The Daily Worker Newspaper, May 23, 1925, Page 7

“The idea becomes power when it pene- trates the masses.” —Karl Marx. SPECIAL MAGAZINE SUPPLEMENT MAY 23, 1925. THE DAILY WORKER. <<Be200 SECOND SECTION This magazine supple- ment will appear every Saturday in The Daily Worker. English Pacifism and English Aversion to Theory By VLADIMIR ILYITCH LENIN. Note.—The following article by Comrade Lenin was published re- cently in the Pravda, official organ of the Russian Communist Party for the first time. The manuscript has not been dated by Comrade Lenin. Hence it is impossible to state ex- actly when it was written. The Pravda estimates that it was probably written about the beginning of 1915. | Re eS Se JN England there has existed up till now an incomparably larger measure of political freedom than in any other European country. Here the bourgeoisie has been more used to governing than is the cage in other countries and understands the art of governing better. The relations between the classes are more developed and in many. re- spects clearer than in other countries. Freedom from compulsory military service affords the people greater lib- erty in respect to their attitude to war insofar as everybody is free to refuse to enter the army. The government is therefore compelled (in England the government constitutes in its purest form a committee for conducting the business of the bourgeoisie) to exert all its forces in order to arouse “pop- ular” enthusiasm for the war. It would be quite impossible to achieve this aim, without committing a fundamental breach of law, were ye the proletarian mass not completely ~ disorganized and demoralized by the minority of best paid and qualified workers organized in the unions go- ing over to liberal, that is, to bour- geois politics. The English trade un- ions comprise one-fifth of the wage workers. The leaders of these trade unions are liberals for the greater part, and Marx long ago designated them as agents of the bourgeoisie. LL these peculiarities of England enable us on the one hand to understand the nature of present day social chauvinism the more easily, as it is precisely the same in the coun- tries with a despotic form of govern- ment, as well as in the democratic countries, in the militarist countries as well in those without compulsory military service. On the other hand they help us, when regard is had all the facts, to estimate the import- ance of those reconciliatory tenden- cies with social chauvinism, which find expression for example in the glorification of the slogan of peace, ete. The most complete expression of opportunism and of liberal labor poli- tics is undoubtedly to be seen in the Fabian Society. In this connection the reader should carefully peruse the exchange of letters between Marx and Engels and Sorge, He will there find a brilliant characterization of this so- clety by Engels, who treats Messrs. Sidney Webb & Co. as a gang of bourgeois scoundrels, who wish to poison the workers and to influence them in a counter-revolutionary direc- tion, We can be quite sure that not, a single one of the influential and mw sponsible leaders of the Second Inter- national has at any time attempted to refute this judgment of Engels and that none of them have attempted to cast any doubt upon the correctness of this judgment, Be ie Se os me ment and compare the facts. We shall see that the attitude of the Fabians during the war (see for ex- ample their weekly paper, The New, Statesman) and that of the German social democratic party, including Kautsky, is exactly the same. The same direct as well as indirect de fense of social chauvinism, the same uniting of this defense with the in- clination to utter all sorts of kind, humane and almost left phrases re- garding peace, disarmament, etc., etc. The fact exists and there follows from it, no matter how disagreeable it may be for various persons, the in- evitable ard indisputable conse- quence: that the leaders of the pres- ent day German social democratic party, including Kautsky, are in prac- tice just as much agents of the bour- geoisie as the Fabians, whom Engels long ago characterized as such. The repudiation of Marxism by the Fab- ians and its ‘recognition” by Kautsky and Co. make not the slightest differ- organization is BE. D. Morel who is at present a constant contributer to the central organ of the “Independent La- bor Party,” the Labor Leader. Morel was some years ago the canidiate of the liberal party in the constituency of Birkenhead. When’ Morel, soon af- ter the outbreak of the war, spoke against Russia, he was informed by a letter from the Birkenhead Liberal Association, dated October 2, 1914, that in future his candidature would not be acceptable for the liberal party, that means, he was simply expelled from the party. Morel replied in a letter dated October 14, which he then published in a special pamphlet under the title: “The Outbreak of the War.” MARX AND LENIN SPOKESMEN OF THE WORLD SOCIAL REVOLUTION. ence to the matter when it comes to actual policy, but only proves the transformation of Marxism into Stru- vism by certain writers, politicians, etc. . .Their hypocrisy is not their personal sin; they can, under certain circumstances, be the best fathers of families. Their hypocrisy is the result of an objective contradiction in their social position. Ostensibly they rep- resent the revolutionary proletariat and in reality, are agents for the pro- motion of bourgeois chauvinst ideas in the ranks of the proletariat. The Fabians are more honest and sincere than Kautsky & Co. as they have not promised to go in for the revolution—but politically they are of the same kind. The “deep-rootedness” of political freedom in England andthe high stage of development of English poll- tical life in general and of the English isie in particular has resulted in the various shades of bourgeois opinions in this country finding quick- ‘ly, easily and freely a new form of ex- pression in new organiza- tions, One of these organizations is the “Union of Democratic @ontrol.” In this pamphlet, as well as in a num- ber of other articles, Morel exposes his government by proving how incor- rect it was to point to the violation of Belgium neutrality as being the cause of the war and to claim that the ob ject of the war was the destruction of Morel defends the program of the “Union of Democratic Control”: Peace, disarmament, the right of self- determination of all territories on the basis of a plebiscite, and democratic control of foreign policy. ROM all this it is to be seen that Morel as a person undoubtedly deserves recognition for his sincere sympathy for democracy, for his turn- ing from the chauvinist bourgeoisie to the pacifist bourgeoisie. When Morel proved by facts that his government deceived the people when they denied the existence of secret treaties, altho they existed all the time; that the ‘English bourgeoisie, even in the year 1887, was perfectly clear as to the in- evitability of the violation of Belgium neutrality in the event of the Franco- German war and emphatically reject- The secretary and treasurer of thig|ed every idea of intervention (Ger- many at that time was not yet a dan- gerous competitor), that the French militarists of the type of Colonel Bou- cher have before the war, in a num- ber of books, openly announced their intention of conducting an aggressive war on the part of France and Russia against Germany; that the well-known English military author’ty, Colonel Repington, in the year 1911 character- ized in the press the increase of arm- ament in Russia since 1905 as a dan- ger for Germany—when Morel proves all this, we must admit that we are dealing with a courageous’ bourgeois who is not afraid of breaking with his own party. Everybody must however, immedi- ately percieve that he is nevertheivss a bourgeois whose phrases regarding peace and disarmament remain empty phrases, as without the revolutionary action of the proletariat there can be no talk either of a democratic peace or of disarmament. And Morel, who has now fallen out with the liberals on account of the question of the pres- ent war, remains on all economic and political questions a liberal. Why is it regarded, not as a piece of hypoc- risy, but as a merit when Kautsky in Germany uses the same _ bourgeois phrases concerning peace and disarm- ament, decorated with Marxist termin- ology? Only the backward develop- ment of political conditions and the lack of political freedom in Germany prevents a bourgeois league of peace and disarmament springing up,,0m the basis of the program of-Kautsky, with the same.ease, and rapidity;as: in England. .. us recognize the fact that Kaut- sky adopts the standpoint of the pacifist bourgeois and not of the rev- olutionary social democracy. e are living in the midst of sufficiently great events to have the courage to recog- nize the truth “regardless of persons.” In their aversion to abstract theory, proud of their practicality, the Eng- lish often approach political questions in a direct manner. They thereby help the socialists of other countries to find the real content within the husk of every kind of terminology— including the “Marxist.” In this con- nection the pamphlet, “Socialism and War,”* which was published before * “Socialism and War”: The Clar- ion Press, 44 Worship Street, London, E. C. the war by the chauvinist-paper, The Clarion, is instructive. “The pamphlet contains a “declaration” by Upton Sinclair the American socialist against war, and the reply of the chauvinistic Robert Blatchford, who has for long occupied the same imperialist position as Hyndman. INCLAIR ig a sentimental socialist without theoretical training. He puts the question “simply,’ he is in- censed at the approach of war and seeks salvation from war thru so- cialism. “We are told,” writes Sinclair, “that the socialist movement js still too weak, that we must rely upon evolu- tion. But evolution proceeds in the hearts of men; we are the instru- ments of evolution. We are told, that our movement against; the war will be suppressed. But I declare, and I am profoundly convinced of it, that the suppression of all activity which has as its aim, on the ground of the highest humanity, the prevention of war, would constitute the greatest vic- tory of socialism—the greatest it has ever gained—as this would rouse the conscience of civilization and stir up the workers of the whole world as never before in history. Let us not be too anxious regarding our move- (Continued on page 8) oe