ep resy a Pa WWWWwg1976.net. cH fel oc fe Bt Fy fea asiaCopyright © 1970 by Patnfinder Press, Ine All rights reserved Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 75-143589 ‘Manufactured in the United States of Ameriea First Edition, December 1970 Second Printing, February 1972 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction by Douglas Jenness 3 ‘Thisty-Five Years After: 1871-1906 10 ‘The Paris Commune 26 The Paris Commune and Soviet Russia 29 Mare and... Keutsky a7 Lessons of the Paris Commune 52 Glossary of Nemes and Terms 62 PATHFINDER PRESS. 410 West Street New York, N. ¥- 10014 INTRODUCTION . by Douglas Jenness + In May and June of 1968 red fags were raised throughout France. They waved from the tops of government buildings, uni versities, factories, and even ships In the harbors. They were a symbol of the revolutionary mood and aspirations of millions of French workers and students then conducting the largest general strike ever held in world history. For today’s generation of revolutionary youth, this massive revolt was @ most inspiring example of the power and creativity fof the students and working masses. More than two years Inter, revolutionaries throughout the world, not least of all those in the United States, are still studying and absorbing the lestons of thi reat event ‘This Is not the first time that France has provided an example {o the world revolutionary movement, On many other occasions the eyes of socialists have turned to France to learn from its rich history of working-class uprisings and revolts. The most mag. rifcent example Is the Paris Commune of 1871, where the working lass gave notice for the frst time that It would and could take political power into its own hands. Like many revolutionary uprisings, the Parls Commune was born of war. Prussia, guided by Bismarck, and the Second Em- pire of France, headed by Louls Napoleon Bonaparte, locked In combat on ‘July 15, 1870. The French army lost one battle after another until early in September when the French emperor was personally captured In a major defeat at Sedan. On September 4 the Empire was swept aside and amid a great uprising a re- public was proclaimed. A Government of National Defense headed by a coalition of capitalist politicians was established and con- tinued to condvet the war against Prussia. Shorly after this gov- ecriment came to power, Paris was encircled by the Prus Under a state of siege for 135 days the starvation conditions of the workers steadily worsened. The Government of National De- fense continued the war only half-heartedly, as its leaders became Increasingly alarmed at the growing discontent of the working ‘masses of Paris. In order to defend Paris the workers were armed and enrolled into the National Guard. They established their own, Vigilance committees to safeguard thelr interests in the National Guard and set up a Central Committee with representatives fromcach of twenty distrets. Later, when the Commune was established, the Central Commitee and the National Guard became the mil tary arm of the revolution. Finally, in late January, an armistice was signed between France and Prussia with very harsh conces- sions forced from the French by Bismarck. When the capitalist class attempted to disarm the workers in March, the workers refused; and the National Assembly headed by Adoif Thiers retreated and convened in nearby Versailles. The Workers were now in power, and on March 26 elections were held to the Commune—the world’s frst example of a workers’ gov- ernment. As Marx wrote in The Civil War in France, "The Com- mune was formed of the Municipal Councillors, chosen by unix ‘versal suffrage in the various wards of the town, responsible and revocable at short terms. The majority of ite members were, nat- urally, working men, oF acknowledged representatives of the Work Ing class. The Commune was to be a working, not a parliamen tary, body, executive and legislative at the same time” ‘This new government had litle time to work out its program. and put it Into practice before It was forced to wage a military campaign of defense against the capitalist counterrevolution head fed by Thiers. Thiers was able to convince the Prussians, who still ‘occupied a couple of forts outside of Paris, to release hundreds of French prisonersofwar to fight against tae workers’ government. The Commune was finally. smashed in late May after a herole resistance by the workers of Paris, Men, women, and children fought for eight days after the entrance of Thiers's troops into Pais, ‘Teng of thousends were slaughtered In the savage massacres orga nized by the bourgeois terror. Thousands were deported to Te ‘mote French colonies. ‘Although the Commune lasted only seventy-two days before it ‘was drowned in blood, it beeame one of the great models for learning about the dynamies of working-class revolutions. Marx, who followed the development of the Paris Commune on 4 day-to-day basis, drafted three manifestos for the General Coun cil of the First Invernational analyzing the events in France in Tate 1870 and early 1871. ‘These were distributed widely at the time in Freneh, English, and German, and compose his famous book, The Civil Warin France. ‘The only major cozrection ever proposed by Marx and Engels to the Communist Manifesto was based on the experience of the Paris Commune, When the Communist Manifesto was published in 1848, Marx and Engels had assumed that the working clas fs it came to power would use the capitalist state apparatus for Its own purposes. Altering this view after the Commune, they wrote in thelr introduction to an_ 1872 edition of the Manifesio: “One thing especially was proved by the Commune, iz, that "the work ng lass cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made State ma- chinery, and wield i for its own purposes.” ‘As Marx and Engels digesied the lessons of the Commune, so did the ext generation Of Marxist revolutionaries, most notably Lenin and Trotsky, Tn his ‘writings on the 1905 revolution in Russia, as well as the February and October revolutions of 1917, Lenin utilized the experience of the Commune to explain and develop more clearly the Marxist concept of the state, particularly the diflrence in form between a workers’ stale and ® bourgeois state. His most exten sive treatment of the Commune is inelided in his book, Sate and Revolution,writien in August and September 1917, ‘Trotsky, like Lenin, recognized the continuity of experience be- tween the Commune and the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917. As the Chairman of the Petrograd Soviet in 1905, a prin cipal leader of the October 1917 insurrection, and the organizer ff the Red Army's victory against military counterrevolution, he hhad considerable occasion to contrast the experience of revolu tionary Russia with that of France in 1871. "This collection is the most complete ever published in English of Trotsky's weitings on the Paris Commune. The first selection, ‘Thinty-Five Years After: 1871-1906, was writen by Trotsky in December 1905, while In @ Czarist prison awaiting tral for his role in the 1905 revolution. 1t has been translated for this edition by George C. Myland and has never appeared before in English, This particularly significant because it demonstrates how Trotsky's study of the Paris Commune played an important part in the development of his theory of the permanent revolution. That theory was first advanced in complete form in a 1906 pamphlet ented Results and Prospects, which was included in his book, Our Reo: ‘olution, published in 1907; a translation appears in the Pathfinder Prest edition of The Permanent Revolution In Results and Prospects, Trotsky developed the concept that the Russian Revolution would not end in the esteblishment of bourgeois republic even though the traditional tasks of the bour eois revolution sill remained to be accomplished —land reform, hhational independence, development of a national economy, ee Rather, he though, the revolution would lead to the formation of ‘a workers’ government, Le, the dictatorship of the proletariat, led by the working class and supported by the peasantry. In Trotsky's it class of backward Russia was too weak to ead en Iniransigent struggle against Czariam and foreign im- periallam. A successful struggle could only be earrled out under the leadership of the working alass; and under working-class lead- frahip the struggle, while solving the tasks of the bourgeois rev- ‘lution, would not limit itself to the establishment of « bourgeois 5 Esrepublic. ‘Thus, Trotsky saw the struggle for bourgeois demo racy growing over into the proletarian revolution. Twelve yea later this prognosis was proved correct In the successful October Revolution led by the Bolsheviks, Although Results and Prospects was until then his most com- prehensive statement of the theory of the permanent revolution, Trotsky had been developing the basic ideas since 1904 in sev. feral articles and pamphlets. Among these are Up to the Ninth of January, writen in January 1905; an introduction to Lassalle's Speech to the Jury, writen in July 1905; and certain articles in Nachato, a leading Social Democratic newspaper ofthe time ‘Thirty Five Years After was among the writings of this forma: live period. In Results and Prospects, Trotsky refers to this article and directly quotes a long passage from It. He also incorporated Into Results ond Prospects nearly word for word « large number of additional paragraphs that are not directly quoted. However, ‘except for one oF two small references none of the material on the Paris Commune in Thirty-Five Years After was used in Results and Prospects. For this reason Thirty Five Years After is unique for showing how the experience of France In 1871 helped Trotsky Acquire a better understanding of Russia in 1905. Russian liberals and reformists routinely assumed that a pro- letarian revolution leading to a workers’ sate could only obcur fon the basis of highly advanced productive forces. ‘They argued that a period of capitalist economic development under « bour- Beois form of government was necessary until the level of tech nique and the size of the working last prepared the way for socialist revolution. ‘Trotsky used the example of the Paris Com ‘mune to show thatthe decisive factor was the relationship of forces between classes and the consciousness of the working class, and these did not follow mechanistically from the level of the productive forces, In his book, The Puris Commune of 1871, Frank Jllinek points fut that in 1870 more than 60 percent of the French population ‘were still engaged on the land. Even in Paris in 1866, only 40) percent of the population were wage workers. The average num ber of workers per shop was only 7.7, scarcely an indication of highly developed industrial. production. Yet, as ‘Trotsky pointe out, the Parisian working class "could not refuse 10 take power ‘twas forced to by the sequence of political events” Against those critics who argued that Trotsky was proposing 4 transformation to socialism before capitalism had prepared an ‘adequate material base, he explains that the dictatorship of the working class does not immediately Institute socialism but rather reates the premises for it Here again the example of the Com 6 mune $8 used {0 show how the workers took power,but the new overnment .- was not, of course, soalst commune “The Commune immediately took these steps: i naiuted separ tion of church and state, abolished capital punishment, replaced the standing army with a miltia of the armed population, and teleased all cizens from. payments of back rent retroactive to October 1870. Mt made a satnieal reistretion of factories which had been closed by thelr owners and established plang fo carry fut work in these factories with workers organized into cooperative Sorietes. To counter bureaucracy, provided that members of the government were subject to Immediate recall and could not receive # aalary above that received by the average wage worker ‘These measures provided a preview of what worker’ govern rent in power would. do. Trotsky, rating this experience to the prospects Tor Russa, slates: "The proletariat wil begin with those felorms ‘which ener inio the socalled minimum program —and iret from them, by the very loge oft position, wil be fore to'go over to collecivit measures” Here, in 1903, can be sen the fmbryonie beginnings of the concept of « transitional program Shieh does away withthe arial separation that many soctlists Of that time made between a "minimum program’ of immediate demands and a'maximum program” of sacalst demands ‘Athough Lenin was. in tal accord with Trotsky's analyse that the capitalist clas’ could not ead he Russian Revolution, before 1917 he beloved thatthe revoltion woule be “democratic father than socialist, Le, that H would not go beyond the bounds ‘of bourgeois democracy. In addition, his jusied emphasis on the Importance of the peesantry in the Russian Revolution led him,in deserbing the dynamics of te revolution to put forward an inter ivedlate formula. ascribing to the peasant lies of labor & joint leadership role they were unable o assume, He called for a “demo cratle dctaorahip of the working sass and peasantry” and’ not, in Trotsky's correct ormulation, a dictatorship ofthe working cass Supported bythe peasantry. Referring to this question Trotsky potnis out that, "The dctatorehip of the proletariat will undoubled- IF represent all the progressvs vad interests of the peasentry— nd not only the peasantry, but als the petty bourgeoisie and the inkeligentsia. “+The Commune, says Marx, was thus the true representative of all the healthy elements of French sodety, and therefore the truly national goversment®. But itwae sll the di tarorship ofthe proletariat” (Bmphasa a Teoaky's) “the eecond selestion The Fart Commune as pred om March 17, 1917, in Novy Mir, « Russlamlanguage Mataist weekly pub lished in New York. 1 hrat appeared in English in The New Mil tant Maeh'21, 1936,Written shortly ater the news of the February revolution in Russia had reached him, it obviously rellects Trotsky's excitement with this event. IC is @s much a manifesto to the revolutionary workers of Russia as a commemoration ofthe forty-sixth anniver- sary of the Commune. It is particularly noteworthy that he em: pphaslzes the internationalism of the Commune ("The Commune be. gan by confirming the elecion of all foreigners to the workers overnment”). The Russian workers even after the February rev- olution had deep patriotic illusions whieh Trotsky attempts to combat by appealing to the best traditions of international sols dari “The Paris Commune and Soviet Russia" and "Marx and Kautsky” are chapters from Troteky's Terrorism and Communism: written in 1920. ‘This book first appeared in English in 1922 when it was published by the American Communists (Workers Party), As he wrote in the introduetion to the second English ed. tion, “This book was writen... in the car of « military train amid the flames of civil war. ‘Tis ereumstance the reader must keep before his eyes if he wishes righlly to understand not only the basic material of the book, but also its harsh allusions, and particularly the tone in which iti written ‘The entice book is a polemic against Karl Kautsky's book of the same tile. After the Russian Revolution in 1917, Karl Kautaky, who at one time had wielded considerable authority among Marx 'sts throughout the world, opened up an attack on the Russian Revolution. In the summer of 1918 his book ‘The Diclatorship of the Proletariat appeared. Lenin replied to it in The Protetarian Revolution and Renegade Kautsky. Kautsky resumed the attack 4 year later with Tervorsem and Communism, to which Trotsky. replied in 1920, Kutsky, in what appears to be an act of political desperation, atiempts to employ the example of the Paris Communards and the reputation of Marx against the conduct of the Russian work ers, Parlly by half-truths and omissions and party by advancing himself ‘as @ theoretician for vacillation and indecision, he tren {o show that the Commune was more democratic and spontencous, and less violent and bloodthirsty, than Soviet Russia. Relercing to two eyewitness historians of the Paris Commune, Fierce Laveov (Parishskaia Kommuna, 1878) and Prosper Olivier Lissagaray (History of the Commune of 1871, 1876), Trotsky effectively counters Kautsky’s attacks, At the same time, he offers a most perceptive comparison between the new Soviel Republic and the Paris Commune, contributing to a tieher understanding of both phenomena ‘The final selection, Lessons of the Paris Commune, was written ‘mn 1924, but was not published until March 24, 1924, in La Vie September 1970THIRTY-FIVE YEARS AFTER: 1871-1906 The protetarians of Paris, amidst the failures and teasons of the ruling classes, have understood that the hour has struck for them to save the situation by taking into their own hands the divection of public affairs... They have understood ther it is their imperious duty and their absolute ight to render there selves masters of their own destinies, by seating upan the goo, ernmental power, Proclamation of the Central Committee of the National Guard of Paris, March 18, 1871 The Russian reader can acquaint himself with the history of the Paris Commune of 1871 through Lissagaray's book, which, If we are not mistaken, is soon due to appear in several editions. He can ‘acquaint himself with the philosophy of this history through Marx's immortal pamphlet, which is equipped with a very valuable inte @uction by Engels. Subsequent Marxist literature, insofar ae, we are familiar with it, has added nothing essential Guring the course ofthe last thirty-five years to what Marx said about the Commune The non-Marxist literature is not even worth mentioning by it very nature, it is incapable of saying anything on this subject All that is available in Russian, down to the latest translated edi tions, is a clumsy rehash of the toothless gossip of international Feaction, seasoned wilh the philosophical and moral. judgments ofthe policeman Mymretao. Police and eensorship have not been the only circumstances that hhave kept us from interesting ourselves in the Commune, The vesy character of the ideology which has ruled in our progressive clecles liberal, iberal-Narodnik, and Narodalk-socialist~is completely foreign to that structure of relations, interests, and passions which Were manifested in this unforgetable episode of proletarian strugele But if @ few years ago we were apparently further than any European nation from the traditions of the Paris Commune, then ow, in passing through the first phase of our own revolution, which the struggle of the proletariat has made @ revolution in Permanens, an uninterrupted revolution, we are confronted by the heritage of the Commune of 1871 more direcly than any Europea ation. For us, the history of the Commune is now not just a great dra: 10 ‘matic moment in the international struggle for liberation, not a ese illustration of some sort of tactical situation: itis a divect ‘and immediate lesson 1, THE STATE AND THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER Revolution is the open test of strength between sotial forces in the struggle for power. The popular masses revolt, set in motion bby elemental vital impulses and interests, offen without any concep. sion of the paths and goals of the movement: one party writes “law and justice’ on its banners, another "order"; the "heroes" of the revolution are guided by a consciousness of "duty," or are carried away by ambition; the behavior of the army ie determined by discipline, which does not reason, by fear, which consumes disei- pline, or, at last, by revolutionary insight, which conquers both ‘discipline and fear; enthusiasm, selfinterest, routine, soaring Blghts ff thought, superstition, selfsacriice thousands of felings, ideas, ‘moods, capabilities, passions, theow themselves into. the mighty Whirlpool, are seized by it, perish or ise to the surface; but the objective ‘sense of a revolution is this—it is a struggle for state power in the name of the reconstruction of antiquated social rela tionships. The state isnot an end in itself It is only & machine in the hands of the ruling social force. Like any machine, the state has its mo tor mechanism, its transmitting mechanism, and its working ma chine.** ‘The motor foree is class interest ity mechanism agita- ‘doo, the press, the propaganda of ehurches and schools, the party. the street meeting, the petition, the insurrection. The transmitting, mechanism is the lawmaking organization of the caste, dynastic, estate, oF class interest under the guise of divine (absolutism) of rational (parliamentarism) will. And Dally, the working machine Js the administration and the polie, courts and prisons, the army. ‘The stale is not an end in ise. But it is @ tremendous means of organization, disorganization, and reorganization of social te. lations. Tt ean be a lever of deep social transformation of an in srument of organized stagnation, depending on whose hands i finds ist in, + The Russian says literally that". . the mate has te moving, trans siting, and exceutive mechanisms” From the content itis lear tht Trt ‘hy was referring to Marx's definition of machinery, 40 this paragraph of Trotsky's has been translated accordingly. Marx makes the distineion between a simple tool used in handleaft (a handaw, for example) and modern machinery where the tool of "working machine (the sewteth of {© power save) Is driven by a "motor mechanism (he power souree) by ‘cans of the “ransmlting mechanism” (geass, pulley ee). See Cope vol. I, chap. 15, sec 1s International Tublahere edion, 1967; Moore. ‘Avelng translation, ~ TranslatorBvery pola! party worthy’ of the name Hive to acgure the governing power and, in tin mane, plac te sate a he see fice of the ans whove intre itexpreses The Soci! Dene Techet ae the party of the proltarat, patra tives towards the pola rule the working cass, The. prasarat grows. an gathers strength together withthe frowth of capitation. Tn thin sence the deveopmen of capitalism IS the development ofthe proletariat toward ttorship Bathe day and the hour when power Koes over info the bands ofthe working. lass depends inmeditey tot on the lee ofthe prs Sscve fore, but on the relations ote clas strug. oo fhe Interational tation, and Bray, on sere of subjects Tato tradon,nitv, sadn for straggle tne country mish is economically more backward the pote tara can come Yo power sooner than in an advanced apts Country. in 1871 it cossovsly “ook Into ts ove hand the dt Fecion of publ afer” (oe the epigraphy in py bourgeois Paris sro be sure, only fortwo month butt id not take power ever for an hout jn the largescale capil ats of Bnglond nd the United Slat The idea that the prlearay dittorhi i ‘Srchowsuomataly dependent on te eel oes anne ite country represents a prjedce of an extreney implied “economic” materialism, Such a viewpoint has nothing in common with Marxism, point ne The Faison workers took power in shir hands on March 26, Isl, not because the prodicve tations had matured for the diclatorsip of the proletariat nor sven becauwe i then appeated to ihe. workers tat thee relations had ature bat heeasse they were forecd to take power by the betrayal of te bourgeoisie in the matter of navonal defense. Mary pon tis out t wes Sniy possile to defend Paria and ogee with tal of France by atming the prokariat. Ruts revoutonary proeara la threat to the bourgeoisie, and an armed prataca ean rted threat “The government of Thiet, whieh was concerned not wi Taisng the French messes agaist the hots of Blsmarchs whe fete turtounding Paris, but wih alin the reaonay hos of France against proletarian Pars, withdrew to Mot in Versa deaving the epital inthe hands Of he worker who wanted fee am for thee country and happiness or themselves and thelr people. The pelea scogszed that the our had struck when 1 The Huan text rede “Democracy” caer than "Solal Democracy si Uaradaed ere. The Suan was probably 2 ypographical cro Teauy hed been cra and ery posable pi roots o his esa, In Troy's ese snd Powe the ene pa sage reads "Social Democracy."— Translator. = 2 iy must save the country itself and become master of its own fate 4 Toul not refuse to take powers it was forced to by the sequence 1 Gulitical events. Power came upon it unawares. However, when Oi Boke power, it nevertheless began, as ifby foree of its own cass xcauht- with waverings to one side of the other—to move along. he correct path, Its cass position, as Marx and Engels explain, forced it first of all to relorm the apparatus of state power ap propriately, and also soggested to It he correet policy in the sphere Br economy. If the Commune collapsed, this was not at all be fause the productive forces were insufficiently developed, but for whole series of reasons of a political nature: the blockade of Paris and iis Isolation from the provinces, extremely unfavorable international clteumstances, its own mistakes, and s0 on, 2, THE REPUBLIC AND THE DICTATORSHIP OF THE PRO. LETARIAT ‘The Paris Commune of 1871 was not, of course, a socialist commune; its regime was not even a developed regime of socialist evolution. The “Commune” was only & prologue. It established the dictatorship of the proletariat, the necessary premise of the Socialist revolution, Paris entered into the regime of the dletator Ship of the proletariat not because it proclaimed the republic, but because out of ninety representatives it elected seventy-two repre: Senlatives of the workess and stood under the protection of the proletarian guard, It would be truer to say the republic itself was Only the natural and inescapable expression of the"workers' power” that bad been established in fact, ‘Alexander Millerand, who figured as something in the nature of a “toclalls” hostage in the Bourgeois ministry of the Late Wal cek-Rousseau, alongside of the late executioner of the Commune, General Galife— this former socialist Millerand proclaimed as his politcal slogan: "The republie fs the poliseal formula of socialism; Socialism is the economic content of the republie.” It is necessary fo acknowledge that this "politieal formula” is deprived of any Kind of "socialist content” Contemporary republies, being formal ly democratic organizations, expressions of the popular will, in essence remain. sate “formulas” of the dictatorship of the possess Ing classes, When it separated from Sweden, Norway could have femained in the guise in which it appeared after the separation, fen it could have remained a republic, without in the least trans forming itself into the "politcal formula of socialism’ —one can fafirm that nol a. single hair would have fallen from the head of burgomaster Stockmann and other “pillars of society." But Nor sway. preferred to obtain a king (the reserve army of most august Candidates is very great!) and in this manner it put the Nnishing touches om its independent provisional republicA certain Me. Grimm, to all appearances a professor, @ liberal writer besides, and in addition (o all that a collaborator of Pol ‘arnaia Zvezda (The North Star) recently explained 10 us “doc frinaires with literary enthusiasms" that a "democratic republic Js nelther @ "panacea" “nor “the most absolutely perfec form of politcal organization. If Mr. Grimm were even slighty acquainted With those doctrines on which our "iterary enthusiasms" rest, he would know that the Social Democrats nourish no luslons what soever about the panacea-like qualities of the"democratie republics ‘To take an example that is not too far afleld, Engels in hile inte. Auction to The Cioit War in France literally says the following “And people think they have taken quite an extraordinarily bold step forward when they have rid themselves of belie! in hereditary monarchy and swear by the democratic republic. In reality. how. ever, the state is nothing but a machine for the oppression of one class by another, and indeed, in the democratic republic no less than in the monarchy, .. ." But while Mr. Grimm pushes forward the shoddy Idea that the essence of the matter Is in the "correct relationships of diferent organs of state power,” given which a monarchy and a republic are equally good, international socialism ‘considers that the fepublle is the only possible form of socialist emancipation—with this coneition, that the proletariat tears It from the hands of the bourgeoisie and transforms it from a "machine for the oppression of one class by another” info a weapon for the socialist emaneipation of humanity 3, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT When the idea of an uninterrupted revolution which links the liquidation of absolutism ‘and serfdom with the socialist revolution, through a series of growing social clashes, the upheaval of new sirata of the masses, and unceasing attacks by the proletariat on the politcal and economle privileges ofthe ruling classes, was Rest formulated in the socialist press, our “progressive’ press gave a lunanimous how! of spite and indignation. It had put up with a Jot, but this was too much! Revolution, it cried, was not « path whieh can be “legitimized.” Exceptional measures are permissible only lm exceptional cireumstanees. The alm of the movement of liberation is not to render the revolution sternal, but to bring it 1s soon as possible into the framework of lax, and so forth, and 80 on. This Is the position of the majority of the so-called “Con stituional Democrats"* and the publicists of this party, Siruve, Gessen, Millukov, who are so tedessly compromising themselves with their every plan, prediedon and warning, rose up long ego agsinst the revolution In the name of the “law” that has alrew. * See Glowsary of Names and Terms 4 een won. Up until the October strike they ted to alter the revo bevdn chy means of lamentations) info the channel ofthe Bly rss "and. procaimed. any diet struggle with the Tater fo be Puving into the hands of reaction. Afr the manifesto of Oster ney eave the revolution & porated check for thr snd a Murmore months (Grom August to October 17) and. magnent moualy adopted the October strike under the name of glorious” Grim order that no one should thine that they hed learned ay {hing they demanded, with amazing rexouredalness tha the tev Ruan petit el tobe putin he Procrustenn bed of Wite's Con- Sittons® and. any kind of dreet sroggle withthe latter they TuGdaimed {to be'Raying Into the hands of tescion. It not MMrprising if thee genemen, who could only extend the ime hint Bie revolution for three monthe post jactun, have sepped fo Slord with danched teeth atthe Aca of @ revolution with no me Timi ar all Only & compet sable constitutional regimes with Intequent elections and, i posible, with exceptional laws against the Social Democrat, with: conventional protests agatnst these Iaws by the liberals, with slcepy oppositional iterations, and Ively Backstage deals al tis On the base of soinerruped apr {alist exploitation of the masses, who have been conaitalonally Iota with thea ofthe monary, merle, fd the imperial army —only such 8 tegitve of law” can rear {eve polliians for all the invuls they Bave sueed and provide them, "at las with a age om which to play "governing roles. Frente have suieiendy dialed thee leaders, have so mercisly Exposed their blindness and impotence, sto have long snes fred soot any obligation to petvon therefor the revoltions ight ‘The leas depraved representatives of this samme democracy do not dare to come out gaint tevottion i the name of already Completed consttionaltonguess> Even for tern, 4 pariamen tary eretnism whieh antispats the appearance of paliamentarism thal doee not sem to be « powerful wenpon in the Auge against the proletarian revolution, They are choosing anther path Wey tive ‘arguing, not on the basis of law, Baton the bass of what Sppeare to Them to be the facto the basis of historical “pos ‘bute on the bass of politcal “reallsm’—eally Binal, ven on the basis of ‘Marsiamn” Why not? Afer aly Antonio, the ous bourgeos of Vite, very acutely remarked Mark you tis, Bassano, ‘he Devil ean ce seripture or his purpose ‘These gentlemen, not infrequently former "Marxists," possessing that precious freedom of spirit which appears only in the absence fof any Kind of integrated world view, are equally eager to hide from the revolutionary conclusions of Marsism under the shelterleita and use that same Marxism agains the revolutionsry aetles of the Social Democracy. They are equally decisive in eee, ing us of slavishly adhering to an obsolete docttine and of funda. ‘mentally betraying the evolutionary theory of Marsisns Uninterrupted revolution? Socialist transformation? But doesn’t Marxism teach that no social form gives way to another beng exhausting its own content, belore developing lis immanent tendege ies fo the maximum? And has Russian capitalism exhausted toln> Or do the Social Democrats think, like aubjectiviets, that tis por, ble fo overcome capitalism by ideological means? And so forty ‘and 0 on. Sometimes the most obdurate liberals, for whom even the Constitutional Democrats aren't moderate enough, take over {hls argument from the former Marxists who ate inclined to guote “the conclusions of holy seripture.” ‘Thus, Mr. Alexander Keulman states with deep seriousness in Potiarnaia Zoecda: “Believing, ‘many of us—in the final triumph of the socialist ldeal, we theak {ogether with Rodbertus,* that contemporary to whom?! humanity 4s not yet mature enough for the ‘promised land of socialion” ana [We are convinced, together with Marx, that the socalization of the ‘means of production ean only flow out of the gradual development wf the productive forees of the country and the people” Thre Me Kaufman, who prays for the success of his cause to Redvers and Mars, to Luther and the Pope, presents a living example of that malicious ignorance whieh liberal erities consiantiy, heare In questions of socialism Capitalism must “exhaust itself before the proletariat can take stale power, What does this mean? Develop the productive fosece 'o @ maximum? Bring the concentration of production to a mast mum? Bui if so, what is this maximum? What acc its objecive characterises? ‘The economic development of the Last decades has shown that {spitalism not only concentrates the main branches of prodaetins in few hands, but also surrounds gigantic economic organise with @ parasitic growth of small Industtial and commercial enter, prises, In agriculture, capitalism sometimes kills small production Outright, transforming the peasant info an agricultural ov indie, {rial laborer, street trader, oF a vagabond, sometimes preerece {he peasant economy, seizing it in an iron grip: somnelimes eeeoee small and even dwart agricultural enterprises, which secore a Peasant labor force for the large landowners. What emerges lore the huge mass of intertwining manifestations and facts of eapliaiet development is this, that the value created by the gigantic ontes, rises that dominate the main branches of social labor contiwally Brows in comparison with the value exeated by the small enter Prites— and in this manner inereasingly facilitates the socaltzaton of the main branches of the economy. But what, in the opinion 16 fof our erltics, must be the percentage relationship between these two stetors of social production, in order for one to say’ that cap italism has exhausted lislf, im’ order for the proletariat to have the right to decide: now the time has come for me to put out my hand and pluck the ripened fruit? ‘Our party does not expect, having taken power, to construct socialism from the depths ofits socialist will; it ean and will rest [te socialist construction only on objective economie development, whieh will not cease, one must assume, when the proletariat comes to power. But the point is—and this is an extremely important a pect of the question that in the firs place, economie development hhas long ago rendered socialism an objectively advantageous so- tial order, and in the second place, economic development does rot at all contain such objectively’ determined moments, which mark the beginning of the time when It Is possible fo enter Upon planned state interference in the elemental evolution with the aitm of crowding out private production with social production ‘To be sure, itis unquestionably teue that the higher the form of capitalist development the proletariat finds when it takes power, the more easily it can cope with its socialist tasks, the more im. mediately it ean set about organizing social production, the short. er—ceteris paribus—will be the period of socialist revolution. But {he point is—and this is another important aspect of the ques. ion—that the choice of the moment’ when it can assume state power does not at all depend on the proletariat itself The class Mruggle, which develops on the basis of capitalist evolution, is just a8 objective a process, with inner tendencies that are just as inevitable, as economic evolution itself, Unfortunately, the logie of the class struggle is incomprehensible ‘o all bourgeois politicians, Including those who flirt with theoretieat Marxism all the more “independently” to strugele with its political expression, the Social Democracy. Every argument that proceeds {com the rdationships ofthe class struggle glides off theit conscious. ness as it would from polished glass. They have laboriously mem- ‘rized some isolated propositions of the Marxist theory of capital: {st development, but they” remain primitive bourgeois barbarians Wwhen'it comes to anything that concerns the class struggle and ite ‘objective logie. When they appeal to “objective social development” 4m answer to the idea of uninterrupted revolution, which is & eon clusion we have drawn from social and political relations, they fare forgetting that this development includes not only economic evolution, which they understand in @ superficial way, but also the revolutionary logic of class relationships, which they cannot ‘even bear to think about ‘The Social Democracy has both the duty and the desire to be ‘the conscious expression of objective developments. But once the nobjective development of the class struggte places before the pro. Ietariat the revolutionary alternative of taking upon itself the righty and duties of state power or of abandoning its class position, the Social Democracy makes the conquest of state power its nex! order of business. At the same time It docs not in the least ignote ob Jective processes of development of @ deeper nature, the processes of growth and concentration of production, but it says: if the logge ofthe class struggle, which ress, In thefinal analysis, on the course of economic development, pushes the proletariat toward a dictator, ship before the bourgeoisie has “exhausted” its economic tasks (It hhas hardly even started its politieal tasks), then that only means that history has burdened the proletariat with problems of colossel difficulty. Perhaps the proletariat will even succumb in the struggle and collapse under their weight—that may be. But it cannot te- fuse t0 face them, on pain of class disintegration and the descent of the whole county into barbarism, 4. THE REVOLUTION, THE BOURGEOL LETARIAT The revolution is not a top to be whipped around with « string, But it also is not an obedient Red Sea, which a Moses of liberal- Im ean part with a blow of a rod or a shout. When we speak of an uninierrupted revolution, we are not proceeding from a dis- inclination on our part to lead the workers’ movement into the mits of "law" (what kind of law? the law of the autoesaey” of Witte? of Durnovo? the legislative proposals of Struve? what law?), we proceed from our analysis of clase relations ln the developing revolutionary struggle We have made this analysis dozens of times. We have approached the question fom all sides. Each time the facts have jusiied our analysis. Bourgeois politicians and pub- Iests have grumbled against us alot, butmot once have they tried to answer us in substance, For the last year, the revolution, which has displayed a colossal supply of energy and indefatigability, has nonetheless failed to develop a single state institution as an actual support of "roe. doms" and “guarantees.” The Duma of August 6 was killed. ‘The Duma of October 17 to December 11 is doomed to disaster, The liberals, who allthis ime have been patiently waiting for the moun tain of the revolution to give birth to a mouse stand back in horror before the "rulllessness” of the revolution. But meanwhile, the revolution has a right to be proud of this “rullessnesey It is only the external expression of iis internal strength. Each ume absolutism makes an attempt fo enter into an ayeeement with the Aisconcerted representatives of the possessing classes and, having settled with them, begins to draw constitutional blueprints, a new evolutionary wave, ineomparably more powerful than all the AND THE PRO. 18 preceding ones, washes out the drawings and throws back oF Spams the bureaucratic and liberal draftsmen. "The bourgeoisie is not capable of leading the people to the con- quest of a parliamentary order by mean of the overthrow of Ghsolutism. But the people, in the person of the proletariat, pre- Cent the bourgeoisie from achieving constitutional guarantees by ineans of agreement with absolutism, Bourgeois democracy ix not Capable of leading the proletariat, for the proletariat has matured {oo far to follow after it; it wants to lead the bourgeoisie after Ise And democracy Is proving even more impotent than liberal ism, Like liberalism, itis eut off feom the people, but It does not hhave the social advantages of the bourgeoisie. Its insignificant, "The proletariat is the only leading and the main fighting force fof the revolution. It Is in command of the fed of battle, and it is hot sitlsed, nor will it be satisfled, with any concession, With breathing spells and temporary retreats it will ead the revolution to-a vietory which will transfer power to i We will not attempt at this point to demonstrate this on the basis of the facts of the last year, we refer the reader to the Social Demo Cratie Mterature ofthis period.** Here we wil pause for only one illustration of the inner impo- tence of the bourgeoisie in the struggle for a parliamentary order, Popular representation, as the price of an agreement between the bourgeoisie and the monarchy, as well as # continuous arena for ‘making such agreements, Is killed by the revolution every time It is ready to be born. Another historical institution of bourgeoss revolutions was killed in the very embryo, or to be more precise, at conception. This isthe citizens’ militia, ‘The militia (national guard) was the frst slogan and the first conquest of all revolutions—in 1788 and 1848 in Paris, in all the THallan states, in Vienna and Berlin. In 1848, the national guard that is, the arming of the possessing and "educated classes) was the slogan ofall the bourgeois oppositions, eventhe most moderat ‘and had the task not only of preserving the conquests or "grants™ ff freedoms from subversion from above, but also of protecting bourgeois property from the attempts of the proletariat, Thus the milla was a clear class demand of the bourgeoisie, “The Ital- Jans knew well” says a liberal English historian of the unifica- tion of Haly, “that the arming of a eltizen guard made despotism henceforth impossible. ‘To the propertied classes, too, it was a guarantee against possible anarchy and all the turbulence that $s For example, ovr brochure Up to the Ninth of January, and etpe. clally Comrade Parvus’s introduction Further, we eter the reader 10 fetain artes in Nachalo and aleo to my lattoddcion to Laseale’s Speech to the Jury, This iowodueton, writen in July 1905, has had a ‘complicated fate and is only now appearing in print 19was working below the surface” (Bolton King, A History of Italian Unity, Russian translation, Moscow, 1901, vol. I, p. 220). And the ruling reaction, not having suflicent military force at its dis- posal, in the centers of activity to deal with “anarchy,” that ts, fhith the revolutionary masses, armed the bourgeoisie. Absolutism Iirst permed the burghers to suppress and pacify the workers, ‘and then disarmed and pacified the burghers themselves, Tn our country, the militia as a slogan hat no support at all ‘among the bourgeols partes, It is Impossible that the liberals do fnol understand in substanee the importance of being armed: abso Iutism has given thems few object lessons on this subject. But they also understand the complete impossibility of a militia with bout the prolelarlat and against the proletariat in our conditions ‘The Rustian workers but litle retemble the workers of 1848, who stutled their pockets with stones and carried anything they could Tay their hands on, at the same time that the shopkeepers, stu ents, and lawyers had royal muskets on their shoulders and sabers at thei sides. Tn Russia, to. arm the revolution means above all to arm the workers. Knowing this and fearing i, the liberals completely give Up the mils, They abandon this position to absolutism without ft battle as ‘Thiers abandoned Paris and France to Bismarck, father than sem the workers ‘In the collection Constitutional Government, that manifesto of the Iiberal-democratie coalition, Mr. Dthivelegov, considering the pos sibility of an overturn of the government, quite correctly says that "when necessary, society itself must show its readiness to rise fo the defense of its constitation.” And since the demand to arm the people flows naturally from this, the liberal philosopher con- Siders it "necessary to add” that {0 repel coups d'etat "itis not at Sal necessary thal everyone have weapons handy.” It is only nec- essary that society iielf Is ready to give rebuff By what means is unknown. If anything is clear from this subterfuge, it is only this—that in the hearts of our democrats the fear of the armed proletariat overpowers the fear of the soldiers of the autocraey. Tn the same manner, the task of arming the revolution falls ‘with all ts weight on the proletariat. And the citizen's militia, the ‘dass demand of the bourgeoisie of 1848, appears in our country from the very beginning asa demand {© arm the people and fabove all, the proletariat, The whole destiny of the Russian rev lution comes to bear on this question. 5. THE PROLETARIAT AND THE PEASANTRY ‘The frst tasks which will face the proletariat immediately upon lis conquest of power will be poltieal tasks: to consolidate Its position, arm the revolution, disarm reaction, widen the base of 20 the revolution, reconstruc the state. In the fulfilment of these tasks, particularly the last, the experience of the Paris Commune will not be forgotten by the Russian proletariat, The abolition of the stand: Ing army and the police, the arming of the people, the dispersion of the mandarin bureaucracy, the establishment of the principle ff election of all functionaries, the equalization of their salaries, the separation of church and state— these are the measures whieh, from the example of the Commune, Is necessary to earry through al the very beginning, ‘The proletariat will not, however, be able to consolidate its power without having widened the base of the revolution itself. Many layers of the working masses, eapecially In the countryside, will, be drawn into the revolution and receive political organization om ly afer the vanguard of the revolution, the urban proletariat, stands at the helm of state. Revolutionary agitation and organiza: tion will be conducted with the help of state resources. Finally, the legislative power itself will become a powerful weapon for the revolutionization of the popular masses. In addition to ths, the character of our social-istorical situation, which Ioads the whole burden of the bourgeois revolution on the Shoulders of the proletariat, will not only create enormous diff Cullis for the workers’ government, but will also give It priceless fadvantages, This will tell in the relationship between the proletariat and the peasantry. ‘In the revolutions of 17891793 and 1848, the power at frst pasted over from absolutism {0 the moderate ements of the bour- ieeoisie; the latter liberated the peasantry (how is another question) before the revolutionary democracy received oF was preparing to receive power in its own hands, The peasants, who had been freed from séridom, lost all Interest in the political enterprises of the Mownsmen,” that is, in the further course of the revolution; and lying as an immobile stratum at the base of “order,” they gave the revolution over to Caesarist of traditional absolutist reaction. The Russian revolution, as has already been said, does not permit the eslablishment of any kind of bourgeois constitutional brder capable of solving the most primitive tasks of democracy. [As far ae reformer-bureaucrats of the style of Wite are concerned, fall their enlightened efforts are being ruined by their own struggle for existence. As a result of thls, the fate of the most elementary revolutionary Interests of the peasantry-—even of the whole peas- laniry as an estate—is linked to the fate of the whole revolution, that is, to the fate of the proletariat The. proletariat in poser will appear before the peasantry as a Liberating class. Tike the Commune, st will have the full right to proclaim to the peasants: “Our victory Is your vielory.”‘The rule ofthe proletariat will mean notonly émocratic equally, free self-government, the transfer ofall the weighot the tax burdes fonto the possessing classes, the dissolution of te standing army Into the armed people, and the abolition of evapulsory contribu, tions fo the church, but also the recognition of aline revolutionasy Feshullings (seizures) that have been carried ou by the peasants in land relations. ‘The proletariat will make thee reshuflings the point of departure for further state measures inne aphere of aut! culture. Under sueh conditions the Russian peosntry will in any event have no less of an Interest—from the ver beginning, ducing, the first, most difficult period—in the support of the proletarian regime (workers' democracy), than the French pusans hed in the support of the military regime of Napoleon Bonaparte, which guaranteed to the new property owners, by ie strength of Is Dayonets, the inviolability of thelr parcels of land And this means that popular representation, convened under th lendership of the proletariat which has secured the support of te peasantry, will be nothing other than a democratic form of there of woskers democracy, But could not the peasantry itself crowd out the proletariat and ‘occupy its place? This is impossible. All historia Crperience pro. tests against this proposition. It shows that the peasuetry ls Come pletely Incapable of an independent politcal role ** The history of capitalism is the history of the subordination of the country to the lly. In due time, the industral development of the European cities rendered impossible the further exletonce of feudal relations in the sphere of agricultural production, But the countryside itself did not bring forth a clase which could cope With the revolutionary task of the destruction of udalisn, It was the selfsame city, which subordinated agriculture to capital, that developed the revolutionary forces which established polineal hege: mony over the villages and propagated in then a revolution ie Sate and property relationships, With further devaopment the cour + Are not these considerations, and subsequent one, refued by the fact of the rise and development of the "Peasaris’ Unont= Net the least, What isthe ‘Peasants’ Union?” The uniiealon of seta enone ofthe radical democracy, who are seeking the masses, wth the woe cone scious elements of the pessantry—apparendy not is lowest strata Ihe name of a democratie overturn aud agrarian ter However quickly the "Peasants! Union’ may sow, there ls not the slight ft doubt that iis extremely far feom becoming the poise orucnleedon ofthe peasant masses, The revolution is procteding et such & tees thet, it is impossible to expect aside from all other consideratons. thet the “Peasonts' Unioa” could, by the tie of the final overthsee of abeotioes and the transfer of power into the hands of th tevoluicn besome ¢ ee bus competion of the organized proletariat. Ia addition, meet gor be forgotten that the mein eevoluionary engagements are taking lace mete tryside falls into economic bondage to capital, and the peasantry Into. politcal bondage to the bourgeois parties "These resurrect feudalism in parliamentary polties, transforming the pessantry into thelr politcal domain and thelr electoral hunting ground. ‘The contemporary bourgeois state pushes the peesant into the rmaw of usurers’ capital through taxes and militarism, and by ‘means of sate press state schools, and barracks depravity, makes him a vielim of usurious policy ‘The Russian bourgeoisie will abandon all its revolutionary pos: tions to the proletariat, It will also be forced to abandon its hese mony over the peasaitry, In the situation that wil be ereated by the transfer of power to the proletariat the peasantry will have no alternative but {o adhere to the regime of workers’ democracy Seven iF it does so with no more consciousness than it usually shows in adhering to the bourgeois rexime. But while every bour- sgeois party, when it has acquired the votes of the peasantey, has fens to use its power to plunder the peasantry and deeeive it In all expectations and. promises, and then, as the worst expected venaliy ve way to another capitals partys the polar when supported by the peasantry, will set in motion every force for the Scevation of the caltral Teel of te village nd the Geveiopment of {he politcal consciousness of the peasants Marx says, regarding’ the prejudice of the French peasant how could it have withstood the appeal of the Commune to the living interests and urgent wants of the peasentry? The Rurals —this was, In fact, their chief apprehension — knew that theee months’ free communication of Communal Paris with the provinees would bring about © general rising of the peasants, and hence their anxiety to establish a police blockade around Paris, #0 as 10 stop the apread ofthe rinderpest” rom everything that bat been said, i is clear how we took upon the idea of the “dictatorship of the proletariat and the peas- antzy.” The essence of the matter is not in whether we consider I. “Gies—and hat alone astigae to the Peasanié Unio the role of te Susliaty military doechment, whith ase etermines space on the at of pli forces ‘A fo tne agrerian program ofthe “Peasants! Unio? Cequaity of land se), which conse the reason fort erste, it neces) fo ty the folowing The wider ana deeper the developmen ofthe agrarian move Ime the sooner Ware a conflation: and redistribution, the more ‘quickly the "Peasants’ Union” will disintegrate by vietue of thousands of Sis oct, eatoray and techeleal cnteciions. le members wl have tht share of Invent inthe peanenfcommntes, the organs of the aver tan’ revolution in the locates bu of couse te peasant comme, tconomicadminstratice natitatons, cannot abalh ‘hat pica depen dence of the vllage on the cy, which consates one ofthe basi Ca tetera of conenporary soe 2‘The rule ofthe proletariat will mean notonly democratic equa free salf government, the transer of ahs weight ofthe tax burt, nto the posessng lasses, the Soliton ofthe standing arm tla the armed people, and the abolion of eompulsory cong tis tthe churen, Du lg the recogaion ofall he sevolionesy featullings (anzuses) that have been cari out by he peasy In'lund teatone. The proletariat will make these reefing the point of departure fr finer state measures inthe sphere of ag Entre: Under such conditions the Russian pestontty wil Ia any ven have no les ofa Interent irom the very beginning, doreg the tt, most affieul perlod™in the support of the prolelarag Fegime (workers democracy), than the French peasants had in the apport of the wlltary regime of Napoleon, Bonapart, whieh Guaranteed 10" the ew property owners, by the strength of te Sasonets the invilebilty”of their paresis ofan. And this meane that popular representation, convened under te leadership of tne proletariat whieh Bas secured the support of the peasanty, wil Ee nothing ter thana democratic frm of the rule of workery democracy But could not the peasanity itself crowd out the proletariat and aceupy is place? This is Impossible. All historical experience pro teas againat tis proposition, It shows thatthe peasant is com: ety leapable of an Independent potieal role * “The history of captain i the history ofthe subordination of the county tothe ty. In'due time, the industrial development of the Buropean «les fendered impossible the further exitence of frodal rleuons in the sphere of agriatural production, ut the Countryside ill aid not bring forth a cast which could cope with the revolutionary task of the destruction of feudalism. twas the sfsame ety, which subordinated agriculture 10 capital, tat developed the revolutionary forees which established polieal hex Imony ‘over the villages thd propagated In them a revoton state and property #lationships, With further development the coun: “Are not these considerations, and subsequent ones, refit by the fact of the rise and development of the “Peasants” Union?” Not in the least, What fa the "Peasants" Union?” The unifestion of certain elements ff the radial democracy, who aro secking the marscy, with the more Con ious elements ofthe peasantry apparently not its lowest strata In the ‘peme of a demorate overturn and agrarian Flor “However quickly the"Peasants Union may grow, there is not the sight est doubt that i ls extemely Tar from becoming the politcal organiealion Sf te peasant mee, The Tevolution ix proceeding at such & tempo that {is impossible to expect aside {rom al other considerations thet the Peasants’ Uiaioa” could, by the time of the nal overthrow of absolutism find the transfer of power into the hands of the revolution, becomme ase ‘us competitor of the organized. proltaiat In addition, it must not be Focwetten that the main revolutionary engagements are taking place Inthe 22 rie fas nto economie Bondage to capital andthe peasanry ire eal bondage fo the bourgeols partes. These fesreet 1 es patiamentacy polls, (ansforming the peasantty fade ollie domain end thie cecora hunting around © tee gpoorary Bourgeois, sale pusher the peasant ino the aa eo era capital tough taxes and rifarsm, and DY me of state priet, state schools, and barsacks depravity, makes Aiba vies of usurious poliey m8 oaatan bourgeois will sbandon al its revolutionary post oa Eee proeartae, It wl aso befored to abandon is hege toms 00a Qe peaaantey tn he ituation that wil be created m0" ie of power to the proletariat the peasantry wll have ihe guamtve bal To adhere tothe rime of workers’ democracy ae ert docs wo wih, no. more consciousness than X usually {ut in adhering tothe Bourges come. Bu while every Bout 2 reat ahora acqlted he votes ofthe peasantry, hase eo are power (0 plunder the peasantty and deceive in to Goccaons tnd promises, and then, as the worst expected a snes ave way to another capitalist party the proletariat, when renal fy th peasantry. wil atin motion every Force fo tbe care of the eltural level of the village and the development of the altel conscious of te peasais Sasso negarding, the. prejudice of the French peasant ne reg have withsiood the appeal of the Commune to jhe in imerest and urgent sans ofthe peasaniry? The Rurals aa ee eseye tac tht. chet apprehension — ew that thtee srctlby ace commuication of Communal Paris with tbe provinces ont sing about a general sing of the peasants, aad hence wears alts to catablish a police blockede around Paris, $0 a8 0 Slop the apeeaof the rinderpest.” Fe erasing that has been said, its clear how we look apa Uie of the “ctatorship ofthe proletariat and the peas thence of the mater isnot Im whether we consider it Se ind at alone asigne wo the ‘Teasnis Union the role ofthe ane aaracy dave, which also determines He place onthe Seale of ple forces, praia ptogram ofthe “Peasans’ Union? Cequaity of land wus en gen cnn ‘ee fulling ‘The wer and Sesper the developmen ofthe agrarian move tne fll Te Warives at confscsion and rediebulion, the more a eectane’ Union wil inegrte by virtue of thousands of eh he Cael, an technealcontasicuone te members wil have Sha farce ys eae eee ae eee tocar but of course tne pensan commits, 1a rane istaons, canaot abolish that puta depen. Faerie aie on he ey, wher consttaes one ofthe base chat eters of contemporary sockpermissible in principle, whether we “want” or “don't want” such 4 form of politcal cooperation. But we consider it unrealizase at least i @ direct and immediate sense. In reality, a coalition of thie type presupposes either that one of the existing bourgeois parties gains mastery over the peasantiye fof that the peasantry creates iis own powerful party. Neither oo nor the other, as we have attempted to show, is possible Nevertheless, the dictatorship of the proletartat will undoubtedly Fepresent all the progressive, valid interests of the peasantry — ant not omly the peasantry, but also the petty Bourgeoisie and the intel ligentsa.*. . The Commune,’ says Marx, "was thus the true repre, sentative of all the healthy elements of French society, and thereiore the truly national government” But it was stl the dictatorship ofthe protetariat. 6. METHODS AND AIMS OF THE DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT. The dictatorship of the proletariat in no way signifies the dicta: torship of the revolutionary organization over the proletariay, bat 8 dictatorship over the whole of society through the proletariat ‘Ang this is best ofall shown by the Paris Commune. ‘The Viennese revolution in March 1848 was dominated by the students, who were the only part of bourgeois soclety sill capable of @ firm revolutionary policy. The proletariat, which lacked eohe, sion, politcal experience, and independent leadership, followed the students. At all critical moments, the workers invariably fered the “genllemen who work with their heads’ the help of those whe "work with thelr hands” ‘The students would sometimes summon the work. €F8, at other times block their path out of the suburbs, Somedim: by virtue of their political authority, which was backed up by the ‘weapons of the Academie Legion, they forbade the workers to come ut with thelr own independent demands, This was a classically lear form of @ benevolent revolutionary dictatorship over the proletariat, Jn the Paris Commune, everything was based on the political independence of the workers. The Central Committee of the Ne ional Guard warned the proletarian electorate of the Commune not to forget that only those people who were elected from the ‘midst of the workers themselves would serve them well “Avold the property owners," wrote the Central Committee, “Yor it is an extremely rare occurrence, when a person who ls well-off is inclined to consider a worker as his brother.” The Commune was the execu- tive commitee of the proletariat — the National Guard, ils army — the officials, its responsible servants, This was the dictatorship of fan working class of 1906 is completely unlike the Pa ve nes oie an of mee No. these are organs which are planned creations of that mas ‘abolishing the right of inheritance and to carry this law into prac- 26expropriation without comp but political dial ical difieuttes will be the economic and urganlsational aifg We repeat: a government of the proletariat dee not means get ‘ernment of miracles. {The socialization of production will begin with thse branches which present the least fcles, Inthe fest period the soctaieet Sector of production will have the appearance of oases con with private economic enterprises by the laws of commodinn et change. The larger the fel thats already occupied by the seek, lzed economy, the more obvious wil be is advantages, ine eas stable the new politcal regime will fl, and the bold will be age further economic measures of the proletariat. i Inese easier e will ray not only on the national productive foress; but alee ac {ternational technique, in much the tame Way asl tales ian revolutionary policy, not only on the immediately given aatoney Glass relations, but also on the whole hislrieal experience of mt International proletariat. More than that — possessing the power which the revolution ‘has provided it, the Russian proletariat will do everyining ton circumstances Indicate to link immediately and dineely. he feat of its national cause with the cause of world social *¢ Ta 4s not only demanded by the general international principles of Proletarian policy-the powerful voice of clase seltpreseiraton Wil fore Ito enter tis path, ‘The Russian proletariat will not be thrown back; it will be able to carry its great cause 10 its conclusion, only wader one cone tion that it knows how to break out of the national framonork of ve great revolution and make it the prologue to the world wie tory oflabor. tion offers financial advanta s. But greater than elther the nancial or pelt ‘St Petersburg, December 1905 THE PARIS COMMUNE Revolution has often followed war in history In ordinary times the working masses ‘oll from day to das @ocilely performing their slave labor, bowing to the arent fone Neither overseers nor police, neither jailkerpers wor executloners could hold the masses in subjection were i nat ioe this habit.which does faithful service to eapitalisn, ‘+ We spoke in general terms about the inernational perspectives of the ‘evolution inthe abovementioned introduction fo Lassellessoecc 26 1 | ‘The war which tortures and destroys the masses is dangerous to the rulers as well— precisely because with a single blow it teere the people from their habitual condition, awakens with ity thunder the most backward and dark elements, and compels them to take sock of themselves, and to look around WAR AND REVOLUTION Impelling millions of tolles into the Names, the rulers are obliged to resort fo promises and lies in place of habit. The bourgeoisie pts up its war with all those traits which are dear to the mag hnanimous soul of the masses: the war Is for *Liberly.* for “dustiees for a "Better Life"! Sirting the mastes to thelr nethermost depths, the war invariably ends by duping them: it brings them nothing except new wounds and chains. For this reason the tense condition ‘of the duped masses produced by the war often leads to an explo sion against the rulers; war gives birth fo revolution ‘This happened iwelve years ago during the Russo-Japanese War i immediately aggravated the dissatisfaction of the people and led to the revolution of 1905. This happened in France forty-six years ago. The Franco-Prus sian War of 1870-1871 led to the uprising of the workers and the creation of the Paris Commune. THE COMMUNE, The Parisian workers were armed by the bourgeois government land organized into a National Guard for the defense of the capital fagainst the German troops. But the French bourgeoisie stood in ‘greater fear of its own proletarians than of the troops of Hoher sollern. After Paris had capitulated, the Republican government attempted (0 disurm the workers. But the war had already awake ‘ened in them the spirit of rebellion. They did not want to return to ther benches the selfsame workers they had been prior to the was, ‘The Parisian proletarians refused to let the weapons out of their hands. A clash took place between the armed workers and the regiments of the government. This occurred on March 18, 1871 The workers were victorious; Paris was in their hands, and on March 28 they established, in the capital, « proletarian government, known as the Commune The latter did not long maintain iself. Alter a heroie resistance, on May 28, the last defenders of the Com ‘mune fell before the onslaught of bourgeois cohoris. Then ensued weeks and months of bloody reprisals upon the pactcipante in the proletarian revolution. But, despite its brief existence, the Com ‘mune has remained the greatest event in the history of the prole ‘arian struggle. For the fist time, on the basis of the experience of the Parisian workers, the world. proletariat was able to see whatthe profetarian recolution is, what are its aims, and whi lt rmust pursue paths ‘THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE COMMUNE ‘The Commune began by confieming the election ofall forelgners to the workers’ government. 1 proclaimed that: "The banner of the ‘Commune is the banner of a World Republle” i purged the state and the school of religion, abolished capital punishment, pulled down the Column of the Vendome (the me, ‘morial to chauvinism), transferred all duties and posts o genuing servants of the people, setting thelr salary ata level not exceeding a workingman's wage It began a census of factories and mills, closed by frightened capitaliss, in order to initiate production on a social basis. Tala was the frst step towards the socialist organization of economic Me The Commune did not achieve its proposed measures: it ws crushed. The French bourgeoisie, with the cooperation ofits "a onal enemy" Bismarck —ieho immediately became its clase ally =drowned in blood the uprising of its real enemy: the working class. The plans and tasks of the Commune did not nd thelr realization. But instead they found their way into the hearts of the best sons of the proletariat In the entire world. They became the revolutionary covenants of our struggle. ‘And today, on March 18, 1917, the image of the Commune appears belore us more clearly than ever before; for, after a gecat lapse of time, we have once again entered into the epoch of great revolutionary’ battles THE WORLD WAR The world war has torn tens of millions of tollers out of the ‘habitual conditions under which they labor and vegetate. Up to ‘ow this has been the case only in Europe; tomorrow we shall see the same thing in America as well. Never before have the Working masses been given such promises, Never before have such rainbows been painted for them, Never have they been 40 Mlatiered as during this war. Never before have the possessing ‘lasses dared (0 demand 30 much blood from the people in the ame of defending the lie which goes by the name of ‘Defense of ‘the Fatherland." And never before have the tollers been so duped, betrayed, and crucified as today. In tenches filled with blood and mud, in starving cites and villages, millions of hearts are beating with exasperation, despals, land anger. And these emotions, correlated with socialist ean, #20 being transformed into revolutionary’ fervor. Tomorrow the flames will burst into the open in mighty uprisings of working masses, “Thé proletariat of Russia has already emerged onto the great road cf revolution, and under It Impact are tumbling and erum- bting the foundations of the moat infamous derpotiem the world hee seen, The revolulion in Rusela, however, ieonly the precursor Sf prolearian uprisings tn the whole of Europe and in te entre world ‘Remember the Commune! we socalss will say to the insurgent workers” masses. The bourgeoisie has armed you ogainat sn ex feraal enemy. efuse_to return your weapons, lke the Parsian Workers refused in 1671! Heed the appeal of Karl Liebknecht and {um these weapons against your real enemy, againat capitalism! ‘Tear the late machinery from ther hands! Transform Krom the Instument of bourgeois oppression into an apparatus of prale {arian aelérule, Today, you are intel more powerful than were Your forsiathere. in the epoch of the Commune, Tumble all the parasites fom thelr thrones! Seize the land, the mines, and the {actors for your own use. Fraternity in labor, equalty —in en- Joying the fruits of Labor! "the banner of the Commune isthe banner ofthe World Republic of Labor. [New York, March 17, 1917 THE PARIS COMMUNE AND SOVIET RUSSIA ‘The short episode of the first revolution carried out by the proletariat for the proletariat ended in the triumph of its enemy. ‘This eplsode—teom March 18 to May 28—lasted seventy-two days. ~The Paris Commune of March 18, 1871, P-L. Lavrov, Petrograd, Kolos Publishing House, 1919, SOCIALIST ‘THE IMMATURITY OF THE PARTIES IN THE COMMUNE ‘The Paris Commune of 1871 was the first, as yet weak, historie attempt of the working class to impose its supremacy. We cherished the memory of the Commune in spite ofthe extremely limited char acter ofits experience, the immaturity ofits participants, the conti: ‘lon of its program, the lack of unity amonget its leaders, the indecision of their plans, the hopeless panic ofits executive organs, and the terrifying defeat fatally precipitated by all these. We eherish jn the Commune, in the words of Lavrov, "he fist, though sill eypale, dawn ofthe prolitanian repli Quite otherase with Ka thy. Devoing w couierale pur of his book o's cada eee tous contrast between the Corhmune and he Sov panes, Mee, the main adestages ofthe Commune In features at we ale {Wvortune and faut Kouhy tabortoaly proves thatthe Paris Commune of 1871 was nol vals" prepared, bu emerged unerpecealy. tlaeg the revolutionaries by murpie—in conta tthe Otobes Reson tiny which was early prepared by our pay. Ta incon abie, Nat daring leary fo formulate hs prauncly meacionets ideas, Kauthy doesnot any teh wheter he Fars Feral this of 1871 deserve prase for nothaving aren the pokes insurecton, for nt having freuen ie inevitable a Gascony fone to mee However: ll Rauay' pleure mas bal ap tick ny to rode In he eae new te Ce Sunarde were slmply overtaken by misfortue (ihe Bavarian pole iting Vollmer, once exprescd his reget tnt the Commune had hot gone to bed Intend of taking power ino thr hese And theatre deerve ply. The Boley consouny wea inet mifortne (he conguet of paves) and, helo, ee te, forgivenese for them tier nin or the ture wou Sack 2 formulation ofthe question may seem Inereibe ne nto incomsiseny. Nonethelesy it follows ute Inevitably toe te Penton ofthe Kaulaksan “odependens” who draw thet ade tho ther shoulder In order to ead forsee nthngy had they do move forward tony afer havingteeed ten say Sou low nthe rer “To umlate Paria wits Kaulsh, “not gve 1 slegoveen ment, to deprive of ie poston at capital to dinar it ce {Merwards to tempt ih getter conden a monaccunteeey {iat such was the moa important ask afte National Areas tnd te elt ofthe execu power i eee, Tara Osta ae Suton row the confit which led tothe Pats seiceog tis clear how iferet fom tis was the character of the coup 4a carved ut bythe Bolheviky which sew ts aeons fo the yearning for peace wich nad he peasant bond Se whe haa nthe Nona Asem age nt momar at Ss thd Mershovk Soca Demerras “The Bolsheviks cameo, power by meant of wellprepared coup wet hich atone Mow handed oer t tem he ohoks machinery" of the ate immediately uilzed In he mow oer tha: merieas manner forthe purpose of suppresing thr eee Dnt amon! them thee proeatan opponent "No one-om thee hand, wae mare surpaed by the Snwrree ton af the Commute than he revolutionaries females, ast 30 | A 1 considerable number amongst them the conflict was in the highest dlegree undesirable” in order more clearly to realize the actual tense of what Kautsky has written here of the Communards, let us bring forward the fo: owing evidence: “On March 1, 1871 writes Lavroy, In his very instructive book fon the Commune, “six month alter the fall of the Empire, and a few days belore the explosion of the Commune, the guiding per sonaliies in the Paris International sfill had no definite political program.” “Aer March 187 writes the same author, "Paris was in the hands ‘of the proletariat, but its leaders, overwhelmed by their unexpected power, did not take the most elementary measures” "Your partis too big for you to play, and your sole aim is to set rid of responsibilty,” sald one member of the Central Com fnittee of the National Guard, In this was a great deal of trut writes the Communaed and historian of the Commune, Lissagaray. "But at the moment of action ieell the absence of preliminary orga nization and preparation is very offen a reason why parts are ‘assigned to men which are too big for them to play.” From this one can already see (later om it will become still more obvious) that the absence of a direct struggle for power on the part ff the Paris socialists was explained by their theoretical shapeless ness and politieal helplessness, and not at all by higher considers tions of tacts. We have no doubt that Kautsky's own loyalty to the traditions of the Commune will be expressed mainly in that extraordinary surprise with which he will grest the proletarian revolution in Get ‘many as "a conilict In the highest degree undesirable” We doubs, however, whether this wil be aseribed by posterity to his eredit In reality, one must describe his historical analogy as a combina tion of confusion, omission, and fraudulent suggestion ‘The intentions which were entertained by Thiers towards Paris were entertained by Millukov, mho was openly supported by Teere- tell and Chernov, towards Petrograd. All of them, from Kornilov to Ptressov, © affirmed day after day that Petrograd had alienated self from the country, had nothing in common with t, was com- pletely corrupted, and was attempting to impose Its will upon the Community. To overthrow and humiliate Petrograd was the Best task of Millukov and his aasistants. And this took place at @ period when Petrograd was the true center of the revolution, which had rot yet been able to consolidate its position in the rest of the coun lay, ‘The former president of the Duma, Rodzianko, openly talked about handing over Petrograd to the Germans for educative pu poses, as Riga had been handed over. Rodslanko only called by atits name what Miliukov was trying to carry out, and what Ker- ensky assisted by his whole policy. Miliukov, like Thiers, wished to disarm the proletariat. More than that, thanks to Kerensky, Chernov, and ‘Tseretelli, the Petro- ‘grad proletariat was to a considerable extent disarmed in July 1917. Tt was partially rearmed during Kornilov's march on Petr grad in August. And this new arming was a serious element in the preparation of the October insurrection, In this way, itis just the points in which Kautsky contrasts our October Revolution to the March revolt of the Faris workers that, 10 a very large extent, colneide Th what, however, lies the difference between them? First of all, i the fact that Thiers’ eriminal plans succeeded: Paris was throtled bby him, and tens of thousands of workers were destroyed. Millukov, fon the other hand, had a complete faseo: Petrograd remained an impregnable fortress of the proletariat, and the leader of the bour- ieoisie went t0 the Ukraine to petition that the Kaiser's troops should occupy Russia, For this dflerence we were to a considerable textent responsible and we ate ready to bear the responsiblity. ‘There is a capital difference also in the fact—this told more than conce in the further course of events that, while the Communards began mainly with considerations of patriotism, we were invariably fuided by the point of view of the international revolution. The feleat of the Commune led to the practical collapse of the Firet International. The victory of the Soviet power has led to the erea- tion of the Third International. But Marx—on the eve of the insurrection— advised the Com- ‘munards not to revolt, But to create an organization! One might lunderstand Kautaky if he adduced this evidenee in order to show that Marx had insuliciently gauged the acuteness of the situation in Paris. But Kavtsky attempts to exploit Marx's advice a8 a proof ff his condemnation of insurrection in general. Like all the man daring of German Social Democracy, Kautsky sees in organization First and foremost @ method of hindering revolutionary action, But limiting ourselves to the question of organization as such, we must not forget that the October Revolution was preceded by nine months of Kerensky’s government, during whieh our party, rot without success, devoted itself not only to agitation, but also to organisation, The October Revolution took place afler we had achieved a crushing majority in the Workers’ and Soldiers’ Coun fils of Petrograd, Moscow, and all the industrial centers in the ‘country, and had transformed the soviets into powerful organiza. tions directed by our party. The Communards did nothing of the kkind. Finally, we had behind us the heroic Commune of Pari from the defest of which we had drawn the deduction that revolu 2 tlonaries must foresee events and prepare for them. For this also. wwe are to blame, Kautsky requires his extensive comparison of the Commune and Soviet Russia only in order to slander and humiliate a living land vietorious dictatorship of the proletariat in the interests of an attempted dictatorship, inthe already fairly dstant past. Kaulsky quotes with extreme satisfaction the statement of the Central Committee of the National Guard on March 19 in con: nection with the murder of the two generals by the soldiery. We say indignantly: the bloody Mth with the help of which itis hoped to stain our honoris a pitiful slander. We never organized murder, nd never did the National Guard take part in the execution of faturally, the Central Committee had no cause to assume respon: sibility for murders with which it had no concern. But the sent ‘mental, pathetic tone of the statement very clearly characterizes the political imorousness of these men in the face of bourgeois public opinion. Nor Is this surprising. The representatives of the National Guard were in most eases men with a very modest revo lutionary past. "Not one wellknown name.” writes Lissageray “They were petty-b clzele, and, in most "The modest and, to some extent, fearful sense terrible historical responsibility, and the desire to get rid of it ax soon as possible.” wiles Lavrov of them, "ls evident In all the proclamations of this Central Commitee, into the hands of which the destiny of Paris had fallen” ‘After bringing forward, to our confusion, the declamation con: cerning bloodshed, Kautsky later on follows Marx and Engels in criticizing the indecision of the Commune. "I the Parisians (i-e, the Communards) had persistently followed up the tracks of Thiers, they would, perhaps, have managed to seize the government. The ‘oops falling back from Paris would not have shown the least resistance... but they let Thiers go without hindrance. They allowed him to lead away his troops and reorganize them at Ver- salle, to inspive @ new spirit in, and strengthen, them.” Kautsky cannot understand that it was the same men, and for the very same reasons, who published the statement of March 19 quoted above, who allowed Thiers to leave Paris with impunity find gather his forees. If the Communards had conquered with the help of resources of a purely moral character, their siatement would have acquired great weight. But thie did not take place. In reality, their sentimental humaneness was simply the obverse of thelr revolutionary passivity. ‘The men who, By the will of fate, hhad received power in Paris, could not understand the necessity Fa‘of immediately ulizing that power o the end, of hurling themselves after Thiers, and, before he recovered his grasp of the situation, of crushing him, of concentrating the troops in their hands, of ear, ying out the necessary weeding-out of the olficer class, of seizing the provinces. Such men, of course, were no! inclined to sever, measures with counterrevolutionary elements. ‘The one was clovdly bound up with the other. Thiers could not be followed up without larresting Thiers's agents in Paris and shooting conspirators end ples. When one considered the execution of counterrevolutionary generals as an indelible “eime," one could not develop energy in ursuing troops who were under the direction of eounterrevolutfon ary gene in the revolution, in the highest degree of energy is the highest degree of humanity. “Just the men,” Lavrov justly remarks, "who hold human life and human blood dear must strive to organize the possibility for a swift and decisive vietory, and then to act with the greatest swiftness and energy, in order to crush the enemy. For only in this way can we achieve the minimum of inevitable sacrifice and the minimum of bloodshed” ‘The statement of March 19 will, however, be considered with more justice if we examine it, not as an unconditional confession of faith, but as the expression of transient moods the day after an ‘unexpected and bloodless victory. Being an absolute siranger to the understanding of the dynamics of revolution, and the Internal limitations of its swifly developing moods, Kautsky thinks in life. leas schemes, and distorts the perspective of events by arbitrarily selected analogies. He does not understand that softnearted Inde. cision is generally characteristic of the masses in the frst period of the revolution. The workers purtue the oflensive only under the pressure of iron necessity, just as they have recourse to the Hed Terror only under the threat of destruction by the White Guards, ‘That which Kauisky represents as the result of the peculiarly ele- vated moral feeling ofthe Parisian proletariat in 1871 is in realty, merely a characteristic of the fret stage ofthe elvil wat. A similae phenomenon could have been witnessed in our case. In Petrograd we conquered power in October 1917, almost with: fut bloodshed, and even without arrests. The ministers of Ker fensky's government were set free very soon after the revolution, More, the Cossack General Keasnov, who had advanced om Petro grad together with Kerensky after the power hed. passed to the Soviet, and who had been made prisoner by us at Gatchina, was fet {ree on his word of honor the next day, This was "generosity quite In the spirit of the frst measures of the Commune, Bet ie was a mistake, Afterwards, General Krasnov, alter fighting ag us for about a year inthe South, and destroying many thousands fof Communists, again advanced on Petrourad, this time in the 4 4 of Yadene's army. The prltarian revolution assumed a ranks ete characte on afer the any of he nk Fete mors ‘nd particularly afer the rising of the Czechoslovak on the fests Segtaed ye Cade ine SR, and the Men elt eetmanecfeaions of Commaninsy the atempton Lenn’ te eto of Unio. ee teste tendencies cy an embryone form, we se In the piney ofthe Comma ven by the log ofthe struggle on the path of litimidation. ‘he creation of the Commie of Roe Safety was dictated, In the case of many oft supporters, Pe the iden of the Red Tettor. The Committee was appointed 0 2 Sif the heads of teats” Journal Ofte no. 129), Wo avenge