PROGRAMME OF THE BLANQUIST COMMUNE REFUGEES 28

12 il PROGRAMME OF THE BLANQUIST COMMUNE REFUGEES 28 After every unsuccessful revolution or counter-revolution, feverish ctivity develops mong the émigrés who escped rod. Prty groups of vrious shdes re formed, which ccuse ech other of hving driven the crt into the mud, of treson nd of ll other possile mortl sins. They lso mintin close ties with the homelnd, orgnise, conspire, print leflets nd newsppers, swer tht it will strt over gin within the next twenty-four hours, tht victory is certin nd, in the wke of this expecttion, distriute government posts. Nturlly, disppointment follows disppointment, nd since this is ttriuted not to inevitle historicl conditions, which they do not wish to understnd, ut to ccidentl mistkes y individuls, recrimintions ccumulte nd result in generl ickering. Such is the history of ll refugee societies, from the roylist émigrés of 1792 29 to those of tody; nd those mong the émigrés who hve common sense nd reson give up this fruitless squling s soon s this cn properly e done, nd turn to something more useful. The French emigrtion fter the Commune hs not escped this inevitle fte either. Owing to the Europen smer cmpign, which ttcked ll eqully, nd especilly in London, where the French emigrtion hd its common centre in the Generl Council of the Interntionl, for some time it ws compelled to concel its internl squles t lest from the outside world. In the lst two yers, however, it ws no longer le to hide the process of disintegrtion tht is progressing rpidly in its rnks. An open qurrel flred up everywhere. In Switzerlnd some of the refugees joined the Bkuninists, notly under the influence of Mlon, who ws one of the founders of the secret Allince. 30 Then, in London,

Refugee Literture. II. Progrmme of Blnquist Refugees 13 the so-clled Blnquists split off from the Interntionl nd formed group tht clled itself the Revolutionry Commune. 31 Lter, numer of other groups emerged tht were, however, constntly fusing nd reorgnising, nd did not produce nything worthwhile even s regrds mnifestoes, wheres the Blnquists hve just issued the proclmtion to the "Communeux", 3 clling the world's ttention to their progrmme. They re clled Blnquists not ecuse they re group founded y Blnqui of the 33 signtories to the progrmme only few my ever hve spoken to Blnqui ut ecuse they wnt to ct in his spirit nd in ccordnce with his trdition. Blnqui is essentilly politicl revolutionry, socilist only in sentiment, ecuse of his sympthy for the sufferings of the people, ut he hs neither socilist theory nor definite prcticl proposls for socil reforms. In his politicl ctivities he ws essentilly "mn of ction", elieving tht, if smll well-orgnised minority should ttempt to effect revolutionry uprising t the right moment, it might, fter scoring few initil successes, crry the mss of the people nd thus ccomplish victorious revolution. Nturlly, under Louis Philippe he ws le to orgnise this nucleus only in the form of secret society, nd it met the fte usully reserved for conspircies: the people, fed up with the constnt proffering of empty promises tht it would soon egin, finlly lost ll ptience, ecme reellious, nd there remined only the lterntive of letting the conspircy collpse or of striking without ny externl cuse. They struck (My 12, 1839), ut the insurrection ws immeditely suppressed. 32 This Blnqui conspircy, y the wy, ws the only one in which the police never succeeded in gining foothold; for the police, the insurrection cme like olt from the lue. Since Blnqui regrds every revolution s coup de min y smll revolutionry minority, it utomticlly follows tht its victory must inevitly e succeeded y the estlishment of dicttorship not, it should e well noted, of the entire revolutionry clss, the proletrit, ut of the smll numer of those who ccomplished the coup nd who themselves re, t first, orgnised under the dicttorship of one or severl individuls. Oviously, Blnqui is revolutionry of the old genertion. These views on the course of revolutionry events hve long since ecome osolete, t lest s fr s the Germn workers' prty is concerned, nd in Frnce, too, they meet the pprovl only of the less mture or more imptient workers. We shll lso find tht, in Aux Communeux, London, June 1874. Ed.

14 Frederick Engels the progrmme in question, definite limittions hve een imposed on these views. However, our London Blnquists too re guided y the principle tht revolutions do not generlly occur y themselves, ut re mde; tht they re mde y reltively smll minority nd ccording to pln worked out in dvnce; nd, finlly, tht t ny time it my "soon egin". With such principles people nturlly ecome irretrievle victims of ll the selfdeceptions of the refugees nd plunge from one folly into nother. Most of ll they wnt to ply the role of Blnqui the "mn of ction". But little good cn e ccomplished here y good will lone; Blnqui's revolutionry instinct, his ility to rech quick decisions re not, however, given to ll, nd no mtter how much Hmlet my spek of ction, he still remins Hmlet. Moreover, when our thirty-three men of ction find tht there is solutely nothing to e done in the field they cll ction, our thirty-three Brutuses fll into contrdiction with themselves, which is comicl rther thn trgic, contrdiction wherein the trgedy is not heightened y the gloomy ppernce they ssume, s though they re lot of "Moros, of the clok nd dgger", 3 which, y the wy, does not even enter their heds. Wht cn they do? They re prepring for the next "outurst", y drwing up proscription lists for the future, to clense (épuré) the rnks of the people who took prt in the Commune, which is why the other refugees cll them the pure (les purs). Whether or not they hve themselves ssumed tht title I do not know; it would ill fit some of them. Their meetings re closed, their decisions re kept secret, ut this does not prevent their eing echoed throughout the whole French Qurter the following morning. As lwys hppens with such serious men of ction, when they hve nothing to do they hve picked first personl, then literry qurrel with worthy opponent, one of the most notorious memers of the Pris petite press, certin Vermersch, who under the Commune pulished the Père Duchêne, miserle cricture of Héert's newspper of 1793. In reply to their morl indigntion, this gentlemn pulished pmphlet in which he rnded them s "rogues or ccomplices of rogues" nd poured veritle strem of usive invectives t them: Ech word night-pot nd not n empty one t tht. c F. Schiller, Die Bürgschft ("Dmon und Phintis"), 1st stnz. Ed. E. Vermersch, Un mot u pulic, London, April 1874; Les prtgeux. Poème, My 12, 1874. Ed. c H. Heine, "Disputtion", Verse 86, Romnzero. Drittes Buch. Heräische Melodien. Ed

Refugee Literture. II. Progrmme of Blnquist Refugees 15 And our thirty-three Brutuses find it worthwhile to pick pulic qurrel with such n opponent! If one thing is certin it is tht, fter the exhusting wr, fter the hunger in Pris nd, notly, fter the wful lood-letting of the My dys in 1871, 33 the Pris proletrit needs long rest to recuperte, nd tht every premture ttempt t n insurrection cn only end in new, perhps still more horrile defet. Our Blnquists hold different view. In their opinion, the disintegrtion of the monrchic mjority in Versilles 34 ushers in "the fll of Versilles, the revnche for the Commune. This is ecuse we re pproching gret historicl moment, one of the gret crises when the people, pprently succuming in wretchedness nd condemned to deth, resume their revolutionry dvnce with renewed force". 8 So, it strts ll over gin, nd wht is more, immeditely. This hope for n immedite "revnche for the Commune" is not merely n émigré illusion; it is n essentil rticle of fith for people who hve tken it into their heds to ply "men of ction" t time when solutely nothing cn e done in their sense, tht is, in the sense of precipitting revolution. All the sme, since it is to egin, they feel tht "the time hs come for ll refugees who still hve sprk of life left in them to define their position". And thus the thirty-three tell us tht they re 1) theists, 2) Communists, 3) revolutionries. Our Blnquists hve sic feture in common with the Bkuninists, in tht they wnt to represent the most fr-reching, most extreme trend. It is for this reson, incidentlly, tht the Blnquists, while opposing the Bkuninists over ims, often gree with them over mens. It is, therefore, question of eing more rdicl thn ll others s regrds theism. Luckily, it is esy enough these dys to e n theist. In the Europen workers' prties theism is more or less self-understood, even though in some countries it is quite often similr to tht of the Spnish Bkuninist who declred: to elieve in God is ginst ll socilism, ut to elieve in the Virgin Mry is something quite different, nd every decent Socilist should nturlly do so. As regrds the Germn Socil-Democrtic workers, 0 it cn e sid tht theism hs lredy outlived its usefulness for them; this pure negtion does not pply to them, since they no longer stnd in theoreticl, ut only in prcticl opposition to ll elief in God: they re simply Aux Communeux, p. 2. Ed. *> Iid. Ed c The 1894 edition hs: "As regrds the gret mjority of the Germn Socil-Democrtic workers". Ed.

16 Frederick Engels through with God, they live nd think in the rel world nd re, therefore, mterilists. The sme proly pplies to Frnce. If not, there could e nothing simpler thn to orgnise the mss distriution mong the workers of the splendid French mterilist literture of the lst century, of the literture in which the French spirit hs ttined its sulime expression s regrds oth form nd content, nd which, considering the level of science tht existed then, even tody stnds exceedingly high s regrds content, nd still unexcelled s regrds form. This, however, does not suit our Blnquists. To prove tht they re the most rdicl of ll, God, s in 1793, 35 is decreed out of existence: "Let the Commune forever deliver mnkind from this spectre of pst misery" (God), "of this cuse" (non-existent God cuse!) "of their present misery. There is no room for priests in the Commune; every religious service, every religious orgnistion must e nned." 3 And this demnd to trnsform the people pr ordre du mufti h into theists is signed y two memers of the Commune, 0 who surely must hve hd sufficient opportunity to discover, first, tht nything cn e decreed on pper ut tht this does not men tht it will e crried out; second, tht persecution is the est wy of strengthening undesirle convictions! This much is certin: the only service tht cn still e rendered to God tody is to mke theism compulsory dogm nd to surpss Bismrck's nticlericl Kulturkmpf lws y prohiiting religion in generl. The second point of the progrmme is communism. Here we find ourselves on more fmilir ground for the ship we re siling here is clled the Mnifesto of the Communist Prty, pulished in Ferury 1848. Alredy in the utumn of 1872 the five Blnquists who hd left the Interntionl emrced socilist progrmme tht, in ll its essentil fetures, ws tht of present-dy Germn communism, nd sed their withdrwl solely on the refusl of the Interntionl to ply t revolution fter the fshion of those five. 36 Now the council of the thirty-three hs dopted this progrmme, with ll its mterilist view of history, even though its trnsltion into Blnquist French leves much to e desired where the wording of the Mnifesto ws not kept lmost vertim, s for exmple, in this phrse: 3 Aux Communeux, p. 4. Ed h y order of the mufti, y order from ove. Ed. c A slip of the pen; the proclmtion is signed y four memers of the Commune: Edourd Villnt, Emile Eudes, Jen Clement nd Frédéric Cournet. Ed.

Refugee Literture. II. Progrmme of Blnquist Refugees 17 "The ourgeoisie hs removed the mystic veils from the exploittion of lour in which this lst expression of ll forms of slvery ws formerly shrouded: governments, religions, the fmily, lws, institutions of oth the pst nd present re finlly reveled in this society, resting on the simple opposition of cpitlists nd wge-workers, s the instruments of oppression, with whose help the ourgeoisie upholds its rule nd suppresses the proletrit." 3 Let us compre this with the Communist Mnifesto, Section I: "In one word, for exploittion, veiled y religious nd politicl illusions, it hs sustituted nked, shmeless, direct, rutl exploittion. The ourgeoisie hs stripped of its hlo every occuption hitherto honoured nd looked up to with reverent we. It hs converted the physicin, the lwyer, the priest, the poet, the mn of science, into its pid wge-lourers. The ourgeoisie hs torn wy from the fmily its sentimentl veil, nd hs reduced the fmily reltion to mere money reltion," etc. Yet s soon s we leve theory side nd get down to prctice, the peculir stnd of the thirty-three ecomes evident: "We re Communists ecuse we wnt to rrive t our im without stop-overs t intermedite sttions, without entering into compromises, which only put off victory nd prolong slvery." 0 The Germn Communists re Communists ecuse, through ll intermedite sttions nd compromises, creted not y them ut y historicl development, they clerly perceive d the ultimte im: the olition of clsses, the estlishment of society in which there will e no privte ownership of lnd nd mens of production. The thirty-three re Communists ecuse they imgine tht, s soon s they hve only the good will to jump over intermedite sttions nd compromises, everything is ssured, nd if, s they firmly elieve, it "egins" in dy or two, nd they tke the helm, "communism will e introduced" the dy fter tomorrow. And they re not Communists if this cnnot e done immeditely. Wht childish nïveté to dvnce imptience s convincing theoreticl rgument! Finlly, our thirty-three re "revolutionries". 6 As regrds the ndying of ig words, the Bkuninists re known to hve done everything humnly possile in this respect. But our Blnquists feel oliged to outdo them. But how? It will e rememered tht the whole socilist proletrit, from Lison nd New York to Budpest nd Belgrde, immeditely dopted responsiility for c d e 4-1317 Aux Communeux, pp. 4-5. Ed. See present edition, Vol. 6, p. 487. Ed. Aux Communeux, p. 5. Ed. The 1894 edition hs: "they clerly perceive nd pursue". Ed. Aux Communeux, p. 7. Ed.

18 Frederick Engels the ctions of the Pris Commune en loc. But tht is not enough for our Blnquists: "As fr s we re concerned, we clim our shre of the responsiility for the executions" (under the Commune) "of the enemies of the people" ( list of the executed is ppended), "we clim our shre of the responsiility for the rson tht destroyed the instruments of monrchic or ourgeois oppression or protected those engged in struggle." 3 A lot of follies re unvoidly committed in every revolution, s they re indeed t ll other times, nd when t lst people clm down sufficiently to e le to review events criticlly, they inevitly drw the following conclusion: we hve done mny things tht it would hve een etter to leve undone, nd hve filed to do mny things tht it would hve een etter to do, nd tht is why things took d turn. But wht lck of criticl ttitude is needed to declre the Commune impeccle nd infllile nd to ssert tht, every time house ws urned down or hostge shot, this ws cse of retriutive justice, right down to the dot on the "i". Is this not tntmount to sserting tht, during the week in My, the people shot precisely the numer of people, nd no more, thn ws necessry, tht exctly those uildings were urned down, nd no more, thn hd to e urned down? Is tht not tntmount to sying of the first French revolution: ech one eheded got his deserts, first those whom Roespierre eheded, nd then Roespierre himself? Such childish ptter results when essentilly quite good-ntured people give in to the urge to pper svgely rutl. Enough. In spite of ll the foolish ctions tken y the refugees nd the droll ttempts to mke oy Krl (or Edurd?) pper we-inspiring, some definite progress cn e noted in this progrmme. It is the first mnifesto in which French workers rlly to the cuse of present-dy Germn communism. Moreover, these workers re of trend tht regrds the French s the chosen people of the revolution, nd Pris the revolutionry Jeruslem. To hve rought them this fr is to the indisputle credit of Villnt, who is one of the signtories nd who, s is widely known, hs good knowledge of the Germn lnguge nd of Germn socilist writing. The Germn socilist workers who, in 1870, proved tht ny ntionl chuvinism is solutely lien to them, my consider it fvourle omen tht the French workers re dopting correct theoreticl principles, even though these come from Germny. Aux Communeux, pp. 11-12. Ed. Engels plys on the words of Philipp II from Schiller's drm Don Crlos (Act I, Scene 6). In the 1894 edition the words "(or Edurd?)" n llusion to Edourd Villnt re omitted. Ed.

19 m 37 In London review entitled Vperyod! (Forwrd) 3 is ppering in the Russin lnguge nd t irregulr intervls. It is edited y personlly most respectle scholr, whom the previling strict etiquette in Russin refugee literture prevents me from nming. For even those Russins who pose s out-nd-out revolutionry ogres, who du it etryl of the revolution to respect nything t ll in their polemics even they respect the ppernce of nonymity with conscientiousness only equlled in the English ourgeois press; they respect it even when it ecomes comicl, s it does here, ecuse ll the Russin refugees nd the Russin government know perfectly well wht the mn's nme is. It would never occur to us to let out such crefully kept secret without good reson; ut since the child must hve nme, let us hope tht the editor of the Forwrd will excuse us if, for the ske of revity, in this rticle we cll him y the populr Russin nme Peter. In his philosophy, Friend Peter is n eclectic who selects the est from ll the different systems nd theories: try everything nd keep the est! He knows tht everything hs good side nd d side, nd tht the min thing is to pproprite the good side of everything without eing sddled with the d, too. Since every thing, every person, every theory hs these two sides, good nd d, every thing, every person, every theory is s good nd s d s ny other in this respect, hence, from this vntge point, it would e foolish to ecome impssioned for or ginst one or the other. From this point of view, the struggles nd disputes of the Bnepedh! HenepioduuecKoe o6o3pènie. Ed. P. L. Lvrov. Ed. 4*

20 Frederick Engels revolutionries nd socilists mongst themselves re ound to pper sheer ftuous surdities tht serve no etter purpose thn to plese their opponents. Moreover, nothing could e more understndle for mn of this opinion thn to ttempt to ring ll of these mutully hostile fctions together nd ernestly enjoin them no longer to tret rection to this scndlous spectcle, ut exclusively to ttck the common dversry. All the more nturl, of course, if one comes from Russi, where the lour movement is, s we know, so extremely highly developed. The Forwrd is, then, full of exhorttions urging concord on ll socilists or urging them, t lest, to void ll pulic discord. When the Bkuninists' ttempts to sujugte the Interntionl to their rule under flse pretences, y lies nd deceit, occsioned the well-known split in the Assocition, gin it ws the Forwrd tht exhorted us to unity. This unity could, of course, only e ttined y immeditely letting the Bkuninists hve their wy nd delivering the Interntionl up to their secret conspircies, tied hnd nd foot. One ws not unprincipled enough to do so; one ccepted the chllenge; the Hgue Congress cme to its decision, threw out the Bkuninists nd resolved to pulish the documents justifying this expulsion. 38 There ws gret del of lmenttion on the editoril ord of the Forwrd over the fct tht the entire lour movement hd not een scrificed to der "unity". Yet even greter ws the horror when the compromising Bkuninist documents relly did pper in the commission's report (see "Ein Komplott gegen die Interntionle", 39 Germn edition, Brunswick, Brcke). Let us her from the Forwrd itself: "This puliction... hs the chrcter of custic polemics ginst persons who re in the foremost rnks of the Federlists,... its contents re topped up with privte mtters which could only hve een collected y hersy, nd the crediility of which could consequently not hve een indisputle for the uthors." 3 In order to prove to the people who implemented the decision of the Hgue Congress wht colossl crime they hd committed, the Forwrd refers to feuilleton in the Neue Freie Presse y certin Krl Thler, which, "hving emerged from the ourgeois cmp, merits prticulr ttention ecuse it proves most clerly the importnce for the common enemies of the working clss, [P. L. Lvrov,] "Afc-ronHC p6onro 4BHweHk", Bneped! HenepioduuecKoe o6o3phnie, Zurich, 1874, Vol. II, Prt II, Ch. II, p. 26. Ed. Krl von Thler, "Rothe Jesuiten", Neue Freie Presse (Morgenltt), Nos. 3284 nd 3285, Octoer 14 nd 15, 1873 (in the section Feuilleton). Ed

Refugee Literture. III 21 for the ourgeoisie nd governments of the mutully ccustory pmphlets of the contenders for supremcy mong the rnks of the workers". 3 First let us remrk tht the Bkuninists re here presented simply s "Federlists", s opposed to the lleged Centrlists, s if the uthor elieved in this non-existent opposition invented y the Bkuninists. Tht this ws not, in fct, the cse will ecome evident. Second, let us remrk tht from this feuilleton, written to order for such venl ourgeois sheet s the Vienn Neue Freie Presse, the conclusion is drwn tht genuine revolutionries should not expose merely ostensile revolutionries ecuse these mutul ccustions provide musement for the ourgeois nd governments. I elieve tht the Neue Freie Presse nd ll this press rle could write ten thousnd rticles without hving the slightest effect on the stnce of the Germn workers' prty. Every struggle hs moments when one cnnot deny one's opponent certin stisfction, if one is not to inflict positive dmge on oneself. Fortuntely, we hve got so fr tht we cn llow our opponents this privte plesure if we therey chieve rel successes. The min chrge, however, is tht the report is full of privte mtters the crediility of which could not hve een indisputle for the uthors, ecuse they could only hve een collected y hersy. How Friend Peter knows tht society like the Interntionl, which hs its officil orgns throughout the civilised world, cn only collect such fcts y hersy is not stted. His ssertion is, nywy, frivolous in the extreme. The fcts in question re ttested y uthentic evidence, nd those concerned took good cre not to contest them. But Friend Peter is of the opinion tht privte mtters, such s privte letters, re scred nd should not e pulished in politicl detes. To ccept the vlidity of this rgument on ny terms is to render the writing of ll history impossile. The reltionship etween Louis XV nd Du Brry or Pompdour ws privte mtter, ut without it the whole pre-history of the French Revolution is incomprehensile. Or, to tke step towrds the present: if n innocent girl clled Isell 15 is mrried to mn c who, ccording to experts (ssessor Ulrichs, for exmple) cnnot stnd women nd hence only flls in love with men if, finding herself neglected, she tkes men wherever she finds them, then tht is purely privte mtter. But if the sid innocent Isell is [P. L. Lvrov,] "AÊTonHC p6onro 4BH>KeHiii", Bnepedh!, Zurich, 1874, Vol. II, Prt II, Ch. II, p. 26. Ed. Isell II Queen of Spin. Ed. c Frncisco de Asis. Ed.

22 Frederick Engels Queen of Spin nd one of these young men kept y her is young officer clled Serrno 3 ; if this Serrno is promoted field mrshl nd prime minister in recognition of the heroic deeds he hs performed ehind closed doors, is then supplnted nd overthrown y nother, 15 susequently throws his fithless sweethert out of the country with the help of other compnions in misfortune, nd fter vriety of dventures eventully himself ecomes dicttor of Spin nd such gret mn tht Bismrck does his utmost to persude the Gret Powers to recognise him then this privte ffir etween Isell nd Serrno ecomes piece of Spnish history, nd nyone wishing to write out modern Spnish history nd knowingly conceling this titit from his reders would e flsifying history. Agin, if one is descriing the history of gng like the Allince, mong whom there is such lrge numer of tricksters, dventurers, rogues, police spies, swindlers nd cowrds longside those they hve duped, should one flsify this history y knowingly conceling the individul villinies of these gentlemen s "privte mtters"? Much s it my horrify Friend Peter, he my rely on it tht we re not done with these "privte mtters" y long chlk. The mteril is still mounting up. When, however, the Forwrd descries the report s clumsy concoction of essentilly privte fcts, it is committing n ct tht is hrd to chrcterise. Anyone who could write such thing hd either not red the report in question t ll; or he ws too limited or prejudiced to understnd it; or else he ws writing something he knew to e incorrect. Noody cn red the "Komplott gegen die Interntionle" without eing convinced tht the privte mtters interspersed in it re the most insignificnt prt of it, re illustrtions ment to provide more detiled picture of the chrcters involved, nd tht they could ll e cut without jeoprdising the min point of the report. The orgnistion of secret society, with the sole im of sujecting the Europen lour movement to hidden dicttorship of few dventurers, the infmies committed to further this im, prticulrly y Nechyev in Russi 40 this is the centrl theme of the ook, nd to mintin tht it ll revolves round privte mtters is, to sy the lest, irresponsile. To e sure, it my e extremely pinful for some Russins suddenly to see the dirty side nd it certinly is very dirty of Frncisco Serrno y Dominguez. Ed. Luis Gonzles Brvo. Ed.

Refugee Literture. III 23 the Russin movement ruthlessly exposed to Western Europe. But who is to lme? Who else ut those Russins themselves who represent this dirty side, who, not stisfied with deceiving their own comptriots, ttempted to suordinte the whole Europen lour movement to their personl ends? If Bkunin nd compny hd restricted their heroic deeds to Russi, people in Western Europe would hrdly hve trouled to trin their sights on them. The Russins themselves would hve done tht. But s soon s those gentlemen, who do not even understnd the rudiments of the conditions nd development of the West Europen lour movement, seek to ply the dicttor with us, it ceses to e musing: one simply fires t them pointlnk. Anywy, the Russin movement cn tke such reveltions with equnimity. A country tht hs produced two writers of the stture of Dorolyuov nd Chernyshevsky, two socilist Lessings, will not e destroyed ecuse, ll t once, it spwns humug like Bkunin nd few immture little students, who inflte themselves with ig words like frogs, nd finlly gole one nother up. Even mong the younger Russins we know people of first-clss theoreticl nd prcticl tlents nd gret energy, people who hve the dvntge over the French nd the English, thnks to their knowledge of lnguges, in their intimte cquintnce with the movement in different countries, nd over the Germns in their cosmopolitn verstility. Those Russins who understnd nd prticipte in the lour movement cn only regrd it s service rendered to hve een relieved of complicity in the Bkuninists' cts of villiny. All this does not, however, prevent the Forwrd from concluding its ccount with the words: "We do not know wht the uthors of this pmphlet think of the results it hs chieved. The mjority of our reders would proly shre the feeling of depression with which we hve red it nd with which we record these sorry phenomen in our pges, in pursunce of our duty s chroniclers." 3 With this feeling of depression on the prt of Friend Peter we conclude the first section of our tle. The second egins with the following prgrph from the sme volume of the Forwrd: "Our reders will e plesed to receive nother piece of news in similr vein. With us, in our rnks, we lso hve the well-known writer Peter Nikitich Tkchov; fter four yers' detention he hs succeeded in escping from the plce where he ws interned nd condemned to inctivity, to reinforce our rnks." [P. L. Lvrov,] Op. cit., p. 27. Ed Bnepedt,! HenepiodunecKoe o6o3phuie, Vol. II, Prt 2, Zurich, 1874: H3T> MpKymcK. In the section: Hmo dhjiemcn n Podunh}, p. 115. Ed

24 Frederick Engels We lern who the well-known writer Tkchov is from Russin pmphlet, The Tsks of Revolutionry Propgnd in Russi, which he himself pulished in April 1874 nd which depicts him s green grmmr-school oy of singulr immturity, the Krlchen Missnick, s it were, of Russin revolutionry youth. He tells us tht mny people hve sked him to collorte in the Forwrd; he knew the editor ws rectionry; nevertheless, he considered it his duty to tke the Forwrd under his wing, lthough it should e noted it hd not sked for him. On rriving he finds, to his stonishment, tht the editor, Friend Peter, presumes to mke the finl decision on the cceptnce or rejection of rticles. Such n undemocrtic procedure nturlly infurites him; he composes detiled document climing, for himself nd the other stff (who it should e noted hd not sked for it), "in the nme of justice, on the sis of purely theoreticl considertions... equlity of rights nd oligtions" (with the editor-in-chief) "with regrd to everything ffecting the literry nd economic side of the enterprise". 3 Here we see strightwy the immturity tht, while it does not dominte the Russin refugee movement, is, nevertheless, more or less endured. A Russin scholr, who hs considerle reputtion in his own country, ecomes refugee nd cquires the mens to found politicl journl rod. Scrcely hs he mnged to do this, when some more or less enthusistic youth comes long, unsked, nd offers to tke prt, on the more or less childish condition tht he should hve n equl voice with the founder of the journl in ll literry nd finncil mtters. In Germny he would hve een lughed t. But the Russins re not so corse. Friend Peter goes to gret pins to convince him tht he is wrong, oth "in the nme of justice nd on the sis of purely theoreticl considertions" nturlly in vin. Tkchov, offended, withdrws like Achilles to his tent 41 nd fires off his pmphlet ginst Friend Peter, whom he clls "philistine philosopher". With stifling hep of eternlly repeted Bkuninist phrses out the nture of true revolution, he ccuses Friend Peter of the crime of prepring the people for revolution, of seeking to ring them to "cler understnding nd wreness of their needs". Anyone, however, who wishes to do tht is no revolutionry, ut mn of peceful progress, i.e., rectionry, supporter of n. H. TKnëB-, 3duu peeojiwu,iohuoü nponzudvi es Pocciu, [London,] 1874, p. VIII. Ed. Iid., p. 10. Ed.

Refugee Literture. III 25 "loodless revolution in the Germn tste". The true revolutionry "knows tht the people re lwys redy for revolution" ; nyone who does not elieve this does not elieve in the people, nd fith in the people "constitutes our strength". To nyone who does not relise this, the writer quotes pronouncement y Nechyev, this "typicl representtive of our modern youth". Friend Peter sys we must wit until the people re redy for revolution "ut we cnnot nd will not wit" c ; the truerevolutionry differs from the philistine philosopher in tht he "ssumes the right to summon the people to revolution t ny time". d And so on. Here in Western Europe we would simply dismiss ll this childish nonsense with the nswer: "If your people re redy for revolution t ny time, if you ssume the right to summon them to revolution t ny time, nd if you simply cnnot wit, why do you go on oring us with your prttle, why, for goodness ske, don't you go hed nd strike now?" But our Russins do not view mtters quite so simply. Friend Peter thinks tht Mr. Tkchov's childish, tedious nd contrdictory oservtions, which revolve in n eternl circle, my exert the seductive ttrction of mons veneris 42 on Russin youth, nd, s the fithful Eckrt of this youth, he issues n dmonitory exhorttion of sixty closely printed pges ginst them. e In this he sets out his own views on the nture of revolution, investigting in dedly ernest whether or not the people re redy for revolution nd in wht circumstnces revolutionries hve the right to summon them to revolution or not nd similr niceties, which t this level of generlity hve out s much vlue s the scholstics' studies of the Virgin Mry. In the process, "the Revolution" itself ecomes sort of Virgin Mry, theory ecomes fith, ctivity in the movement ecomes religion, nd the whole dete tkes plce not on terr firm, ut in cloudy sky of generlities. Here, however, Friend Peter ecomes involved in trgic contrdiction with himself. He, the precher of unity, the opponent of ll polemics, of ll "mutully ccustory pmphlets" within the revolutionry prty, cnnot, of course, do his duty s Eckrt, without lso engging in polemics; he cnnot reply to his opponent's ccustions without similrly ccusing him. Friend c d e Iid., p. 8. Ed. Iid., p. 10. Ed Iid., p. 34. Ed Iid., p. 10. Ed [P. L. Lvrov,] PyccKoü coiiijiho-peeoatoiiiohhoumojiodedku, [London,] 1874. Ed

26 Frederick Engels Peter will himself testify to the "feeling of depression" tht ccompnies this "sorry phenomenon". His pmphlet egins s follows: "Of two evils, one must choose the lesser. "I know full well tht ll this refugee literture of mutully ccustory pmphlets, of polemics out who is the genuine friend of the people nd who is not, who is honest nd who is not, nd, in prticulr, who is genuine representtive of Russin youth, of the true revolutionry prty tht ll this literture out the personl dirt of the Russin emigrtion is s repugnnt to the reder s it is insignificnt for the revolutionry struggle, nd cn only grtify our enemies this I know, nd yet I find it necessry to pen these lines, necessry with my own hnd to swell the numer of these wretched writings y one more, to the tedium of our reders nd the delight of our enemies necessry, ecuse of two evils, one must choose the lesser." 3 Splendid. But why is it tht Friend Peter, who evinces so much Christin tolernce in the Forwrd nd demnds the sme of us towrds the tricksters we hve exposed tricksters whom, s we shll see, he knows s well s we do, tht he did not even hve the modicum of tolernce towrds the writers of the report to sk himself whether they, too, were oliged to choose the lesser of two evils? Why must the fire first urn his own fingers efore he relises tht there might e even greter evils thn little hrsh polemics ginst people who, in the guise of ostensily revolutionry ctivity, were endevouring to dese nd destroy the entire Europen lour movement? Let us, however, e indulgent towrds Friend Peter; fte hs een rther hrd on him. No sooner hs he done, in full consciousness of his own guilt, wht he reproches us with doing, thn Nemesis drives him on nd forces him to supply Mr. Krl Thler with new mteril for severl more rticles in the Neue Freie Presse. "Or," he sks the ever-redy mdcp Tkchov, "hs your gittion lredy done its work? Is your orgnistion perhps redy? Redy? Relly redy? Or hve we here tht notorious secret committee of 'typicl' revolutionries, the committee tht consists of two men nd circultes decrees? 43 Our young people hve een told so mny lies, they hve een so often deceived, their trust so shmefully used, tht they will not, ll t once, elieve in the rediness of the revolutionry orgnistion." For the Russin reder it is, of course, unnecessry to dd tht the "two men" re Bkunin nd Nechyev. Further: "But there re those who clim to e friends of the people, supporters of the socil revolution, nd who, t the sme time, ring to their ctivity tht mendciousness nd dishonesty tht I hve descried ove s elch of the old Iid., p. 3. Ed. Iid., p. 17. Ed.

Refugee Literture. III 27 society... These people used the itterness of the supporters of the new socil order ginst the injustice of the old society, sserting the principle tht, in wr, every mens is llowle. Among these llowle mens they included the deception of their collortors, the deception of the people whom they, nevertheless, climed to serve. They were prepred to lie to everyone nd nyone solely in order to orgnise sufficiently strong prty, just s if strong socil-revolutionry prty could e produced without the honest solidrity of its memers! They were redy to rouse in the people the old pssions of nditry nd enjoyment without work... They were redy to exploit their friends nd comrdes, to mke them tools of their plns; they were redy verlly to defend the most complete independence nd utonomy of persons nd sections, while t the sme time orgnising the most pronounced secret dicttorship nd trining their supporters in the most sheep-like nd thoughtless oedience, s if the socil revolution could e crried out y union of exploiters nd exploited, y group of people whose ctions re, t every turn, slp in the fce for everything their words prech!" 3 It is incredile, ut true: these lines, which resemle n extrct from the "Komplott gegen die Interntionle" s closely s one egg does nother, were written y the very mn who, few months efore, hd descried tht pmphlet s crime ginst the common cuse, ecuse of its ttcks on the very sme people, ttcks tht were in complete greement with the ove lines. Well, let us e stisfied with this. If, however, we now look ck on Mr. Tkchov, with his gret pretensions nd utterly insignificnt chievements, nd t the little mlheur tht efell our Friend Peter on this occsion, we might well consider it our turn to sy: "We do not know wht the uthors think of the results chieved. The mjority of our reders would proly shre the feeling of 'musement' with which we hve red it nd with which we record these 'strnge' phenomen in our pges, in pursunce of our duty s chroniclers." Joking side, however. Mny peculir phenomen in the Russin movement to dte re explined y the fct tht, for long time, every Russin puliction ws closed ook to the West, nd tht it ws, therefore, esy for Bkunin nd his consorts to concel from it their goings-on, which hd long een known to the Russins. They zelously spred the ssertion tht even the dirty sides of the Russin movement should in the interests of the movement itself e kept secret from the West; nyone who communicted Russin mtters to the rest of Europe, in so fr s they were of n unplesnt nture, ws tritor. Tht hs now cesed. Knowledge of the Russin lnguge lnguge tht, oth for its own ske, s one of the richest nd most powerful living lnguges, nd on ccount of the literture therey mde» Iid., pp. 44, 45. Ed

28 Frederick Engels ccessile, richly deserves study is no longer gret rrity, t ny rte mong the Germn Socil-Democrts. The Russins will hve to ow to the inevitle interntionl fte: their movement will henceforth develop in full view nd under the surveillnce of the rest of Europe. Noody hs hd to py so derly for their erlier isoltion thn they themselves. But for this isoltion, it would never hve een possile to chet them so disgrcefully for yers on end, s Bkunin nd his consorts did. Those who will derive the gretest enefit from the West's criticism, from the interntionl interction of the vrious West Europen movements on the Russin movement nd vice vers, from the eventul fusion of the Russin movement with the ll-europen movement, re the Russins themselves.