabout of dictatorship.

In the Red



Party of Russia had a Army the Communist And it continues its power. for maintaining powerful weapon to be such up to the present day. That the creating of such from the wreckage of the czarist armies, after the allan army destroying world war, was a notable achievement, shall not be its hold own here. And this denied army against could whether an that French Prussian or an remain will army militarism, of open question. important to us here is the character of the What is more is an army like every other. It can Red Army, The Red Army only by maintaining the strictest war exist and meet with success discipline, ties obedience. But that these qualiand military morale: into men development to the be of suitable especially should if he wants socialistsand communists, is something that no man, to be honest, can truthfully state. For the maintenance and the efficiencyof an army those slave characteristics are of incalculable Without using worth, as they are an integral part of an army. that militarism much circumlocution we can make the statement individual the is the mortal enemy freedom the and thus of of Not development. the only is the also greatest enemy of socialist "as long long as we have armies, so will there statement true that "as long as there is an army, be war," but also the statement that no socialistdevelopment can prosper." Going out from these idealistic ist considerations the true socialfreedom be an must also anti-militarist. But and champion of historic take a one different from may position and considerations consider the Red Ar\my as necessary. If Trotsky from an historical standpoint seeks, as a Marxian, through proofs and to establish the necessity of the Red Army it for be course, a easy arguments, representative of the would, of opposite standpoint, if he only has the ability and the skill,to or, present as many proofs for an opposite perhaps, still more cussion, be But theoretical, a this would only speculative disstandpoint. ism such as we find in Trotzky's anti-Kautsky book "TerrorCommunism." and Instead of carrying on all this discussion I might point to the fact that in Russia itself not all revolutionaries agree with Trotzky's viewpoint. In the question of defending the revolution 97

the bolsheviks take the standpoint that without the Red Army the revolution would have been vanquished by the counter-revolution, Army, that, therefore, the Red a as and savior of the revolution, is one of the first revolutionary factors. If it had not been for the Red Army, some czar reactionary general or a new would be ruling in Russia, that is, in short, the standpoint of the now bolsheviks. The maximalists, a large part ists of the syndicalists,the anarchtake a an the left part oppoand site social-revolutionaries of Against the they first standpoint. put another one, assertion which has saved the revolunamely, that it is not the Red Army tion beaten but down the the and counter-revolution, revolutionary workers and peasants would have defended the revolution even without the Red Army.

As examples they mention: When general Korniloff marched Army Moscow, it Red by which he was the was connot against quered. Army. It At that time there was Red was not yet a other czarist army with him which turned and foughl parts of the same him and proved to be the strongest. For the workers and peasants off who fought in the czarist army, but against Korniloff, this Kornilwas a counter-revolutionary, who tinue wanted to force them to conit was For that reason to fight Korniloff the war. necessary if peace was to come. But this does not speak for the Red Army, did then which not exist, it speaks solely for the urge of liberty the among people.

According to the viewpoint of the mentioned tendencies the bolsheviks make the conscious mistake that they consider the R" Army equal to an armed uprising of the people. Further, the syndicalists and the related tendencies point t". mans that drove the Gerthe fact that it was not the Red Army themAustrians the selves, Ukraine, but the peasants out of and the partisans, the leaders, the insurgents. By guerilla warfare in small partisan groups they chased the Germans or away blocked them in such a manner that finally they were compellec to retreat from the country. Nor was Denekin in the first line conquered by the Red Arm\ but by the peasants themselves, who would not stand for his rule, Batkno Machno, they made rebeland, principally under Ataman lion If the peasants had been for Denekin am against Denekin. not against him, then the Red Army would have never succeedec in conquering Denekin. But at the same time we must not forgel that the peasants in no manner voluntarily formed the Red Army. The peasants got into the Red Army when compelled to, thei being a compulsory military service, just as formerly for th( czar's The peasants rather organized their own army. armies, o1 Machno's, in order to fight against which the strongest one was reaction. And as it went ivith Denikin, so it went with Kaledin,

Petljuraand others.
In regard to Ukraine
the bolsheviks admit this, more 98


facts cannot very well be denied. They seek to support their slovaks contention with the statement that Koltschak and the CzechoThe commandant have been conquered by the Red Army. of the later Red Armies against the Czecko-Slovaks, an anarchist by the name also called Alexa, has told me how the of Gebenjeff^ May, 1918, the Czecko-Slovaks began in When thing happened. their advance from Siberia, the workers, anarchists, left socialrevolutionaries and bolsheviks, arming themselves, united against the Czecko-Slovaks. They elected Gebenjefftheir commander, the shock troops of the reds against the whites. and they were But attention the bolsheviks call this the "red army." Now should be called to the fact that these troops did not yet in any have the characteristics of the Red Army, namely, compulsory way mobilization, unified centralist command under Trotzky, subordination and blind discipline. Nothing of this nature was the armed peasants. They had met voluntarily to be found among to fight against the reactionaries, and it is this that is the most And, of striking difference between them and the Red Army. I have later heard these soldiers of the revolution referred course, If this is done, then we can to by bolsheviks as the "Red Army." by the the Red Army name which has the of call everything to insurrection. But that would mean armed slightestresemblance

confusion of expressions. In the struggle against Koltschak it was not the Red Army that should have the credit for his annihilation. And here I must take a stand with the revolutionary groups which are opposed to by high Soviet the Red Army, because the facts related to me deceased presit. for The brother the themselves speak of ident officials Republic, the second in Sverdloy, of the Russian Soviet after Trotzky in the Commissariat, having charge of the command defense, told me during a trip on the Volga, which we made whole before the Red Army together, that even ants advanced, the peasin in schak rose the all places against Koltrebellion workers and Army in his troops. The Red cases many conquered and Dec. 26, 1919. But long before this the peason ants entered Tomsk Koltschak's had rebelled against Koltschak's rule. Many of in the hands of soldiers joinedthem, and the city of Tomsk was the rebels for a long time beforethe Red Army entered. As early had 1918 the formed as the summer guerilla bands peasants of in the provKoltschak. was inces against the Czecko-Slovaks and -This Atscheisk and Jenniseisk and in the Altei gouvernement.
cause of the great rebellions of peasants and workers his reactionary behavior. Sverdlov, who Koltschak was against in technical charge of the transportation expedition of the was Red Army demics operating against Koltschak, related that terrible epiharrowed Koltschak's troops. Over 80% of them were sick from typhus. The epidemic spread to the people. At Novo Nicolajevsk 10,000 bodies were found. Between Omsk and Nicolajevsk 15,000 graves All were found with crosses. were victims of typhus. Koltschak himself lived in the midst of these terrors



without caring what happened around him. He had a special train and led a fast life. His generals shot the with music and women revolutionary workers of the factories wherever they could get hold of them. In Tomsk put in all the factory committees were bolshevik or being a of some jail. Every one suspected of other revolutionary color was subjectedto a Spanish torture In the finally year of 1919 Koltschak sent a trainload shot. and of dead from Asia to Europe. In view of such conduct it is easy to understand that the peasants and workers would rise against Koltschak and fight him. in the first It was, rebelling place, the peasants and workers Koltschak, this not the and against ghastly rule who annihilated had to do, according to All that the Red Army Red Army. to relieve the peasants and the workers, Sverdlov's report, was who, together with the revolting elements of Koltschaks' army, had already conquered the Koltschak officers. Even here it was bands of peasants and workers the federalistically aggregated the greatest work in combatting reaction and not who performed formed through comthe centralisticallyorganized Red Army, pulsory

mobilization. And the liberation of Petrograd from the armies of even the merit of the Petrograd workers, who in Judenitsch is more hour the of danger went, all united, against the threatening army. As commander of Petrograd, Bill Shatoff, a Russian-American I. W. W. and an anarchist, w,as elected and in the hour of highest danger the workers put Judenitsch to flight,after he had already penetrated into the streets of the Petrograd suburbs. tenMoved by all these instances, all revolutionary socialistdencies in Russia who oppose centralism and in centralism see a They reactionary element are against the idea of ,a Red Army. is not a revolutionary but a counterdeclare that the Red Army revolutionar factor, because, with its system of centralism, the obedience of unfree subjectsis again introduced into the ranks of revolutionaries and freedom is suppressed. But they are by no means opponents of the armed uprisings of the people. They point to the fact that they always stood in the first ranks of the revolutionary fighters and stand there still,and when the bolsheviks say the armed uprising of the revolutionary people and the Red Army its they declare compulsory mobilization, are the same with this to be a conscious falsehood. The defeats that the Red Army suffered in Poland gave birth to grave conflicts within the Communist Party itself.At I the beginning of the war Poland just arrived in Moscow against first the big army as show, a parade on TheatralnajaSquare, took place. The next day, May 6, 1920, Karl Radek explained to me how greatly important the taking up of General Brussilov for the Red Army. was "When Lloyd George reads about that," Radek said to me, "he, and with him all English government politicians, will say to themselves, that the bolsheviks cannot be so bad, after all, when like Brussilov can work a man

from the beginning not very much I was together with them." edified by this taking up of the old reactionary generals and and said this to Radek. With him officers in the Red Army a great effect. They took up all it was case a of making only in Army. the Red But with the old czarist officersfor service the old czarist spirit, the spirit of the blackest them came to battle for the which was reaction in the proletarian army, liberation of the oppressed. The results of this policy soon became Proletarian unity and leadership slipped ever more apparent. bourgeois into the hands of the and feudal elements of the Former estate owners and bourgeois hold old czarist officers. in Army Red the their position to use responsible posts and became more make their influence felt.Thus the Red Army and instrument in the hands of these elements. The soldiers more an have long ago ceased to feel personal responof the Red Army sibility for the victories and defeats of the whole army as the is when compulsory is case taken They are away. mobilization a blind will-less tool in the hands of the generals commanding them; they no longer recognize the battle they fight as their battle. The communists own the only are of the Red Army fight with enthusiasm. The evil results of taking volunteers who still bolsheviks the to up so many old officers, wanted counteract by establishing officers' schools for communist workers (and under certain conditions also for non-communists, although this occurs more are communists seldom) in which schools the young these I have found true trained to become officers. Among inspiration, an inspiration for the red war and for the victory the And, there too, the old officers are of red army. amongsome converts who have become honest^ inspired :rew)lutipi;.s,ries. To these belongs General Nikolajev, Changed 'onw}i"o. w;as! -the because he as an important gallows by Judenitsch in Jamburg leader served the Red Army with great devotion. But on the these whole exceptions confirm the rule.
The bolsheviks themselves now the untenable situation see in the Red Army and gave expression to this fact at their in Moscow in October 1920. Zinoviev said: party conference

"Comrade Trotzky told us after his return from the front that there he had seen hundreds of comrades who deny themselves everything, who do not eat themselves satisfied. They live on the small rations, and are thereby reduced to skin and bone, and stillthey work very hard, in the honor of our party at the front. But order to save there is no doubt that alongside of them among the soldiers there is a different stratum. Yes, a whole stratum. No matter how numerojjg this stratum is,it is there. The people conceive of their rights and their duties differently; These are the elements who rob the party of their credit which has been won through heavy sacrificesand the hard work of tens of thousands of our first and intermediate party mem101

bers. Certain communists, who have been mobilized and sent to the front, work and live there in such a manner that they with right can complain."
have been I could mention many other instances which by people, (communists and non-communists) returning told me from the Polish front, but I had much rather allow only Comrade be suspected of Zinoviev speak, because he least of any can painting it blacker than it is. At all events, the conditions have to carry part of the blame for the defeats on the Polish front.

Hereby the honest intentions of the communists will in no be impugned, but we shall rather demonstrate that the manner in itself is no falsely Red Army socialist body, as Trotzky like any other army designates it, but that it is an army and be nothing else, because it cannot disavow its character of can militarism. And the population realizes that such is the Red Army. for combatting Outwardly, capitalist reaction it cannot have such an effect, and as the instances quoted show us, it has no of Poltava, after such effect. As I learnt in the gouvernement driven out of Poltava and Kiev, the Red Army the Poles were in the first moment was greeted with joy. But this joy did not last long. The peasants were oppressed in the extreme by the Polish troops. They made a rebellion against them, and when the Red Army it was came, received as a liberator. But as the lasted longer, the Soviet government war was compelled to take 'the- grain from: the peasants, in order to be able to feed the army. Ukraine, which they now again held in their hands the -gouvernement of Poltava which ranks among "all;-; and, .above the richest grain- countries of the earth, was to the very welcome it from the Soviet demanded the grain government, and exhausted the peasants are now as peasants. For that reason enraged the formerly Soviet they as were against against government the Poles. incidental to the war, for This is, however, a phenomenon the guerilla bands are compelled to take the grain from the even peasants, when they are driven into a region which is strange to them and the peasants refuse them what they need. True, more this occurs seldom with the guerillas, for they are not idealists, do not wish to combat world imperialism they military does and are contented with driving out those like the Red Army territory. For this reason they are who intrude into their own to the fighting they are never region where entirely strange their needs by force from the peasants. and not compelled to fill The peasants, who for a large part themselves participate in the fighting, give it to them most voluntarily. Such is the case the Ukrainian with Machno, guerilla leader. But outside the Red Army there are other military defense organizations of the Russian workers. In Moscow are and Petrograd the workers to obligatory military exercises through their membership subject

in the unions, which is also obligatory. They form a militia which is organized according to districtsand mustered according to factories. There you find all categories of workers and artisans, even and girls, who work in the factories. married women These organizations prove more efficient, also these and it was that drove Judenitsch from Petrograd. They are not organizations built according to the pattern of the old state armies. And if we really want to accomplish the abolition of the political state, then we must above everything abolish those organizations which have always been the support, yes, the greatest support of the state, namely the centralist armies, and replace them now, and in the so-called period of transition, with workers' defense organizations formed according to districtsor industries. Of the two instruments of defenseorganized by the communists; the Red Army the defense organization built on the trade unions, and the latter are to be because in them the state principle preferred, is already replaced by another principle. It is the one that most indicates progress, and also comes to the abolition of nearer no militarism. The workers in the factories are professional form "work" in order no soldiers and standing army which must to exist. Nevertheless, it is stilla militia which also must disappear become or a when reality. socialism communism shall Only in the absence of every kind of militarism is liberty for the individual and for the whole society possible.

revolutionary people has not been able to accomplish much yet in the field of education. The economic and political situation has been too pressing and important to give the workers and peasants much time to give special attention to the educational is thing a question. Furthermore, cannot which education be greatly benefited by the collapse of the old state and the It requires much one. erection of a new slow detail work and industrious and loving devotion in order to create that which the people can not obtain by sounding the tocsin of the revolution. Nevertheless, individuals as well as the soviet government have done everything in their power in order to restore the destroyed school system upon an altogether new foundation.


the head of the Commissariat missar of Education is the comcording AcLunats char sky, an intellectual and tolerant man. to what I learned in an interview with his nearest assistant and in conversation with himself, the apparatus of the During the destroyed during the war. whole school system was Kerensky were advanced, but they period several propositions When the bolsheviks came to the never came point of realization. into power they found that the old system was entirely unfit for in But the utmost difficulties the use. old road. Many stood teachers sabotaged them. Thus, 70 professors went with Denekin in Odessa, in Ural 67 with Koltschak, because they were political 103


did everything opponents of the bolsheviks. The Koltschak army in order to hinder the enlightenment of the people ; they destroyed the schools, burnt the school books, and drove the teachers away. in private During the czarist period the kindergartens were into power they nationalized the bolsheviks came hands. When these. A mother is supported for three months after child birth by the state. The child can be sent to a Home for Children, to its From the to the sevento third third year. teenth remain there up missariat year the children are under the supervision of the Comfrom the Education their maintenance of and get homes 3,620 At after present there are about children's schools. stituti the Froebel system for children of 3-6 or 7 years. In these intaken it is principally war that are up, and orphans if there is room to spare, proletarian children, and, last of all, there are about 180 such children of the bourgeoisie. In Moscow institutes. In the whole of Russia there are, so far, (1920), 204,917 children in these institutes. In the 43 gouvernements which are under consideration here, nificant there are 7 million children of school age, so that only an insigby has been taken the school. Of so far charge of part them are, naturally, all sorts teachers there are 11,234. Among teachers. In people of 17 of newly established seminaries young years and up are given instruction from 6 weeks up to 3 years, in order to serve as teachers.
For specially refractory children separate children's homes have been established. The children are examined in regard to their natural tendencies, and it is also sought to ascertain whethei the child is born with inherited criminal tendencies. If it shows signs of bad tendencies it is put in a bureau of psychic observation. There are also children still in the prisons. But it them from the prisons as far as possible. sought to remove Persons below 17 years of age are counted as children. In the public schools one teacher had to instruct 40 childrei in czarist times, but it is now tried to reduce the number to 25, far have but so down any further than 32. The they not come it is desired formerly 2-4 years, but now school period was it from 4 9 to years. raise From 8 to 12 years children shall go to the middle school, are they given elementary instruction. In regard to the where told that in the czarist schools new methods of teaching we were the on" the connection between geography on and mathematics is It desired history the on was taught. now never side,and other, to give the children such an education that they will get a general sense. view of the economic structure of society in the Marxian It is attempted to introduce the intuitive method of instruction on a grand scale. By means of technical apparatus, for instance, box, the children shall be taught mathematics, chemistry a match and physics. In the 43 gouvernements of Soviet Russia there are about 3,600 public elementary schools with 29,000 teachers and

pupils. But there is a total of 6,801,000 children of school age, so that the largest part of the children do not go in several circumstances. 1) There to school. This has its cause is not sufficientschool equipThere are ment. schools. 2) not sufficient 3) Many parents purposely neglect to send their children to school, because many children schools are demoralized. Many are speculating, and are then picked up and sent to institutions for the bringing up of children. desire to get a technical education the For children who instruction between 12 and 17 years is more vocational. Those further can to train go to the university. who are gifted and want All instruction is free. The students receive, in addition to food by the state. rations and lodgings, a small contribution in money

Besides these schools there are technical continuation schools, some of them organized by the Commissariat of Education, and by the unions. There are also art industrial schools and some a "proletkult" where young workers have produced quite splendid into transformed villas and palaces were in the country I have visited many Even The now children's homes. estate mansions where there are is happy But one feel there. there short-coming quite children that is noticeable about all this, and that is the lack of equipment. The war No books, no lead pencils, no writing paper. and the one blockade are responsible for this. All over, goes wherever Bolsheviks and the complaint is heard about the blockade. plain mensheviks, revolutionaries and reactionaries, all of them comof the blockade and wish it lifted. Maybe there are Russian counter-revolutionaries outside of Russia who desire a continuation in bolsheviks, but in blockade, to the the of order combat Russia itselfall are against the blockade and' long for its discontinuance with the greatest impatience. The bringing up of man to a free personality is one of the important A tasks a new for most growing person must society. be fittedout with the conquest of science and technique, in order be able to build up a new that he may society. But he must fitted be the positive qualities of a socialistworld also out with he learn that the human and socialistideal must conception, must be transplanted into actual life and that he must realize that in his own Education is not only a problem for the young person. but also for the old. According to bolshevik theory, the dictatorship is the period to socialism or comover which shall carry the working masses munism. This shall be realized by the fact that the conditions of economic and politicallife under which people live and which, without doubt, exert a great influence on the thoughts and actions the Marxians say that this influence is absolute of men assume will then experience other forms, through which men in their actions and will-expressions, a change for the a change better.

work. Many private Children's Homes.



essential difference between the capitalist and socialist order of society consists in this that in the latter wealth and poverty, mastery and servitude, shall be abolished. In practice that a few people the abolition of wealth and poverty means living very poorly. But shall not live very well while others are we still in existence great must say that in Russia there are differences in the standard of living of the people, and that from means abolished. Judging people is by no ruling over tical everything one cannot say that in Russia the economic and policonditions, such as they have been in the last three years, have exerted a particularly favorable or a decisive influence on It has the bringing up of people to socialism and communism. or a become proletarian-com evident that a revolutionary government, towards or a communism state striving state, cannot create the economic and political life forms of freedom do not do it themselves, in each community, if men and justice, in each shop; that the interference of the state, however wellbe, must always appear as forcible dictation from meant it may are the outside, through which men coming prevented from himself, their ideal; that each individual must prepare nearer technically and culturally, and that this socialist training is thrown, capitalism shall have been overpossible not only later, when but right now today, just as socialist propaganda and has always been more or less possible, whether openly or secretly. It is my sincere wish that each reader of this book may draw this lesson from it. If we want to liberate the world from that capitalism and class rule and state, then we must remember this world emancipation is largely also self -emancipation. The


The Revolution in Ukraine


the end of 1919 the bolsheviks for the third time got a firm public, footing in Ukraine. Ukraine was again declared a Soviet ReUkrainians the fact a due to that the made strong and independent an as for independence it was demand affiliated Soviet Republic to the central Russian Soviet Republic. Originally the Soviet Republic in Central Russia wanted to domain. But this proved include the lands of Ukraine in its own for independence. impossible, due to the strong demand to North Russia and South Russia, or The,beopposition between Ukraine, dates far back. Ukraine comprises all South Russia. language, history, its own Ukraine has its own culture, its own have The Russian development. czars its own always national and the most striven to put Ukraine, rich in natural resources In this they fertile country in Europe, under their dominion. was But Ukrainian the always rebellious population succeeded. Great-Russian against the ruling tendencies of Great-Russia. rule had for result the hatred and the distrust of the Ukrainian natural peasants towards the Great-Russians. Therefore it was did not disappear after the outbreak that this old antagonism of the revolution; on the contrary, the population took a rather public frigid stand towards the Central Russian Council or Soviet Reindependent free independence; a republic and demanded had to comply bolsheviks demand Russia. This the the rest of of live in to did a war if they permanent with the not want with Ukrainians. But even Soviet Republic had not sprung from the this new Ukrainians the themselves, and it still ranks of remains a foreign reasons body for the peasants, and that is one of the many why Russian Soviet Ukraine continues to be the child of sorrow of the Republic, and will long remain so. The president of the Ukrainian Soviet Republic is not an Ukrainian and is not elected by the Ukrainians. He is a Roumanian, put in his place by and was is Rakovsky. Lenin. His name

and the situation in Ukraine as a result of the war few in the is so years be next complicated, and will revolution history know to it is that the so necessary of the complicated, development since the outbreak of the war, in order to understand the revolutionary situation. The war of Russian czarism was not the Ukrainian peasants' business. They were against the war not only because they had


but also because they had to to the war to send their sons for The dissatisfaction of the the army. supply the provisions and when the peasants increased with the duration of the war, Ukraine Russia, was in Central broke also soon out revolution Kerensky the were in flames. But as the Ukrainians against the bolsheviks soon gained the upper hand and at government, in Ukraine. Bui there, was in they were 1917 the end of power the bolsheviks found an open ear with the why another reason This was the peace of Brest-Litovsk. The Ukrainian peasants. have to peace at any price. The bolsheviks who peasants wanted preferred to all other parties by the concluded this peace were Ukrainian peasants. But through this peace the Germans and the Austrians got imperialistic policy. began in They their Ukraine. a free hand the economic blockade of Particularly Germany, which through in saw the allies had been precipitated into a "food crisis, now is land the Ukraine its savior in their hour of need. Ukraine tories Europe's largest sugar facthat flows with milk and honey. in These Ukraine. fields its largest are great grain and its for to felt German acquire compelled militarism supplies fighting the battlefields Western then on were of armies which Europe. General Eichhorn was cupied sent to Ukraine and his armies octhe country in the beginning of 1918. But in order to hide the foreign rule from the people they put in Skoropadski tion. hetman over the country. German as militarism began to func"save the land from They proclaimed that they wanted to trian bolshevism and decay." By the entry of the German and Auscrowded out of Ukraine. armies the bolsheviks were Eichhorn mand military comreceived orders from the supreme The peasants to deliver grain, sugar, etc., to Germany. but when also gave up a good deal at the start for payment, for the money, for lack of they could not later buy anything important things industrial products, as the Germans had more industry than to supply Ukraine with goods, to do with their war they finallydid not want to supply anything. Then the Germans began the requisition policy. The peasants still refused. They threatened with force, and finally force was were used. insurrections Thus began the peasant 'against the armies of Although done under the name this was occupation. all officially it Skoropadski, that Germans was the were the originof clear ators. in the Ukraine rested on German Skoropadski's power bayonets and machine guns. It was not Ukrainian soldiers but, Austrian German principally, and soldiers which suppressed It was the peasants. these soldiers who executed the death sentence those peasants who offended against the proclamations over declared all over Ukraine, Military law was of the state of war. hanging day. traveler The the was the and shooting and order o/ Ukraine has to today an see many who visits graphs photoopportunity where peasants by the hundreds hang on the gallows, in

front of which stand Austrian officersor Ukrainian and Russian its priests. The fury of the Central European soldiery was ,at But in 1918. height the exasperation and the the summer of its height. During the rule despair of the peasants was also at Eichhorn-Skoropadski total a of of about 80,000 workers and killed. were peasants Now the peasants began to rise against their tormentors The party of the left social-revolutionaries remained everywhere. true to their old terrorist traditions and one of their members killed general Eichhorn. The death of Eichhorn was a signal for the peasants. The learnt West-European had brutalized through the war, soldiers, on a murder grand scale, and the naturally brutal peasants, culture, continued this handiwork without the gloss of European in stillmore barbarous forms. They started to arm themselves. Everywhere bands and littletroops appeared, in the beginning primitively armed with pitchforks and flails,they started an insurrection, and killed the Austrian and German soldiers wherethey could get hold of them. ever It is easy to understand that morals have suffered terribly through this. A human life had hardly any value any longer. longer One no but beat him to enemy, negotiated with one's death. The peasants finally succeeded in procuring modern fire but, to begin with, in very small quantities. A revolutionary arms, who lived through this state of affairs gives the following account of the terrible situation, and about the desperate courage of the peasants. "The bolsheviks in Moscow complain about the unUkrainian the communistic spirit of peasants. They came to the conclusion that such an un-communistic spirit existed from the fact that the peasants revolt against the Soviet sia republic. They call the peasants "kulaks." Kulak is in Rusthe name for the richer peasants who are against the abolition of private property and oppose the introduction It is said that the peasants band together of communism. fight kill The people who talk so have and and communists. raine, not the slightest idea of the events that took place in Ukto which events the present situation can be traced. "When the peasants under the leadership of the socialbolsheviks, etc., revolutionaries, anarchists, maximalists, fought against the oppression by Skoropadski, the Germans, the Austrians, Kaledin, etc., they were inadequately very Thus for instance in I arms. was a battle, in supplied with which 500 peasants had only 200 rifles. For each riflethere two cartridges. The enemy were 1000 strong. over was The 500 peasants stood in one troop, the 200 who were armed with riflesstood in the front ranks. The numerically was very well supplied with the most modern superior enemy had arms. They machine guns, we had nothing. All knew that the foremost ranks must fall first and that the turn

to the others. And, still, thereafter would come nobody left his place. On the contrary, each man waited until his front had fallen, in order that he might then take his rifle. man "Such a blind courage could spring only from extreme despair and from the most mortal hatred, conjured up in the hearts of the peasants through the draconic measures reaction. of a most inhuman "Those who lived through such things, and who have seen the butchering of the peasants and their desperate struggle, only they can understand the state of the Ukrainian peasant's soul, and shall find it possible then to understand that the the bolsheviks and reject the also combat peasants now But bolshevik theories, which are strange to the peasants. tactics the the Central Russian they will never approve of of bolsheviks towards the Ukrainian peasants, which show an absolute lack of understanding of the life of the peasants; a lack of understanding which brands all the efforts of the as peasants counter-revolutionary risings of "kulaks" who wish to defend their private property."

had spent Thus my informant, a Russian who before the war is five years in America, ended his story. This man's name Baron. He is at present one of the most active members the of anarchist federation of Ukraine, which calls itself "Nabat." These reports place us to some extent in a position to understand the psychology of the Ukrainian peasants. People who have for some time lived in this atmosphere feel as though they transplanted to a different world when were they read columnlong articles in humanistic papers the theory of force and on the use of force, and where force is treated as a problem. on For the people of Eastern Europe, particularly of Ukraine, force is no problem, but a fact, a matter a principle of life. of course, It may be admitted that matters have reached this point of development only through the war and the revolution, but force have to never would spread such a great extent, if it had been foreign to the life of the people. Not only in world wars and not only in class struggles, or in periods of the social civilwars, revolution, but also in common yes, every-day life, hostilities, differences of opinion are settled by primitive people prineven cipally through resort to the law of might. How can one wonder, then, that under such conditions as existed in Ukraine, force the all-powerful principle and the deciding factor, was made took the or nego^which place of every kind of justice, agreement tiation.

only for the non-partisan peasants, but also for the political parties and organizations, force is the most important in their struggle. Thus the anarchists and maximalists means Ukraine daily and hourly facing the alternative whether are of to use force or to succumb in the struggle against counter-revolutionary generals, as well as against the bolsheviks. It has even


far that it has been spoken of in anarchist circles to the ism, struggle against the bolsheviks by means of terrorconduct if the persecutions do not cease.

At the time when the peasants in all parts of Ukraine rose against Skoropadski, and against the Germans and the Austrians, distinguished there was himself among man one who particularly later became famous and is stilla hard the leaders. This man nut to crack for the bolsheviks, a nut on which they time and is Machno. again break off their teeth. This man
The reason Machno has acquired such an the name why importance in Ukraine lies less in the prominence of Machno's in than the Ukrainian the personality spirit of peasants which is personified and symbolized in Machno. Platon Machno born in the village of Gulai-Pole in the was Alexandrovs. As a young man he came into the gouvernement He was a the socialist movement. paper partner publisher of "Euro Vjestnik." Not yet 20 years old he shot a "Pristov," a member of the Russian czarist secret police. He was condemned to death, pardoned to penal servitude for life and banished to Siberia. The revolution of 1917 released him. He was ten over in exile. Through the sufferings and hardships of prison years life he became consumptive. He is a small man, suffering in the highest degree and often afflictedby violent hemorrhages which him while walking or speaking. By extraction and overwhelm in his habits of life he is a peasant. He calls himself an anarchist, but is more Ukrainian an than theoretical a of peasant anarchist. And it is this that connects him with the peasants them. and makes him so popular and loved among But if Machno has his Ukrainian peasant extraction in common latter the have the in common peasants, with anarchism The Ukrainian peasants are attached to the Machno with Machno. brand of anarchism with the strongest ties. Machno is, properly but the theoretical this expression peasant speaking, nothing of The anarchism. anarchism of the Ukrainian peasants is not built on the theories of a Goodwin, a Proudhon or a Kropotkin, but the fact of the matter is that parts of the anarchist theories find expression in the tendencies and manifestations of the Ukrainian peasants. The anarchist theories contain negative and positive parts. The negative parts are antimilitarism, decentralization and the negation of the state. The positive parts are the connection of the independent free communes into federative units, federalism, free for in the necessary the respect personality unification on the economic and politicalfield. efforts of the Ukrainian The negative parts of anarchism.
The peasants peasants

covered by the do not want to re-


Theoretically expressed we could say cognize any government. functions the that they deny the state. They of the combat hate and abhor state: they do not want to become soldiers,they taxes, in to do bureaucracy, any pay not want officialdom and functions hostile the they take towards a of all stand short, the state. They are anti-militarists when up against the militarism freedom with all of the state, but they defend their own if the negative parts of anarchism are the most But even means. ment prominent parts of the anarchism of the Ukrainian peasant moveis The as a movement. not purely negative ,this movement theoretical but are peasants not rather sentimental anarchists. They have also showed, on different occasions, that they are capable of regulating their affairs in consonance with their in the sense libertarian tendencies, and even of communism.

these comparatively ask ourselves wherefrom come, peasantry strong anarchist tendencies of the Ukrainian desire for liberty, that, besides the the we can consay natural ditions have last years of revolution and war of the exerted a strong influence. Who will not be able to understand that a in the course hate people will of when all political governments it has had thirteen differentgovernments, ias the case was six years in some gouvernements, such as Kievsk, Poltava and Berdiansk. But these governments were governments all war and must, themselves from the worst side. They reconsequently, show quisiti in horses, from the the peasants, etc., grain, short, for the governments peasants were only the means of carrying on the war. In

the revolutionary regard to the theories of anarchism the has movement of peasants only parts of anarchism in it. But is not identical with the anarchist movement this movement of Ukraine. Although the bolsheviks label the whole peasant movement, them so many causes (which under Machno difficulties) bandit as as a common sometimes anarchistic and sometimes the anarchists in no manner identify themselves with movement, And the Machno peasant movement. stilla large part of the in anarchists of Ukraine join the Machno peasant movement, to for ideas. for And their they, the reasons order work while above mentioned, and because of the related character of this found a good field for their ideas and made movement, great in these circles,the whole Machno by was progress movement designated as an outsiders anarchist movement.

Machno stopped in Moscow. penetrated to Moscow place Gulai-Pole.



from The


and he went

prison in Siberia, he first massacres of the peasant to Ukraine, and to his home

The following description of the development of the Machno comes movement not alone from his most intimate friends, his aids and comrades, but also from the bolsheviks, who formerly served him as soldiers but who later entered the Red Army and fought against Machno.


Machno and organized the peasants against the Germans in Gulai-Pole, a village There were Skoropadski-Warta. against men who were good rebels. of about 30,000 inhabitants, seven Machno, Tschubenko and Gribelenko. They had Among them were some oners. riflesand took in the firstday 80 Skoropadski soldiers prisfor a fighting Besides they took riflesand collected money fund, and for the first 3,000 rubles they bought a machine gun. is a splendid, fiery orator bombs and one revolver. Machno some inspire how to his the peasants to fight. Through and understood he became famous among the peasants and was successes soon known in the whole gouvernement and later in all Ukraine. From the peasants gathered round him and wanted to serve all sides flag. his His power became stronger from day to day, and under towards the end of the year 1918 he had an army of 50,000 or, to 70,000 men. some according reports,
all other generals and adventurers the peasants The peasants loved Machno, stood skeptical. But not to Machno. for him they voluntarily gave everything that the Germans and


Skoropadski as and well as all other counter-revolutionary from them. Thus Machno was not generals could get able to Moscow in 1918. 30 December, loads foodstuffs to wagon of send The Moscow then wrote paper of the bolsheviks, the "Isvestija" held a Machno's army that time very approvingly of Machno. at front of over 300 kilometers (about 186 miles).
The Germans and the Austrians, as well as Skoropadski, wdre thus driven from the Ukraine by the peasants, principally It was, consequently, not the Red Army, which under Machno. into came existence only later, but the peasants themselves who cleaned out Ukraine. This is a historic fact of great importance. It shows us that well organized and great modern armies were tary conquered by peasants and peasant generals who had no milifore beHere we we training whatsoever. see repeated what have seen in history; the French peasants, after the revolution of 1789, threw back the invasion of the Prussians and the instances of this phenoAustrians. In Russia we have still more menon. Such historic experiences from the French, Mexican, themselves into a Russian and Ukrainian revolutions compress lesson which can be of great use to us for the future.

the counter-revolution was not settled through the expulsion Germans, Austrians the Skoropadskis from,the the and of France as Ukraine, Not for a moment. well as and England in directly danger the Roumania, thereby of revolution who got in Ukraine, fact that their neck, were not at all suited by the it was the peasants, the anarchists and bolsheviks who ruled. The aim of the entente was, and is up to the present time, to break down Soviet Russia and Soviet Ukraine. They provoked the old czarist and supported counter-revolution. They financed D enekin, K aledin, Grigorjev, and Wrangel and generals Petljura, was vanquished, encouraged them to reactionary advances. As Germany took over the role of watchthe conquerors of Germany 113

in Europe. dogs for the reaction, formerly played by Germany Germany throttled with iron fistthe revolution in Finland through in the Ukraine general Goltz. The entente tried to do the same through the old czarist officers. From Podolia and from the East Galician frontier came f rom the region of Don came Kaledin, and later Denekin Petljura, basin. Besides, a former took possession of the Don czarist general, Grigorjev, gathered dissatisfied peasants around him, under and he succeeded in drawing to himself great numbers he brought that the freedom. pretense peasants The bolsheviks in Moscow the danger which threatened saw from Ukraine. It was them clear that the counter-revolution which raised its head in such manifold shapes, would not content itself with Ukraine but would extend further into Central Russia. far outside of Ukraine. He In fact, Denekin later came portant occupied Orel and stood before Tula, the last strategically imBut before Moscow. Soviet the the now point aim of to overthrow in Central Russia was government all other powers Party. and establish one single soviet power of the Communist in The peasant movement Machno the under stood road of this Economically Ukraine. dependent they were tral Cenupon policy. tral Cenand North Russia needed Ukraine's grain and sugar. North Russia is higher developed industrially raine, Ukthan and poveris imbut through the war it was so and the revolution that they were not capable of entering into purely independent but had to Ukraine an economic exchange with amalgamate politically with that country. Besides, it would not do to allow Machno to become too strong, for just as well as Denekin the Machno into Central movement could crowd over Russia, and that had to be prevented. The position of the bolsheviks in the Ukraine the was very regarding also situation This could vacillating. The reaction had to be beaten down. But not be done without the Ukrainian peasants and workers. these stood suspicious towards the bolsheviks, although they went together with them in breaking down reaction. The bolsheviks masters needed the peasants but sought to become of their libertarian Denekin they movement. separatist bat could openly comArmy. He Red the was a reactionary and the peasants with was and the workers were also against him. But the Red Army to For Denekin. that they purpose not strong enough quash At the outset, about the end needed the peasants and Machno. of 1918 and the early part of 1919, the reactionary wave of the dangerous was so so czarist generals not yet powerful. and not The power of the peasants was stronger. But it was not possible to fight them openly without coming to a complete rupture with them, for they needed the peasants badly, in the first place for providing food stuffs, and in the second place to help the Red Army against the counter-revolution. The bolshevik plans were that the peasant army to 70,000 men kept in be Ukraine and, as far should 114

of 50,000 possible,

held in inactivity. This could be accomplished quite painlessly. ning The lack of arms and ammunition, which already in the begintragic developed itself the risings of such effects, made That the one was of weakest points of the again noticeable. knew. Machno This the bolsheviks peasant army. asked the He for arms Soviet government turned to and ammunition. Debenko, the highest commander Red Army the of of Crimea. Debenko delayed the munitions shipment and gave him first in load of cartridges. February, 1919, a single wagon In order to discuss the situation Machno called a conference in Machno's birthplace, Gulaitook the place peasants, which of Pole. This was a conference of revolting peasants. They are in Ukraine called "Povstanzi." These povstanzi are guerilla soldiers, The anarchists, rebellious peasants who fight in armed groups. left social-revolutionariesand maximalists, in a resolution condemned the conduct of the bolsheviks. But the peasants stillhad the striking out of confidence in the bolsheviks and demanded directed against those paragraphs of the resolution which were the situation did not improve. The munition shipthem. Still, ments became smaller and smaller. The leaders of the Machno army called a second conference in Gulai-Pole about the end of dissolved by the bolsheviks. March. This conference was
sent the anarchist Roschtschin-Grossman, University, professor of philology and philosophy at the Moscow to Machno, in order to prevail upon him to join with the Red Army. Machno to remain supreme was of his army commander but place his force under the supreme commander of the Red Army, the by Trotzky. Machno, who was conduct of embittered the bolsheviks refused this on the ground that he did not want And to conquer to work under those whose desire was power. his by be in bolsheviks the this no made position of change could load of paper. sending him a wagon

The bolsheviks


From began the war that moment between the bolsheviks Machno it to had to an open break That come and the warriors. between these two powers, lay in the very nature of these two Here were two hostile principles which armies. stood against formed through one another. The principle of an army which was

compulsory mobilization naturally stood on centralistic and on the other side peasants who' had sprung together ground, and held together only for voluntarily, guerilla bands which were the moment through the hour of danger and through common With the former, iron discipline was a matter of fact; suffering. Machno, taste. latter discipline was a matter of with the enforced the leader of the rebellious peasants, could never as submit to if he Even high the superior command a army of commander. he had personally desired to do so, the very nature of the army commanded would not have permitted it. To demand this bears witness of complete ignorance of the essential difference between is militarism; the Machno these two bodies. The Red Army army but not military. consisted of rebellious peasants, militants, 115

as It is, therefore, absolutely false and unjust to brand Machno the did. defenders Only a bandit and a traitor, as the bolsheviks designate law Roman can rebellious peasants as bandits, but of the bolsheviks who themselves are revolutionaries have no right to do so. Not only in principle, but also as a matter of tactics, was it impossible for the Machno to co-operate with the Red army Army, at least for any length of time. The Machno army which in the military sense consists of revolting peasants, is no army the work in the fields begins, then the When of the word. to that work, and when the harvest begins peasants go to tend is, thus, anything but they go out harvesting. Machno's army its stances strength varies extremely, according to circumstable, and Also the mode of fighting used by this army and seasons. different from the methods is fundamentally used by the Red The drilled around Army, the barracks. rebellious peasants However successful principally carried on a guerilla warfare. tactics be it be, the never can a guerilla war may used by still is and It a centralistically organized, militaristicnational army. and remains the tactics of insurgents in a revolution, no more less. no

Although the Red Army of Trotzky and the peasant army due to their nature, stood completely strange to one of Machno, platform and, for the another, stillthey struggled on a common It time being had a common therefore clear that was aim. Trotzky should want to make use of this considerable power of the peasants. But the impossibility of getting rid of Denekin Trotzky blind to the unbridgeable cleft made without Machno which existed between him and Machno.
Trotzky was really in an extremely difficult situation. The in Denekin North, in Red Army South, the the and Machno stood his in between the Trotzky the middle two. was was army with force Machno to to his compelled recognize superior command, in order to be able to conduct uniform operations, that could have given the victory to the Red Army, which was not any too done be Machno. But This the strong. only with could aid of from the above mentioned causes fundamental it was of nature impossible for Machno to recognize Trotzky's supremacy. And Machno himself was in a very critical situation, between two fires. Munitions he had none. Trotzky wanted to give him munitions only if he completely accepted all the conditions of impossible for Machno. This was Then Trotzky the Red Army. Machno. the idea of annihilating conceived Machno needed 5 million cartridges. He had then about According to Riefkin, the leader of the maximalists, 50,000 men. They sent him only half a million cartridges, and 70,000 men. even instead of 5,000 rifles, only 300. They prolonged the negotiations, in order to gain time, and thereby 3 to 4 days were lost. In Denekin kept advancing. Machno had no munithe meantime tions and had to retreat under terrible losses. Through the pres116

also was compelled to draw back. Machno's to committee wished call a peasant conference, in order that they might take counsel in the situation. Even the second dissolved by the bolsheviks. One conference in Gulai-Pole was fronts, that there think were must not unified, distinctly marked but one front ran into the other. Thus it came that a part of to the riding messengers, announce were the who conference to the peasants in the villages, were picked up and arrested in the had a firm footing. The conference region where the Red Army to naught, and seven thus came were of these messengers shot in Charkov as members of the revolutionary war committee.

the Red


in Charkov and spoke on April 29, 1919 in a bandit and a He called Machno a meeting against Machno. robber and said that it would be better if the white guards took possession of Ukraine than to have it in the hands of Machno. back, the peasants will call the For when the whites have come in power, then the bolsheviks back. But if Machno remains hand. the upper middle peasants will retain

On the ground of these theories the bolsheviks decided to was open the front at Josufka. At this place the Red Army directly facing Denekin. The result was that Denekin's armies tacked attacked Machno' in the back. Machno, without munitions, atin the front as well as from the rear, had to retreat, but was completely defeated and lost the largest part of his army. he succeeded in saving himself by With a few thousand men fleeing. He retreated to the Dnieper region in the Southwest.
But on this account the Red Army was also forced to retreat, Denekin He further. Charkov, penetrated took and advanced still into Central Russia, took Kursk and Orel, and even got as far as Tula. The bolsheviks said that Machno had committed treason and they declared him outlawed. He was placed outside the law. His brother was discovered in a hospital, was taken for Machno and Machno', treason was murdered. who accused of against the Red Army, should have thus acted to the advantage of Denekin! These were the hardest days, not so much for Machno as for the Red Army. The peasants again gathered around him. Gulai-Pole and the capitals Jekaterinoslav, Mariopol and Poltava fell into Machno's hands. in the late summer This was and the fall of 1919. Machno became a danger to Denekin. Denekin's main army stood already in Russia; his rear guard was stillin Ukraine. Machno cut the from rear the ports main army guard off and bound Denekin's transin tightly the South. up of munitions and provisions Denekin was thus forced to retreat and the Red Army took to the offensive. Most experts and participants in these struggles were of the firm conviction that Denekin then would have come to Moscow had Machno not frustrated his plans. Through this decisive blow in a critical situation Machno

again found favorwith the bolsheviks. The sentence hanging over longer labeled a ''counterrevolutionary. no his head was revoked, and he was

pressed back by Denekin's victorious his aparmy, pearance reactionary czarist general made in Ukraine: Grigorjev. He fought against the bolsheviks and promised the peasants freedom and the soviet system, he and succeeded in gathering quite a large following. Machno desired to know whose spiritual child Grigorjevwas. He began negotiating with him. At one of these negotiations Machno killed him after he had learnt that Grigorjev was a favor in his by This the bolsheviks. was reactionary. also counted 1, 1919, Jekaterinoslav Between October 30 and November fell from Denekin's into Machno's hands. As Denekin's main then compelled to on army, account of Machno's exploits, was from Central Russia down into Ukraine. What retreat, it came happened to Denekin: formerly had happened to Machno, now he had no ammunition. Machno held Jekaterinoslav for a month. During this whole month, parts of the Denekin army stood only 10 versts from Jekaterinoslav on the other side of the Dnieper. He but neither could Denekin. Machno could not get over, bombarded the city but could not take it. Both of them, Machno Dnieper, in order to the bridge across and Denekin, bombarded Denekin's In December over. prevent the other from coming North driven back by the Red Army, army, upon advanced Jekaterinoslav from the North side. Machno thus forced to turn back and retreat to Alexwas Denekin retreated stillfurther, and androvsk. In the meantime the Red Army followed upon his heels. On January 10 and 11 Army the Red Trotzky now also arrived at Alexandrovsk. demanded that the peasants disarm. This they under Machno once was refused to do. It came again to conflicts,and Machno Part his himself more disarmed. He outlawed. of people were drew back his troops in the night and fled. From that time his At time the the power weakened. agricultural work had to be in the performed, spring and the summer of 1920, he did not have more than a few thousand men. The bolsheviks became in Ukraine more powerful and pursued him. He retreated to kept himself the woods between Poltava, Berdiansk and and Alexandrovsk. The entente, particularly France, saw itself deceived in the hopes it had placed on the Denekin undertaking. But France did not yet surrender its hopes of \making Ukraine the starting the bolsheviks. It looked around point for its attack upon for other hirelings and found one in Baron Wrangel, "the white baron," as he is called in Ukraine and in Russia. French Through became stronger. Especially support Wrangel that broke out between Russia and Poland, after the war Russia was compelled to concentrate its power against Poland itself very much with Ukraine. The defeats and could not occupy


the Red





the Polish front weakened on the position of of the Red Army in bolsheviks the the Ukraine also. About the end of September the danger of the advance of the Polish army so great that was the bolsheviks again evacuated Kiev. Wrangel threatened the Don basin. Ukraine was not unlike a boiling kettle. Everywhere the peasants congregated and formed bands. These bands fought against the Poles, against the bolsheviks, and also againstt Machno Wrangel. also became stronger again. As a few months before, the bolsheviks had liberated West Ukraine from the Poles, who had taken Kiev and penetrated into the gouvernement of Poltava, the peasants looked upon the bolsheviks as their liberators. To begin with, they got along quite well with the Soviet But as the bolsheviks later, through the protraction government. the forced to requisition provisions for the Red war, were of fought Army to an end. came which against Poland, the harmony The peasants began to fight also against the bolsheviks, as before dissatisfied and rebelled, and, against the Poles. They became Machno was naturally, again their man. Machno But the bolsheviks more operated once against Wrangel. The fact was wrote that he co-operated with Wrangel. that the peasants fought against both Wrangel and the bolsheviks. The bolsheviks, in their turn, fought against Wrangel and Machno, but did not meet with any success. The peasants, including those Machno' fought banner, fought against all foreign s under who troops that entered their territory. It was immaterial to them it Poles, the bolsheviks. If they only was Wrangel or whether in driving the they were away enemy succeeded satisfied. They were cesses. not strategists sufficientlyto take advantage of their sucThey did not pursue the beaten foe. They were satisfied when he had left their territory. In this respect the peasants are imperialists, who wish to conquer other domains, but neither no they idealistswho, for higher purposes or for the sake of an are ideal, pursue the counter-revolution. In their innermost soul they are conservative and do not want to be annoyed or disturbed from the outside. But if this happens, then they rise and start a rebellion,slay their oppressor, and return to"their work in the fields. That is all.

About this time Machno sent a note to the President of the Soviet Republic of the Ukraine in which he laid claim to the gouvernements of Jekaterinoslav and Cherson for himself and his followers, in order that the peasants might organize then" the release of his selves as they desired. Besides he demanded did not give any friends from prison. To this note Rakovsky Machno But the bolsheviks spread the information: answer. together works with Wrangel. About the end of September, 1920, Machno's forces became considerably stronger. At this time the position of the bolsheviks on the political front was most critical. Machno succeeded in He took Wrangel. favorable carrying out some operations against his native city, and soon possession of Gulai-Pole, also occupied 119

Mariopol and Alexandroysk. The Soviet government, which only co-operated with shortly before wrote in its papers that Machno "now" Machno to that Wrangel, was report again compelled Machno Wrangel. was a again sent note to operating against in he demanded more the once the Soviet government, which freedom of Wollin and the rest of his friends. As Machno this time had power behind his words, the bolsheviks were compelled to give in. On Friday, October 1, 1920, Machno's friends, the theoretical anarchist W. M. Eichenbaum (Wollin), and Machno's Gabrilenko, Tschubenko were prison, and released from aids, where they had up to that time been held as hostages for Machno. in the Butirky prison in Moscow, Both the firstmentioned were At the same the latter in the prison of Charkov. time Machno, who had been outlawed since January 13, 1920, was pardoned. But on October 2 and 3, 1920, there appeared in the Moscow a was "Isyestija" progress report that the Red Army making From Mariopol Alexandrovsk, Wrangel. had Wrangel against and been driven away. Further it also said that Machno again had Those on the inside had to laugh united with the Red Army. this ridiculous and absolutely unnecessary over disfigurement of the truth. The truth was, as appears from the "Isvestija" itself, Machno But we must admit that it was who defeated Wrangel! that, as Machno, after his demands had been conceded to, declared himself prepared to fight with the Red Army against Wrangel, for declaring Machno they had some reason as part of the Army, they Red did, so through their announceoperating and ment "the had taken Mariopol, Gulai-Pole and Red Army that Alexandrovsk." !! In the middle of November, 1920, Wrangel was almost It beaten. foreseen be Army, Red that the completely could which through the peace with Poland in Riga, had become free, would throw itselfupon Wrangel and crush him. But the beginning of the end for Wrangel should be credited to Machno. In consideration of this state of affairs it was a signal lack of good taste for the bolshevik papers, who should not have fought against other revolutionaries, that they, nevertheless, did they had been, they themselves saw that. How wrong time some later. Thus one of their papers which is published in English ("RussianPress Review," edition of October 29, 1920) at Moscow says, in an article under the heading "Machno and Wrangel," as follows: "The War Commissariat has published the following French press has, as is probably known, The correction: joining Wrangel. The written a good deal about Machno Soviet press, in its turn, has also published documents which have shown that a formal alliance existed between Wrangel But it has now been ascertained that this and Machno. information was doubt, Machno has Without not correct. de facto helped Wrangel Polish by the as army, well as fighting against the Red Army. But a formal alliance has not


All documents them. existed between published about a Machno between Wrangel were formal alliance forged and from by Wrangel. A bandit chief the Crimea, who called himself chief Voldin, who was the of under command Machno, received his instructions from the Wrangel staff. But in reality there was The no connection between them. forgery by in Wrangel, was whole undertaken order to deceive the French and other imperialists. "For some weeks Wrangel was really trying to get into forces and sent two delegates to contact with the Machno Machno's headquarters, in order to begin negotiations. But the Machno' troops showed that they did not want to have in their error anything to do with Wrangel, that they saw fighting against the Soviet army by the fact that Wrangel And united with the wanted to get in contact with them. fought against Wrangel. Soviet army of the South and jointly Soon thereafter they proposed to the commander of the army the to South common of action against Wrangel. undertake This proposition was accepted under certain conditions. At the present time Machno is carrying on his operations of war under the direct supervision and orders of the commander of Frunze." the army of the South, Comrade This document shows conclusively that all reports, stating that Machno fought on the side of Wrangel, were false. The bolsheviks excuse themselves by saying that they learnt only later forged. In the first place it is quite that these documents were had they otherwise that they as peculiar not found out sooner, do not put any faith in the capitalist press, but on the contrary always emphasize their lying tendencies. Second, one would think that the bolsheviks would not first go to foreign countries like France, to" get the news land. of what takes place in their own knew, French Because the French press so so (the and wrote took place in Russia) the bolshevik consequently, better what press took it up as the truth. But as the bolsheviks are not as for asserting that it was naive as all that, there is good cause not lack of correct information but evil intention that put the pen in the hand of their paper when and their high command, Machno between they spoke of co-operation and Wrangel. In regard to the other statement, which is to be found in the forces de facto, (that is, article quoted above, that the Machno they fought against the h ad helped Wrangel indirectly) when Red Army, we have also to do with a conscious distortion of the facts, a conscious lie,for it was not the peasants under Machno fought the these peasants ivho against which revolution. It was the centralistic Red Army the revolution. It was when made freedom that the peasants to their the peasants of wanted rob this rose new not Machno rulership also. Thus, it was against the Red Army but it was who fought against the Red Army Machno down the to who were peasants under who wanted strike by themselves defended insurgents. When then the peasants 121

it naturally appeared to the fighting against the Red Army, if the fought against the as peasants under Machno uninitiated Red Army. Although we today stand in the midst of the struggle and dispassionate objectivity does not yet prevail, still,the writer history the the up of of revolution in Ukraine will be able to sum from the following these battles of the peasants and the Red Army battled against the capitalist points of view: The Red Army imperialism sian of the entente and against all the Rusworld czarist generals sent forth by this imperialism, as well as against the smaller states, like Poland, Roumania, etc., which were the entente. upon economically and politicallydependent But the Ukrainian peasants fought against all, and even against "imperialism" the Russian Soviet Republic. The word coupled to the word "red" has, of course, only a symbolic meaning. It further says in this article that the Machno troops have Army. This the Red that the means only peasants united with to the Wrangel army, not, however, that prefer the Red Army they consider the Red Army the savior of liberty, for they will Army Red it the if tries to circumscribe their liberty. also fight As long as the Soviet government of the bolsheviks does not them, they take no exception to it. But if it demands annoy their subjection, then they fight against it. It is quite sure, however, that the bolsheviks, who now cooperate fight first him their opporwith Machno, will tunity again at and then, perhaps, will annihilate him. But with Machno's person they have not killed the rebellious spirit of the peasants. it might happen Of course, that a general exhaustion of the the a peasants, relaxing of revolutionary tension sets in, and to an end. Therefore later that then the peasant movement comes historians of the revolution could, chronologically, connect these things, but between Machno's person and his eventual separation from the movement, of the and the revolutionary movement peasants on the other side, there is no causal connection.

In Russia there are strong differences of opinion in regard to the character of the Machno The Russians and movement. the Russian revolutionaries do not allow themselves to be guided by the facts in passing judgment on this movement. tions Appreciathis are of movement almost altogether colored by preconceive theoretical views and opinions. Thus, the bolsheviks the Machno condemn movement, tionaries. and so do the counter-revoluBoth of them see in the peasants who flock around Machno, as well as in himself, only bands and bandits, which must be fought and exterminated, because they stand in the way of any The mensheviks, as well as the right social-revolugovernment. tionaries, the base tactics of yes, even part of the left, condemn the bolshevik government in dealing with Machno, but they also turn against Machno, because they are for a unified and centralistic state army The maximalists, and against the Povstanzy. the social revolutionaries of the left, the largest part of the syn122

dicalists and the anarchists defend the Machno cause bemovement, they themselves desire no party rule and combat centralism. learns, when Machno is under discussion, less truth Thus one Machno than truth the about about standpoint of the disputants. An objective this one can opinion of movement only get by doing like the writer of this story, that is, by listening to all opinions in the matter without being a member of any of the Russian parties. If we now free ourselves from all party opinions and hold fast to the objective facts of the case, the following historic facts The Machno in Ukraine are was movement originally undeniable. a movement of the peasants against hostile invasion. The rebelliou did fighting themselves peasants not content with against the Germans and Austrians, but in the course of their battle they As in the course turned against every government. of events all into from through Ukraine the war the outcame governments side, in some localities had had 13 governthe peasants, who ments, conceived of each one of them as a tyranny coming from the outside. Their fight is a struggle for their own independence. Whether in to they are a position regulate their own affairs according to libertarian principles, that is a question of the greatest historic cided significance. But this question cannot be answered, solved or dethrough the different governments who wished, and still footing to in It Ukraine. a get wish, exclusively depends on the
peasants. The position of the Russian Soviet Government towards Ukraine and the rebellious peasants is conditioned by the character Although bolshevik in itself. the the Soviet of government party is a revolutionary party, it stillis the representative of the Russian state. That it calls that state a proletarian state changes nothing in the fact that they judge everything from the point of view of the interest of this state, and must act in the interest of that state. The maintenance trol of that state requires a central conthe territory, of all and subordination of all groups, unions and organizations under the central body which in Russia is the in bourgeois democracies the Council of the Peoples Commissars; The Russian Soviet must insist on the government parliaments. if it does not peasant movement subordination of the Machno want to sacrificethe fundamental principle of its being.

the main thing is the maintenance of that principle, the for is the that to means as of a subordinate nature. end question I submit it to the conviction of each individual to approve of or The Machno. defenders bolsheviks the the tactics against of reject which of the state idea cannot in principle rejectany means to support and keep up the state. They may serve rejectthe they but, are bolsheviks the tactics anti-state unless special of cause opponents of the bolsheviks, they rejectthese tactics only beit is the bolsheviks. But they have always proven to do the Particthing when they themselves have the power. same very As

cipitate ularly the defenders of the bourgeois order of society, who prethrough the people of the earth into the valley of sorrow have no right to condemn the bolsheviks. For they have the war, proven whither their world order leads: to the greatest misery has that ever come over man.

One of the things which runs against our taste and which is constantly being used by the defenders of the state, not only by the proverbial diplomat but also by all politicians,is lying. As a matter of fact, the bolsheviks can no more get along without this means than the capitalist state can. As an example, the bolshevik that Gabrilenko, taken was papers write who captive by the bolsheviks and imprisoned in Charkov, as well as Tschubenko, had said that Machno men, was a bandit and and other Machno that they did not want to have anything more to do with him. This was do"ne for the purpose of discrediting Machno with the later, in When let out 1920, Gabrilenko October was population. heard he terribly agitated and chalwas of prison and of this, lenged them rather to kill him, for when he came to Machno, his men would do it anyhow, as they would consider him a traitor. A second example. When the bolshevik papers in Ukraine fought against the bolsheviks wrote, in July, 1920, that Machno Wrangel, together then two Charkov anarchists, and worked with Joseph, the Emigrant, and Makrousov went to Rakovsky, president of the republic, and said that they held this untrue. They to send an anarchist asked the permission of the government delegation to Machno, in order to investigate the case. Rakovsky to Makrousov do brigade so. was a of the commander promised his division which drove the Poles out of Red Army, and it was Kiev. But when Makrousov, they respected for his miliwhom tary he was an was (although away, achievements anarchist) arrested by the extra-ordinary comabout twenty anarchists were mission the that of Charkov, because it was anarchists assumed who wished to go to Machno had connection with him. They were accused of conspiracy. Most of them had to be released for lack kept in of evidence. But one of them, Josef, the Emigrant, was hunger days He was reon a strike and after eight leased. prison. went If it had been as the bolsheviks wrote, they would have had to arrest these people. This proves rather that they feared to be convicted of lying.


In spite of all these means which the Soviet government creditin used in the struggle against Machno, they did not succeed in disMachno before the population. The peasants honor and love Machno one as of their own, and there is hardly another in all Ukraine who is so* popular as Machno. The peasants man Little Father. They have him Batkno, the surname gave meaning credibl his the head woven a wreath most inand relate of stories about Machno is to tales among themselves about Batkno. them not a "Mister" (Gospodin) but their "Little Father" (Batkno) No matter what dangers Batkno throws himself into,he al.


out of them whole, as by a wonder. Because Machno had such great armies that were always dissolved again, only in to he had to flee so often, but albecause anew; up order rise ways back again, the peasants said that Batknp could not be came defeated. There is a tale that Batkno was in Denekin's camp and in his tent. He was disguised and talked with Denekin. Suddenly he said : "I am Machno," and disappeared. As a sample of Machtactics it is said that, when he has taken a place, he orders no's one or several houses vacated and then pretends that he is to live he goes disguised into some there. When evening comes other known. Another being there tale village and sleeps without about is: in some Machno village a small, insignificant peasant (thatis how Machno looks) sells a dish of butter. The buyer, who gets the dish also*, can, when he gets home, find the following words Batknoon the plate: "He who bought this butter has seen Machno."

in the mind Such a figure of story and myth is Machno For it is the that that reason the Machno of peasants. plain finds better than response movement ernment and reception all the govMachno troops coming from the outside. When needs horses, provisions, or rather material of war, the peasants generally give to him voluntarily what others cannot get with force. It needs only to be said that "Batkno needs it," and it is given

without question. Is is also said that Machno, as an who anarchist rejects every compulsory sent out a call for a volunmobilization, once tary At following the this the mobilization. end of call words are have to been "Who does not come voluntarily will added: said be shot." Naturally, a peasant movement Machno's canas not such humorous It happens the that escape such contradictions. also bolsheviks peasants, when the want to mobilize them, declare that Nor is the Machno they already are mobilized by Machno. movement free from coarse, brutal and savage traits. Thus, an officer troops had made relates that the Machno of the Red Army utation, an attack upon a railroad train in which traveled a Wrangel dephave The to been Frenchmen. some are of whom said leader of the delegation is said to have been a very stout gentleman. in killed The Machno tion. delegathe the soldiers struggle whole But the thick leader they opened up, after he was dead, and discovered, the leader later was then buttoned the coat again. When he could not be recognized, because it was a corpulent man they sought. But among the dead were only thin ones. be held reFor such horrors Machno sponsib should not, of course, The peasants are so brutalized through the incessant wars, revolutions and struggles, during which they had to suffer terribly. When, for instance, the Poles staged their entry into the peasants looked with avaricious the Poltava gouvernement, horses fed their eyes at and decided in advance on how they well A noisy had be divided they chased the Poles away. should when in the presence of a Polish officer.When he asked quarrel arose 125

fighting about, they answered him bluntly: them what they were " About who will own your horse." The logic of the peasants is very simple: We want to live for ourselves and not be disturbed. us to over Who comes us "to will be slain and his rule and wants property will be distributed. To have thrown the peasants upon this primitive, savage, level, through not which the cultural development uncultivated but back, that is the work of those who lit set only was stopped The blame for this brutalizing of the flame of. the world war. falls upon them. men declared itself army conditions under which the Machno against Wrangel prepared to fight together with the Red Army laid down in the form of a pact on October 16, 1920, which were People's Commissar Bela was signed by the former Hungarian Kun It reads as army. and by a representative of the Machno follows :

in regard to provisional co-operation in the military operations between the Ukrainian Soviet Republic and the revolutionary guerilla army of Ukraine, called "Machnovtzi" :

(1) The revolutionary guerilla army joinsthe forces of the republican army

of the Machnovtzi a guerilla army, in its is to the comsupreme operations which subordinated mand But it retains its previous organof the Red Army. ization, als without adopting the principles and the fundamentof the regular Red Army.

of the Machnovtzi, is located the territory the Soviets along or o"n which of the front, shall not take up in its ranks such parts of across the Red Army as wish to desert to it.

(2) The revolutionary guerilla army

The parts of the Red Army the isolated red or in Wrangel's rear come together soldiers who with the revolutionary guerilla army, shall again unite with the Red Army when they meet with it. Note: The guerilla Machnovtzi who are still in Wrangel's rear, the in those as as well population which parts of the country have entered the guerilla army, remain in the ranks of the latter, even if they have before been mobilized by the Red Army. between the compurpose of the argreement mand Army the Red the of revolutionary guerilla army and "Machnovtzi," is to annihilate the common the white enemy, The Machnovtzi declare themselves in agreement with army. to discontinue the request of the command of the Red Army At the hostilitiesof the population against the Red Army.

(3) The



time the Soviet Government the agreeannounces ments into, in to entered order obtain the greatest possible results in the tasks designated.

families of the soldiers of the revolutionary "Machnoytzi," who live on the territory of the guerilla army Soviet republic, are entitledto the same rights as the soldiers Army from the Ukrainian Soviet Red the of and shall receive Government the relief agreed upon.

(4) The

in regard to provisional co-operation in political questions between the Soviet Government tionary of Ukraine and the revoluMachnovtzi the : army guerilla of

(1) The immediate liberation of all those persecuted and

the discontinuance of all further persecution in the domain of the Soviet Republic against all Machnovtzi and anarchists, with the exception of those who have carried on an armed fight against the Soviet Government.

in words the press for all Machnovtzi and anarchas well as through ists ideas their tary and principles, with observance of miliand For the issuing of all censorship in military matters. publications (books, magazines, anarchist and Machnovtzi are papers, etc.), recognized by the Soviet Government which as revolutionary organizations, the Soviet State places all the technical material at their disposition on the basis of the general rules which apply to publications.

(2) Complete free agitation and propaganda

to the Soviets, Machnovtzi for well and anarchists to become right free participation in the besides, the Soviets,and members of preparations for the next V. Soviet Congress of Ukraine, which will take place in December, 1920, is guaranteed.

(3) Free participation in the election


by the representatives of both parties to the the conference on October 16, 1920. at

Signed by

After these agreements were entered into, it became possible tween to conquer Wrangel's white armies, due to the co-operation beArmy But after the victory the Red and the Machnovtzi. Government Red Army, broke Soviet these agreements the the of Machno detachment. the battle a and started against merciless And all anarchists again put in prison. of Ukraine were Soviet government methods against the used the same Machnovtzi German the the as anarchists and government used

when marching into Belgium; at the outbreak of the world war but are a scrap of paper. This is apt to nothing all agreements the end of the Machno mean movement. forgot its agreement, How rapidly the Soviet government their conduct toward the Machno people shows. Wollin and Tschuin a Moscow 9 months benko, mentioned abo"ve, who were prison again arrested in the house of their and released in October, were friend N. Pavlov, Bolschoi Tschernitschevski No. 18. When, on October 24, a membership meeting of the anarchists took place in that house, the Tscheka Commission) broke (Extra-ordinary in and wanted to arrest Tschubenko. But as he could not be found, taken along, and to-day, were all of those present about 50 men in January, 1921, some them are prison. But Wollin was of still 1 December at a conference of the anarcho-syndicalists arrested on in Charkov the conference was entirely legal and permitted by the Tscheka together with all the other participants, among was whom also the above mentioned Pavlov.
" " " "

The forecast I made in regard to Machno's early annihilation by the bolsheviks proved to be correct. Fourteen days after I had the manuscript yet of this book ready, and before it was in print, the telegraph brought the information (a Rosta notice) that Machno's troops were being disarmed by the bolsheviks. The Rosta bureau in Stockholm, which has the most direct connection Reval, sent out a telegram in these words: with Russia over "Moscow, December 7, 1920 (Rosta). The Soviet commander fight front has the Southern on a at merciless all started in the robber bands Machno, the still operate under which Ukraine. The operations have been very successful. The largest detachments armed." are part of the Machno already split up or dis"


now news


the "Rothe Fahne" (Red Flag) of Vienna also item coming from Christiania, in which it says:

"In the struggle with Wrangel the Machno troops have, conwithout obeying the orders of the Red Army command, tinued to plunder peaceful inhabitants and to irresponsibly take up various robber bands in their army. The revolutionary War Council of the Southern front has, after the liquidation Wrangel to the an army, sent out of order change the Machno troops into common disciplined parts of the Red Army. The order was caused by the fact that the Machno troops had undertaken regular plunderings of cities and villages, plundering not only the population but the store of ammunition, and had attacked red soldiers, in order to get troops have hold of weapons. In the villages the Machno aided the rich peasants, who sabotaged the grain deliveries to the hungering After a partial change gO'Uvernements. Machno into troops the a of given regular army, they were orders to immediately start off for the Caucasus. Instead of against the Red obeying this order, Machno started hostilities


Machno' s traitorous plan was not en, successful, and at present his main forces are already beatthanks to the prompt and energetic steps of the commander the South-front. The Machnp artillery has fallen of into our hands. Our troops have received order to mercilessly Machno the bandits, turb distraitorously exterminate who the building up of Soviet Ukraine." That the bolsheviks, after the victory over Wrangel, would was annihilate Machno plain after they had used them as their instrument in the struggle against Wrangel. But it is also clear that they had to try to surround this act with an appearance of it righteousness and to justifytheir actions. For that reason bolsheviks that the take recourse need not surprise anybody again to lies. Having previously read how they before took back their lies,calling it all a mistake and blaming it all on the reown ports of the French capitalist papers, we will also properly appreciat before us. It is really quite remarkable the news now have that "the peaceful inhabitants" of Ukraine themselves never Machno, Army. but foreign Red the anything against only against But what is correct in this report is,that "the peaceful building up being sabotaged by the was of the Soviet government of Moscow" Ukrainian peasants who fought under Machno, for that is a government the peasants do not want. They would rather be "plundered" by Machno than by the requisition detachments of the Red Army.






Socialist Movement

in Ukraine

less anor socialist movement archist of Ukraine has a more This is to be traced back less to character. character theories and doctrines than to the influence which the political and economic conditions of the country exerted upon the mind of the peasants. Marxism, to expression in the form of which in Russia came bolshevism and menshevism, has less of a footing in Ukraine. On the other hand, the Russian Peasant and People's Socialism of the Narodnik Social-Revolutionaries is more strongly represented. This "people's socialism," which is penetrated with strong anarchist tendencies, has been able, so far, to hold back Marxian and West-European socialism. In Ukraine, Bakunin lives stronger than Marx.

In Ukraine all socialisttendencies are represented. The mensheviks, the bolsheviks, the right and the left social-revolutionaries, the maximalists, the barbists, the syndicalists and the anarchists The bolsheviks and the mensheviks both Marxians. are In consonance with their theories they, principally, sought their following among the industrial proletarians of the cities. All here paid their principal attention tendencies other mentioned to the peasant question, as was natural in an agrarian country 129

lowing like Russia, and for this reason these parties enjoy a greater folformer. the With than the the among exception peasants like the the were who, mensheviks, social-revolutionaries, right of in favor the the other parties and organizations national assembly, of another, especially in their agrarian stand close to one They are all in favor of the soviet system, but not in program. favor of party Soviets. In this they differ from the bolsheviks, the Soviets of their own party. Thus, there who by Soviets mean in Kiev Poltava, in the are and cities as well as in whole gouvernements, no Soviets at all, but only revolutionary committees. The revolutionary committees are put in by the bolshevik party, by the people. In Poltava the Soviets have and a\re not elected been called together. After the Poles had been driven away, never Party (bolsheviks) the Executive Committee of the Communist the Not took over power and organized everything themselves. the communists ecutive even were called in to the meetings of the ExFor Committee, nor called in for meetings of their own. these communists The party of communists were conworkers. sists, After Kiev went for the- present, largely of non-workers. from the hands of the Poles into the hands of the Red over Army, no Soviets were of 1920, elected during the whole summer being When in later, installed. only revolutionary committees September, the elections took place, there were 100 nonover were out of the 125 communists workers who elected to the from Kiev. It the district was soviet of principally Soviet officials, specialists,etc. These figures speak a plain language. They show us that the Ukrainian Soviet government carries this name, partly without there are important and significant gouvernements right, as which have no Soviets. They show us further that the Communist Party bolsheviks the is no of absolute soviet party, properly speaking, but only an opportunist soviet party. For when it pleases the party it calls in the Soviets, and when the Soviets do not suit them, they send them home. The other parties and movements in favor of the Soviets, are as the idea of the Soviets came to light through the revolution itself and all revolutionary parties, naturally, had to accept that The peasants themselves are in favor of the Soviets. system. Although the largest part of them do not belong to any party, they stillare all for the Soviets. They write on their banners: "Long live the Soviets." The Maximalist Union, who stands for a maximum the left social-revolutionaries,the Internationalists program, and the barbists, the syndicalists and the anarchists for the slogan: All poiver to the Soviets. No power are to the parties. Against these slogans the bolshevik party stands in opposition. They declare that these paroles are counter-revolutionary and therefore they combat all these parties as counter-revolutionary. Thus it is that the business offices of these parties, their

bureaus and their book stores were propaganda closed by the They now their Soviet government. continue work illegally. We cannot deny that there is a certain justification for the bolsheviks, that the "All the to the Sovpower parole, opinion of iets;
to the party," is useful to the counter-revolution. no power In some it has been shown that in the soviet elections the cases bourgeoisie got the majoritythrough election frauds, trickery, or times through pure slipshodiness, other manipulations, yes, many in the minority, had prevented the workers or that they, when from coming to the Soviets, through obstruction or sabotage, so that there was The counter-revolutionaries pointed no quorum. for to this, and it was to show that the revolution did them easy bring had hoped for. The road was not what they smoothed for

the counter-revolution.
only a few cases against which we can bring in great number of other cases which show the opposite. The fault of which the bolsheviks here are guilty is, that they are drawing general conclusions and thus wish to handle everything according to one recipe. By this route they themselves come to the position of contra-revolution. In order to arrive at one-sided party rule there is, naturally, no" revolution necessary. The revolution is supposed to create the freest politicalforms, and even a social revolution has to take note of that. Although in a social revolution the change in economic conditions, the abolition of private property, just forms of possessions, equal rights of consumption, rational the most important points, are production of the necessities, the political field on progress even such a revolution must mean But or the rule of one party and not retrogression stagnation. is not to be considered a revolutionary conquest, for such a party rule we had in the pre-revolutionary epochs and have in countries ian where the revolution has not yet taken place. Even if we in Marxfashion call this class rule, this rule in politics always manifests itself as the rule of one or more it is And exactly parties. against this rule that the revolution turns.

But these

to the Soviets, no the slogan, "All power will be seen, to the party," is originally and practically a revolutionary power sale parole and one cannot on account of a few cases permit a wholecondemnation of the Soviets as counter-revolutionary. For we can also present examples from the revolution in the Ukraine, which show the exact opposite. he in October, 1919, Machno When captured Alexandrovsk, the a the the congress peasants and population rest of called of The organizer of of the whole gouvernement of Alexandrovsk. this was Wollin. As an anarchist, Wollin was against all party impossible for him, for reasons On that account it was politics. quently, mentioned above, to be active under bolshevik rule. He, consefollowers benefit the for the this of congress of called Machno. the Machno for his the peasarmy ants. support of needed to the villages in order to invite the They sent messengers peasants to elect delegates to this congress and send them to the



The representatives of different parties city of Alexandrovsk. to Wollin and pleaded with him not to do anything foolish came and for God's and the revolution's sake to put up party lists,in cording order to enable the peasants to send delegates to the congress acheld that the rich peasants, the to party lines. They in the majority and would dominate the congress. Kulaks, were The whole thing would be a great disappointment, they prophesied. Wollin answered that the people had had enough of parties sense. once and for all,must cut out all party nonand that they now, delegates. The The any party congress met, without the peasants themselves did not want to have any parties. When Yes, if they were congress opened any parties asked represented. from there were the city of Alexandrovsk seven mensheviks had been by The the sent present who unions. peasants did have to the to do not want anything with politicians. They to start their deliberations before the politidid not want cians had left the hall. The mensheviks had to leave, and only then did they start with business. According to the reports of before taken part in such some of those present, they had never All a fine, harmonious congress. party political squabbling and all party hatreds were eliminated. The peasants discussed only the practical questions. It was to a question of helping Machno Denekin. the It decided war was that continue against everybody must help. Those who had four horses would have to give up two ; those who had three would have to give one. Those who had only two horses would not have to give any horses, but only hay, feed and other things. Thus the congress progressed without any party to the satisfaction of all the participants and without any politics, domination of the kulaks.

This example does not only show the emptiness of the phrase that party-less Soviets or councils of workers and peasants had to be counter-revolutionary. It also shows positively that it is the party-less Soviets which are best able to order the economic and politicalaffairs of the revolutionary population. A further difference in tactics between the bolsheviks and the others, which can be traced back to the theoretical differences, the city was showed itself in Jekaterinoslav. When captured by Machno, he insisted that all socialistmovements lute should have absofreedom to carry on their propaganda. As is well known, the bolsheviks rejectthis freedom as "bourgeois superstition." Particularly does Trotzky go on the warpath it in his against antiKautski book 'Terrorism As you know, in and Communism." the places where the bolsheviks rule, they allow no opposing party to issue a daily paper or more than one paper. Under Machno' s it for to issue their was regime all socialist movements possible papers and to hold their meetings, in short, to propagate their issued, two anarchist, ideas. In Jekaterinoslav 7 daily papers were two communist, right and left social revolutionary* and menshevik All socialist tendencies were geois papers. represented. Only the bourhad no publicity organ. They were, terrified so naturally,

because it dare to.


the Machnovtzi


ruled, that they

did not

The proportional strength parties in Ukraine of the different is at present difficult to indicate, as all parties, with the exception Party illegal. Communist the bolsheviks, the are ruling of of At the elections to the National Assembly, November, 1917, the social-revolutionariesobtained 62.77% of the total number of votes. The anarchists and the maximalists, being anti-parliamentarians, did not take part in the elections. The maximalists have a union. They do not call themselves a party, being as they are opposed to parties. The left social-revolutionaries, the barbists and the left social-revolutionary internationalists are also strongly represented. The anarchists have in Ukraine a special federation separated from the anarchists of Central Russia, which calls itself In numbers this federation is hardly "Nabat," that is, "Alarm." larger than the maximalists and the left social-revolutionaries. the anarchists had a greater influence for the reason that Still, Little the Father their they stood under (Batkno) protectorate of Machno, who gave more support to them than to any other parties. The anarchists have never identified themselves with the Machno but make use of the Machno movement to the movement, it to serve their poses. purextent make greatest possible and wanted

The bolsheviks arrested Wollin in Alexandrovsk in the beginning January, Machno 1920, after had fled. As reason for his of father the Machno the arrest they gave out that he was called of But this was impossible. The Machno exmovement. movement isted firsta year later since the summer of 1918. But Wollin came to Machno, in the summer namely of 1919. The truth is that through Wollin the movement distinct anarchistic received a more in depth and purity. Wollin himself is a deep, character and won pure and noble man, and he succeeded in exerting a strong cultural influence on the Machno troops. But this was, of course, gerous danto the bolsheviks, because it made the movement more threatening to them.


and the Peasantry

have elucidated the the preceding discussion we difficulty Ukraine the only with much why peasants of be brought under the common can ment. scepter of a central governless of an economic nature than of a These reasons are fusal politicaland national character. If we want to classify the rewith provisions of the peasants to supply the government have to concede that economic then we as an economic reason, in But their reasons ties, part. addition there are racial peculiariplay an influence. Among agricultural which also exert some tive people in a fertile country there develops, as a result of the relain the race a in or independence, the certain people economic


is always of independence with which a centralist government velop debound to get into collision. A powerful state can never tendencies will in such a country. The "free-from-Rome" We need only over. plenty to worry always give the government in Spain tendencies the permanent and Italy. anarchist remember The bolsheviks asserted that these instincts constituted antiThey pointed to the the peasants. tendencies among communist fact that the Ukrainian peasants did not have such a wide-spread mir-organization as the Russian peasants, that they did not have fieldsto the same forests, common common pasture, and common extent, and declare that the peasants are for private property and They further say that against the introduction of communism. fight Machno Kulaks and fight for are the peasants who under But as private property against the introduction of communism. large the the masses are peasants, yes, of that quite of majority, if it flock is them to the the only most active part of who mind, even Povstanzy, it would be foolish to force the ideas of bolshevikthem on their anyagainst communism will. That would mean thing it freedom is that the peasants want ; else but freedom. And that is what they have been fighting for during half a decade. if One can force people to everything but not to freedom, even the most powerful on earth. one were But the assertion of the bolsheviks is wrong. On the contrary, the Ukrainian peasants take at least a sympathetic stand towards the social revolution and the new-construction of Ukraine, in Russia, where the great mass more even so than the peasants became the as they had taken of peasants conservative as soon from the estate owners. The peasants are in no the land away way unfriendly to socialism, but even show quite outspoken communist tendencies. The whole peasantry is opposed to the "pomeschtschiks" land do not want the estate owner back They (large owners). under any conditions. They fight desperately against all counterrevolutionary large the defended system of generals, who estates. They Petljura,Kaledin, Denekin, Grigorjev and chased away Wrangel. And stillWrangel had drawn a lesson from the fate of his predecessors and came beforethe peasants with an agrarian in to to his side. No land owner them over program, order gain to be allowed to own more than 200 Dessiatins of land. (1 was Dessiatin equal to 2.7 acres.) Wrangel expected to gain greater to the share of Denekin and sympathies with this than had come his predecessors. He believed that they would succeed in pulling the peasants over to his side, just as the Roumanian government had pacified the peasants and understood how to keep them from manian revolution through a similar agrarian policy. But while the Roubo jars (landowners) succeeded in saving themselves with a few sacrifies of land, the Ukrainian peasants, who had become far-sighted through their long struggle, could see through more Wran gel's purposes, and, although Wrangel was able to fool part the he had the them of peasants, progressive part of against him.


if he had In the long run Wrangel could not have held out even and Machno. not been annihilated by the Red Army The peasants were opposed to the 200 Dessiatin program of Wrangel's. But they are also opposed to the 50 Dessiatin program into conflict of the bolsheviks. The bolsheviks do not want to come with the better situated peasants. They need the peasants and cannot afford to have them against them. Hence, they have than 50 Desestablished the rule that no* peasant can have more have But in land. the their taken congresses peasants siatins of Particularly in this regard we a stand against this norm. note the above mentioned congress, which was called by Machno and October, 1919). They Wollin (in Alexandrovsk, that this said is too high; it is a bourgeois norm. By that method maximum they would again create pomeschtschiks.
theorists of bolshevism-communism, The Marxian from their theoretical viewpoint, brand the Ukrainian peasants as anti-communists and as defenders of private property; particularly those But my investigations in the of them who fight against Machno. Ukraine have given the result that almost the opposite is the case. The bolshevik-communists decree a more ship extensive private ownerin land than the peasants themselves. The bolshevik-commuists, who pretend to be the only representatives of communism, less communistic than the peasants, whom they designate as are

non-communists. But the peasants would not by far be communists if they only parcel of land than the bolshevikstood for a smaller maximum This communistic communists. would at most prove that they are more than the communist bolsheviks. But this is only speaking About the positive communism comparatively. of the peasants it information. us no would give
Although the abolition of private property in land is one of the most important parts of communism, there are other things head, also, which belong under that such as the regulation of the working conditions of collective labor according to principles of equality, the organizing of the exchange of the products of labor the regulating of mutual relations on a on the basis of justice, libertarian basis. All this a state cannot give; not even vik a bolsheIt decree If a can sound state. at most counsel, and order. fairness is lacking, instinct a sense a people strong social of and Communism can never will arrive at socialism and communism. Have by order. the Ukrainian peasants preserved that not come through the terrible years of the civil war? If they have, instinct the if not, then even then they will be ripe for communism; in their ranks which do Soviet government cannot introduce traits not live within them. My trip through Ukraine, as well as conversations with those Ukraine best, have shown to me that there is reason who know for harboring good hopes. The Ukrainian peasants are coarse, but they are good-natured and helpful and generally have a strong 135

One instance does not, of course, prove of justice. very it but be illustration. Eichenbaumas an much, still might used Wollin listened to a conversation between a peasant and a bolshevik-communi The bolshevik wanted to explain to him what But the peasant did not understand him. The was. communism gan were explanations unintelligible to him. Then the peasant beto give his own ideas, how he would order everything in his village as he had thought it out. And when he was through his "But to the bolshevik-communist him: with explanations said


communist." "What? I, a communist?" in anger. the peasant answered "I am no communist." This peasant showed that he knew well how to regulate his ments experiaffairs in his village,if nobody disturbs his own communist through interference from the outside and by checking his private initiative. Numerous examples can be quoted where the husbandry peasants independently arrive at communistic and regulation their mutual relations. of A visit to a soviet farm, 30 verst from,Charkov, which formerly belonged to an estate owner, the me gave opportunity to husbandry of the peasants of that estate. There study the common 100 were peasants about with women and children, a total of Not one of them was 160 persons. a communist, and stillthey had regulated everything nicely in justice and equality. To many individual and jointhouseholds the same thing applies. The peculiar refusal of the peasants to be called communists be traced to the fact that the peasants heard the name commay munists only from the government, which calls itself by that But the same name. government sends its soldiers into the village, in order to requisition provisions, which the peasants are are, consequently, to the peasunwilling to give. Communists ant's those or And them. who send mind, requisitioning soldiers there are, besides, a great number as of commissars, who also but are actually swindlers (a concall themselves "communist" dition for which the bolsheviks are not to blame but against which in the large country) they can fight only with difficulty fleece , who the peasants, there has in Ukraine arisen a play upon words the peasants by which they want to ridicule communism. among While thus the communists are not well liked among the peasants, the bolsheviks have with them a better reputation. For it the bolsheviks who brought them peace. was Through the peace Brest-Litovsk Lenin has for his won of party. great popularity For that reason the peasants love the bolsheviks but hate the communists. They do not understand that it is one and the same


With the help of some intelligentelements among them the larger They their common peasants regulate affairs. called in the larger congresses, formed co-operatives, etc. It is true that they have not the right understanding in all things, nor a strong initia136

tive. They stillpartly believe in the ability of the intelligentzia. Thus they believed that Machno, who was such a good leader for them in battle, should also be able to tell them what they should For that reason do in other matters. they would ask Machno in business. Machno to do is said to any matter of most what have answered them to do what they themselves considered best to do. But the peasants were not helped with that. They wanted he And disinterested counsel, is naturthem can who give advice. ally them. welcome among

Communism, with the Ukrainian peasant, is not a theory but their practical life.The large estate owners, the pomeschtto disadvantages them the of private ownership in schiks proved that springs from it. And this injustice land, and the injustice Marxism may eternally proclaim that sonourished their envy. cialism is not a matter of privilege, but the peasants feel the injustic into their life with unequal distribution of which has come the land and want to abolish it. The others shall not have any By the enemies of socialism this has always been than we. more branded as the envy of the property-less. But this envy of the property-less is for the peasants a regulative principle. It ca/rries within itself equality in the ownership of land, and this leads the peasants to communism.



Situation in the Ukraine

into the hands of had come If the land of the estate owners it the peasants before the war, would without question have meant an improvement of the lot of the peasants and therewith the change an their uplift of economic position. Even as it was, brought with it an improvement in the position of the poor peasants, in the position of the peasants who that is, an improvement By this we wish to had become empoverished through the war. say that without these measures of the revolution the peasants but not have in been are, a worse would position than they now in a better position than before the war. It is with the peasants it was They complain and as with the population in Germany. back. Before the war the times peasants had boots, wish pre-war lack to-day. They have that they things clothes and petroleum dustry few agricultural implements and fewer agricultural machines. Inthere was is very poorly developed, and during the -war industry. They obtain very few industrial practically only war products and had to give up their agricultural products for the


the bolsheviks had taken possession of the Ukraine, they prohibited free trade, so that the inhabitants of the cities found themselves in great straits for the necessities of life. The purpose a double one. bolsheviks was the of First, they wanted to prevent the provisions and use-objects from becoming objectsof trade and speculation. Theoretically, When 137

the standpoint of socialism, the matter presents itself this rectly that through free trading the goods produced are not diway: for profit mongering, distributed, but serve enpersonal richmen to maintain the life of those who occupy themselves or ' Instead of turning to productive work, they 'trade." therewith. Especially is the Russian But in practice this is often not the case. home their the the peasants sell products, market place where have in by no manner or they purchase speculaacquired tion. which the difficult But as it was very given circumstances under to define who was a trader, this measure a peasant and who" was has quite often hit the wrong person, and particularly in the small The cities. so-called speculators are often the poorest.


was In the second place this measure calculated to force the if For there was bourgeoisie to go to ivork. nothing for them to thought that they would buy and if they got nothing to eat, it was But in this calculation they certainly were be compelled to work. of evading mistaken, for most of them found other ways and means it would not be possible for the this rule. In the long run covers The soviet government bourgeoisie to dodge work. gradually disthe tricks of the bourgeoisie and resorts to other measures. introduced, the inhabitants are registered,no food Work-books are stuffs are delivered to non-workers, etc., so that they cannot find Then they some any way out except to perform sort of work. food like rations receive everybody else.

They have, consequently, not attained what they aimed at. It has been tried on a great scale to introduce production for use. But on a small scale so-called speculation flourishes, namely the erly. trade with food stuffs and other use-objects, stronger than formAll larger factories and farms are nationalized and work for the account of the state. But the smaller establishments (and in the Ukraine small industry prevails everywhere, with the exception of the large sugar industry and the metal industry)are stillall in private hands and work for private interests, just as before the revolution. The economic life,consequently, continues in this respect to move if the individua on private capitalist lines, even largest Stinnes the two or are no Thyssen( employers German In for instance, 2 or 3 months Kiev, after capitalists) the occupation by the bolsheviks, everything remained as in other new capitalists countries. Many shops were opened, and only those were to close which had no more compelled goods. But as they receive no goods from the bolsheviks, one after the other is compelled to give up his business. After that the shop keepers in some enter the service of the soviet government, commissariat or bureau. They become officials, But the salary on state officials. that they now they live, they receive cannot and continue to smuggle and speculate. Others had already started to speculate, They cannot stop that any more contrary to the law, of course. than the cat can stop catching mice. Even the peasants, who by nature are against the system as they derive no benefits therefrom, have of commercialism,


to speculation, as it is called in bolshevik also taken language. This speculation consists in this, that instead of delivering their products to the state, they sell them at the highest possible prices. This is not done out of lust for do anything speculation, but because they cannot else. They it turn to if the over they would willingly state, all could only obtain the goods that they need. But the state has nothing and can give them nothing. Thus they are compelled to buy in. free trade the they require. For one pud of flour (34 Ibs.) objects in free 21,000 trade they receive the about rubles, but from 100-200 It is therefore they receive about rubles. state easily explainable that they would rather sell their goods at speculation for it, than turn they might get punished prices, although to the state. But, in spite of receiving so much them over for their products in free trade, they are not anxious for the do* not They They are money. willing to forego the money. but to the money want at all would give up everything state if they only could get what has no they need. Money value that they paper their for them. They have so" much money them. their What they want walls and wedding carriages with is articles that they can to a The traveler who use. comes if he frequently buy has can even ever so village nothing, much but he can money, get anything for a piece of cloth, a glass

of salt, or something similar. But there is no doubt that this speculation evil will immediate the the stop at moment peasants receive what when they need from the state. Then the government will also receive from the peasants, voluntarily, all that it needs and cannot take even with force. Then the requisitions and the resulting hostility between the peasants will cease and the government and the greatest obstacle separating the peasant and the soviet government be for it be the would much easier removed, and would latter to become The peasants reconciled with the peasants. longer then the to be "counter-revolutionary", no would need firm in districts footing the a country revolution would get and would have a chance to build up and develop freely.
But that can only take place if Soviet Russia has peace, if the entente at once that unhappy to inflictwar ceases upon into the if is blockade if comes the country, called off and goods That the Russian revolution in the form of bolshevism country. have become such a regime of terror with its requisition should fact has its causes that policy, and in principally in the war the the blockade. The originator of this blockade and this war, America, France, in the England enemies and of revolution the defenders of the capitalist states are the ones upon whom the blame should be placed for the stagnation of the Russian mean the liberty crushing revolution. // with bolshevism we Soviet government, principally against policy of the Russian the peasants, then bolshevism is best co\mbatted with the slogan: Peace with Russia; Lifting the blockade; Hands offRussia.



As free commerce it was was tied up by the government, by means forced to create some organs of which the population This is, of course, food be extremely stuffs. could supplied with it has the governmental if for difficult a political party, even Its character is political and not economic; it is not power. do it. The Food to Stuffs Commissariat stood helpless able It the co-operation of the threw itself upon before the situation. Consumers' Societies. In Russia, as well as in Ukraine, these took over these well developed. The government societies were as them before stated, into state organs. societies and made became Membership obligatory for the whole population. The bourgeoisie, which also nominally belongs to these societies,has no rights inside them. The proletariat alone has any right to elect officials. Nevertheless, most of the officials spring from are the bourgeoisie, because the workers uneducated and for the largest part illiterates.
are speaking of the workers and the bourgeoisie the to a large extent are not of peasants. The peasants in included They do" not need it. the consumers' not societies. They need not obtain any food stuffs; on the contrary, they for others. This is therefore intended merely can spare them for the citieswhich are dependent upon the country. we



consumers' co-operatives receive the food stuffsfrom They distribute them among the government. the workers of the have factories. The branches in the their cities and co-operatives factories, and the workers receive their bread in the factories. But due to the shortage of food stuffs the workers are not live The their on workers cannot possibly supplied. sufficiently to receive 1 Ib bread daily. (1 Russian Ib. are rations. They American Ib. to 400 or equal weight gram). .88 But it happens that they bread for days at no often get time. In a chocolate and confectionery factory in Charkov, a the seat of the present Ukrainian Soviet government, the workers, in September 1920, received no bread ration for 4 days in succession. This is state factory No. 22, for chocolate and


confectionery manufacture. As the workers do not receive sufficient bread in the factories through the government, they are compelled to procure bread themselves, is the their privately. In Russia, bread principal food stuff. Most people subsist almost exclusively o"n bread and Kascha (a kind of millet mush). But the workers can not pay the market price of bread. We should remember in this chocolate factory are that the wages 2,400 rubles per But Ib. bread the a month. of price of at the same amounted time (Sept.12, 1920), in the fish market of Charkov, to 500 rubles for white bread and 340 rubles for black bread. The monthly wage will, consequently, buy barely 5 Ibs white bread Ibs. a 7 and good of black bread. the question arises; how can Irresistibly the workers live that way. But it is to be noted that in many factories the 140

meal is delivered to"the workers. This lunch is certainly not very good, but on the contrary, of a very inferior quality. Only in one factory have I found the lunch really nourishing, if simple. This was in the 4th government factory for the even textile industry. But this is still only in the initial stage. In 1,500 workers. Only 500 can this factory there are get their lunch delivered. It stillremains necessary to fix up things for the There rest of them also. But this meets with great difficulties. be for the be there food space must meals, and must serving lunch For this the workers pay only 20-30 rubles. stuffs. do Wtiat those workers do who get no lunch? They try to it themselves. But how? Of the 1500 workers emprocure ployed there, 10% do not come to work. They away remain heavy from inflicted for such penalties are work, although Those from three days in away who conduct. remain work being other urgent succession, without sick, or without some legally condemned to*a concentration camp. In practice cause, are this is not sternly enforced. Even if the government would like do not want it done. The first court to do it, the workers from for on is passing sentence workers staying away work in many factory the And these as are places committee. workers they are naturally themselves, few of them being communists, inclined to be lenient with their fellows and do not sentence there is a relatively them. In this factory of 1,500 workers high percentage of communists, namely 200, about 13.3%. But in 3,350 locomotive factory in the same a among city there are or 2.9%. It frequently happens workers only 100 communists, in each factory form a communist that the communists group, the principal function of which is spying. Of these some are at time in the tscheka (extra-ordinary or the same commission At the end of August, 1920, 172 workers were secret police). they, under the arrested in the locomotive factory because influence of anarchists and left social-revolutionaries, wanted to themselves organize the food stuffs distribution among and from the job. remained away noonday

from the job, in order to workers also stay away in a the m anner, procure, different which they necessaries of life in can Part "semi^proletathe factory. not get of them are only rians" ; part of the workers are peasants who stillhave a piece little they work a of land which and which supports them bit better. Another part strolls out in the country, in order to "rustle". The workers organize themselves for this purpose. They send some of their number out in the country for provisions. These buy provisions for the whole factory or for a group of In Ukraine it. in 20 men, how to take many all part according co-operatives at the and in all Russia this kind of workers' This shows us common. also" a new place of work are very form of distribution and of supplying the factory workers with the food stuffs and which has sprung among up spontaneously workers as a result of the economic conditions. The consumers'


formerly free, that is, independent of the co-operatives were but in fashion, socialist not then constructed state. They were like everything else in the capitalist system, in capitalist fashion. After they were state socialistic of course, nationalized, they were, As but had lost their efficiency. organs of the state they are not independent but tied up, dependent upon the state to deliver do this only to such the food stuffs to them. But the state can a small extent that these societies are not able to properly perform their duties. The procuring of food stuffs the state could accomplis the of the requisition policy through only by means military. It could not follow a different policy due to the bad are economic situation. Again we confronted with the blockade. We are always turning round in a circle which we cannot get out of as long as the blockade is not lifted. other hand, the state had not nationalized the co-operatives, the independent consumers' co-operatives have would served the peasants better. But the nationalization a necessary result of the co-operatives was of the consumers' The trade the free among strangling of prod^lcers. abolition of the Russian markets of the peasants and the workers proved to be a very disastrous error which revenged itself heavily in the paralyzing of the food stuff supply system, through which badly injured. again industry and the whole of production was After the abolition of private property the economic life should have moved in a socialist direction without further interference by the state. All these phenomena are extremely instructive and shoiv us that it is impossible to regulate the economic lifeof a country through political organizations, yes, even that the political rule life have over far-reaching destructive effects. economic must Independent of the state the workers themselves create their own for the regulation of economic life, for their organs economic own maintenance and for their bare existence. The state could not carry it through with the best will in the world. It his not the intelligence necessary for this purpose. It is strange to life.This duty devolves iipon the working economic people





supplying of the citieswith fu"l and building material, principally wood, the Soviets of the cities are taking in hand. The soviet of Charkov, has for its duty to supply the city with for the winter. The executive committee wood of this soviet itself in puts connection with the executive committees of the Soviets of the districts.Each commune, each village is ordered to deliver a certain quantity, according to its size and number of inhabitants. The Soviets are responsible for compliance with orders. In the year of 1920 Ukraine received a total of 6,000 These were distributed to the various saws and 4,000 axes. communes, in bound to deliver wood. their turn were which But the peasants are not very willing to deliver cut wood for the government because they are not sufficiently paid for it. Even The


in a while, which again here the military has to interfere once the peasants. creates bad blood among The Unions of Ukraine are organized exactly as the unions in Russia and have the same a functions, and for that reason is this this In time treatment unnecessary. of special subjectat Ukraine there are a total of 1,173,000 workers organized in the 13 gouvernements. fall on Of these unions. These numbers 162,000 are 280,000 are soviet employees, railroad workers, 134,000 mine workers, 113,000 metal workers, 72,000 workers in the food stuffs industry, 58,000 in the sugar industry, 58,700 telegraph and postal employees, 49,660 agricultural laborers on the soviet estates, 42,135 employees of the hospitals and asylums, 38,000 educational workers (teachers, ists), party agitators, journal31,500 clothing workers, 23,800 chemical and glass workers, 22,900 leather workers, 20,600 building construction workers, 18,800 wood workers, 18,000 tobacco workers, 13,000 textile 11,000 graphical workers workers. and 3,000 paper workers, unions is obligatory for the workers. They elect factorycouncils. These factory councils elect a soviet in their industry for a whole gouvernement. This gouvernement soviet elects an executive committee consisting of 9-14 men. In this soviet are also the representatives of the Commissariat Council of National Economy. of labor and of the Supreme These commissariats carry on their activities through the unions. Council of National Or, expressing it differently, the Supreme its Economy through representatives in organizes production be carried out unconditionally, the unions, whose orders must they decide what the workers shall do and how they shall work. The Commissariat of Labor controls the workers through its representatives in the unions, whose orders must also be strictly long they must the workers: carried out over where and how The in have no their unions influence ovev work. workers nor the over work. production, conditions of The executive committee Soviets has o/ the gouvernement 5 departments: Wage tariffs, The department, 1) 2) economic General Education, Organization Instruction, 5) 3) 4) and Business. Each department has further its sub-departments. The Economic Department is subdivided into two sub-departments: For Industry, 1) 2) For distribution of provisions organization of have not the right to and working clothes. But the workers but departments, labors the the control only have the right of to decide over such work as is assigned to them by the department.




Industry in Ukraine may be devided in three parts : The largest industry, the metal industry, is under the direct control and the industries of the Supreme Council of National Economy the the of provisional council second and third class stand under in There are Council of National Economy. of the Supreme Ukraine 42 larger and 14 smaller textile factories. The large into are combined metal works of the country, 16 in number, one great trust. The mines of the Don basin are divided into 16

districts,which are subjectto the central executive committee of the unions of the whole of Ukraine, subdivided in the manner described above. The working hours are legally determined to 8 hours daily, in all those industrie but during the war there was overtime work The renumeration connected with the war. which were for overtime consists principally of natural products. The workers bread. receive more Bread and Freedom! That is what workers and peasants far they have come into possession all struggle for. In how the revolution, the investigations described through of them how far they shall be able to advance further In above will show. in that direction, the future will show. But in any case this depends upon Russia and the politics of the entente towards Ukraine. Just as Russia will be capable of further development generally, in the direction of socialism, if it unmolested and lie develop the can the that powers people, unhindered within just so will the workers and the peasants be able to gain bread they are left unmolested measure as and freedom in the same inherent powers by the governments bring to free their can and development. Not the soviet government, but only the peasants for themselves. This has the can and create socialism workers been proven to us by the development of the Russian and Ukrainian revolution. The bolsheviks as state socialists have showed to us that they cannot bring socialism about.










RETURN This book





or on


the last date stamped date to which renewed.





to subject







APR 21 '64-9 AM


8 1957










I /.