First appearing in the “Social Democrat” of January 31st (February 13th new), Lenin surveys the turning international situation after years of war and a few weeks before the outbreak of the February Revolution.
‘A Change in World Politics’ (1917) by N. Lenin from International Press Correspondence. Vol. 7. No. 16. February 25, 1917.
A festive mood prevails in the camp of the pacifists. The virtuous bourgeoisie in the neutral countries are rejoicing: “We have enriched ourselves enough by war profits and by the rise of prices; is this not sufficient? Nothing more is to be made out of it anyhow, and the people might lose patience…”
Why should they not rejoice when “even” Wilson himself “paraphrases” the pacifist declaration passed by the Italian Socialist Party only recently in Kiental, an official and solemn resolution on the complete bankruptcy of social pacifism.
Is it any wonder that Turati triumphs in the “Avanti” over this new formulation of the pacifist phrases of the Italian “also-Socialists”? Is it any wonder that, in their “Le Populaire”, the French Social Pacifists and Kautskyans amiably “associated” themselves with Turati and Kautsky? The latter published in the German Social Democratic Press five specially stupid pacifist articles, which naturally also “paraphrased” the gossip about a good democratic peace which events had brought into foreground.
This gossip, however, is at present distinguished from former gossip in that it has a certain objective foundation. This foundation was created by the turn in world politics away from imperialist war, which has brought the greatest misery and distress on the people and the greatest betrayal of socialism by Plechanov, Albert Thomas, Legien, Scheidemann etc. to imperialist peace, which is destined to bestow on the peoples the greatest treachery by means of honeyed words, half reforms, small partial concessions etc.
This turn is now taking place.
We cannot at present know–even the leaders of the imperialist policy themselves, the kings of finance and the crowned robbers are not in a position to determine exactly–just when this imperialist peace will come, what changes will take place in the arena of war in the meantime, and what will be the details of the peace. That, however, is not important. What is important is the fact that the turn towards peace has been made: what is important, is the essential character of this peace; these two factors, however, are already clear enough thanks to the development of events up to the present.
The 29 months of the war have offered sufficient opportunity for determining the resources of the two imperialist Coalitions; all, or almost all possible allies from the circle of the “immediate neighbours” of any appreciable size have been drawn into the slaughter; the forces of the armies and navies have been tested and retested, measured and remeasure. Financial capital has made milliards out of it; the mountain of war debts shows what will be the dimensions of the tribute which the proletariat and the non-possessing masses will now have to pay to the international bourgeoisie for decades on end for having been graciously permitted to kill millions of their brother wage slaves in war and to help divide up the imperialist booty.
It is not possible, by means of the present war, to skin the wage-earning beast any further. This is one of the most deep-seated economic foundations of the present turn of world politics. It cannot be caried on any longer, because the resources are becoming exhausted. The American milliardaires, and their younger brothers in Holland, Switzerland, Denmark and the other neutral countries are beginning to notice that the are becoming exhausted. The American milliardaires of neutral pacifism is based and not on noble humane sentiments, as is believed by those naive, pitiful, ridiculous fellows Turati, Kautsky & Co.
At the same time, the discontent and indignation of the masses is increasing. In our last number (of the “Social Democrat”, the organ of the Bolsheviki Ed.), we published expressions of opinion by Gutschkov and Helfferich, which show that both of them are in terror of a revolution. Has not the time come to put an end to the first imperialist slaughter?
Thus, the objective conditions which are urging towards the cessation of war, are supplemented by the influence of the class instinct and class calculation of the bourgeoisie which has enriched itself by war profits. The political turn, which is based on this economic turn, is taking two main directions; victorious Germany is wresting from England, her arch-enemy, the latter’s allies, on the one hand because the heaviest blows are falling (and may still fall), not on England herself but just on these allies, and on the other hand because German imperialism, which has carried off any amount of loot, is in the position to make partial concessions to England’s allies.
It is possible, however, that a separate peace has been concluded between Germany and Russia. It is only the form which has been changed in the political bargaining between these two robbers. The Tsar may have said to Wilhelm: “If publicly sign a separate peace, you, oh most august partner to the treaty, will have to deal by to-morrow with a Miliukov-Gutshkov Government, if not one headed by Miliukov and Kerensky. For the revolution is growing and I hold myself in no way responsible for the army, in which the generals are in correspondence with Gutshkov, and in which the officers of to-day were, for the greater part, students but yesterday. Is it worth while exposing ourselves to the danger of my losing my throne and you losing a good partner to the treaty?
Wilhelm could not but answer “Of course it would not pay”, if such a question were put to him directly or indirectly. “What would be the value to us of a public separate peace or of any peace which is merely written on paper? Cannot we achieve the same end with other and finer means? I will turn openly to the whole of mankind and offer to bestow on them the benefits of peace? I shall whisper to the French that I am prepared to give back the whole or almost the whole of France and Belgium, in return for the “just” concession of their colonies in Africa–and to the Italians that they may count on a “morsel” of the Italian soil of Austria plus a scrap of the Balkans. I am in a position to let the peoples know of my proposals and plans–Will the English in that case be able any longer to hold back their allies in Western Europe? And then you and I will divide between us Roumania, Galicia and Armenia; but Constantinople, oh most august brother, you will never have, Poland, oh most august brother, will never be yours.”
It is impossible to know whether such a conversation has taken place. This, however, is not essential. What is essential is, that this is exactly how events have happened. Even if the Tsar did not listen to the arguments of the German diplomats, the “arguments” of the Mackensen army in Roumania must all the more have made an impression on him.
In the German imperialist Press the plan of dividing up Roumania between Russia and the “Quadruple Alliance” (i.e. between Germany’s allies, Austria and Bulgaria) is already being discussed openly! And the loquacious Herve is already telling tales out of school: We shall not be able to persuade the people to go on fighting if they hear that we can have back Belgium and France at once. The pacifist blockheads of the neutral bourgeoisie have also been “set in motion”: Wilhelm has loosened their tongues! And the pacifist sages among the socialists, Turati in Italy, Kautsky in Germany, etc. etc. are jumping out of their skins for joy and are calling into use all their humanity, their love of mankind, their supernatural virtue and their eminent intelligence to beautify the coming imperialist peace.
How beautiful is everything in this best of all worlds!. We, the kings of finance and crowned robbers, have become involved in an imperialist policy of robbery, and we are forced to carry on a war. Well, is there anything bad in that? We shall enrich ourselves no less in war than in peace, indeed a good deal more. And lackeys to announce that our war is a “war for freedom”, we have in abundance, all these Plechanovs, Albert Thomas’, Legiens, Scheidemanns etc. are at our disposal.
Will the time come when we shall have to conclude an imperialist peace? Well, what harm is there in that? War debts are that kind of obligation which guarantee our sacred right to collect tribute to a hundredfold from our peoples. There are simple-minded people enough to beautify this imperialist peace, to deceive the peoples by honeyed words, as many as we want, even if it be only the Turatis and Kautskys and the other “leaders of international socialism”!
That is just the tragi-comedy of the attitude of Turati and Kautsky, that they do not realise the actual objective, political part which they play. They play the part of parsons who console the peoples instead of rousing them to revolution, they play the part of bourgeois lawyers who, with specious words on all kinds of good things in general and on democratic peace in particular, cloak, conceal and decorate the horrible nakedness of the imperialist peace which traffics with peoples and dismembers countries.
In this we see the fundamental unity between the social chauvinists (Plechanov and Scheidemann) and the social pacifists (Turati and Kautsky), that both are objectively servants of imperialism: the former “serve” it by beautifying imperialist war with the idea of “defence of the fatherland”; the latter serve the same imperialism by beautifying the imperialist peace which is being prepared and is approaching maturity with phrases about democratic peace.
The imperialist bourgeoisie needs lackeys of both sorts and both shades: it needs the Plechanovs to promote the continuation of the slaughter by cries of: “Down with the conquerors!” and it needs the Kautskys in order to console and calm the unduly indignant masses by fulsome hymns in praise of peace.
For this reason the union of the social chauvinists of all countries with the social pacifists, that general “conspiracy against socialism”, of which a proclamation of the International Socialist Commission in Berne speaks, that “general amnesty” of which we have often spoken–will be no coincidence but an expression of the fundamental unity of these two groups of international “also-Socialists”. It is no coincidence that Plechanov screams himself hoarse over the “treachery” of the Scheidemanns but at the same time hints at peace and unity with these gentlemen when the time is ripe.
But–the reader may argue–we must not forget that an imperialist peace “is in any case better” than an imperialist war. That “possibly” “parts” of the programme of the democratic peace might be realised, if not the whole. That an independent Poland would be better than a Russian Poland. That it would be an advance if Austria’s Italian territory were joined to Italy.
The defenders of Turati and Kautsky take cover behind such considerations without noticing that they are turning from revolutionary Marxists into quite ordinary bourgeois Reformists.
Can anybody in his senses deny that the Germany of Bismarck with his social laws is “better” than the Germany of 1848? That the Stolypin reforms are “better” than Russia before. 1905? Did, however, the German social democrats (who still were Social Democrats at that time) for this reason vote for Bismarck’s reforms? Were the reforms of Stolypin beautified or even supported by the Russian Social Democrats, apart of course from Potressov, Maslov & Co., from whom now even Martov, a member of their own party, turns away with disgust?
History does not stand still during a counter-revolution, History went on during the imperialist slaughter of 1914 to 1916, which was a continuation of the imperialist policy of the decades which had preceded it. World capitalism, which in the sixties and seventies of last centuries was a progressive force of free competition and which, at the beginning of the twentieth century grew into monopolist capitalism, i.e. into imperialism, made a considerable step forward during the war, not only towards a greater concentration of financial capital but also in that it turned into State capitalism. The force of national connections, the significance of national sympathies has, for instance, been shown in this war by the behaviour of the Irish in the one imperialist Coalition and of the Czechs in the other. The clear-headed leaders of imperialism say to themselves: We cannot of course realise our object without throttling the small peoples. There are, however, two ways of realising this policy of throttling them up. There are cases in which it is more advantageous and more expedient to gain sincere and honest “defenders of the fatherland” in an imperialist war by creating States which are politically independent, while “we” take good care that they are financially dependent! It is more advantageous (in the case of a serious war of the imperialist Powers) to be allies of an independent Bulgaria than to be rulers of a dependent Ireland. The carrying out of national reforms which are badly needed, may at times consolidate an imperialist coalition internally. This circumstance is, for instance, taken rightly into consideration by Karl Renner, one of the particularly contemptible lackeys of German imperialism a hero of course, who is in favour of the “unity” of the Social Democratic parties in general and of unity with Scheidemann and Kautsky in particular.
The objective course of things demands justice, and just as the executioners of the revolutions of 1848 and 1905 were, in a certain sense, the executors of their wills also, the directors of the imperialist slaughter are forced to carry out certain national reforms, certain reforms in State capitalism. Further, the masses who are roused to indignation by war and the high costs of living, must be soothed by small concessions; why should they not be promised “disarmament”? (Which might partially be carried through–it involves no obligations!). War is a “branch of industry”, somewhat like forestry; it takes some decades for the trees to grow high enough… i.e. to provide sufficient adult “cannon-fodder”. And let us hope that in the course of decades new Plechanovs, new Scheidemanns, new fulsome mediators of the Kautsky type will grow up in the bosom of the “united” international Social Democracy.
The bourgeois Reformists and pacifists are people who, as a rule, are paid in some form or other, for consolidating the rule of capitalism by patching it up, for stupefying the masses of the people and diverting their thoughts from the revolutionary fight. If such “leaders” of socialism as Turati and Kautsky, by means of direct statements (a statement of this kind “escaped from the lips” of Turati in his unfortunately famous speech of December 17th, 1916) or by means of silence (in which Kautsky is a passed master) put the idea into the heads of the masses that a democratic peace might grow out of the present imperialist war, while the bourgeois Governments still continue to exist, without a revolutionary insurrection against the whole system of imperialist world conditions–it is our duty to declare that preaching of this kind is a deception of the people, that it has nothing in common with socialism, that it leads to beautifying the imperialist peace.
We are in favour of democratic peace. And, just for this reason, we do not want to lie to the peoples as–of course with the best intentions and the most virtuous motives–Kautsky and Turati lie. We will tell the truth; a democratic peace is impossible unless the revolutionary proletariat of France, England, Germany and Russia overthrow their Governments. We consider it the greatest stupidity if revolutionary Social Democrats suddenly abandon the fight for reforms as a whole, including that for “the reconstruction of the State”. Just now, however, Europe is passing through a time when it is more than ever necessary to remember the truth that reforms are by-products of the revolutionary class war. For the solution of great historical questions is now on the order of the day–not by our will, not through any plans, but as the result of the objective course of events–questions which must be solved by the direct application of force by the masses to create a new foundation, and not by bargaining on the basis of the old and decaying one.
Just at the present time, when the ruling bourgeoisie is preparing peaceably to disarm millions of proletarians and–under the cover of a fine sounding ideology and while sprinkling them with the holy water of nauseous pacifist phrases–to remove them without danger from the stinking, muddy trenches, where they have served as instruments of murder, into the prisons of the capitalist factories, where they will have to work off by “honest work” the national debts which run into hundreds of milliards–just now the slogan: “Convert imperialist war into a civil war for socialism”, with which our Party appealed to the people in the autumn of 1914, has much more significance than at the beginning of the war. Karl Liebknecht, when condemned to imprisonment, identified himself with this slogan when he said from the platform of the Reichstag: “Turn your guns against your class enemies within the country!” Just the war, in which the harnessing of the forces of the people compelled the Government to regulate, from one single centre, the whole economic life of more than 50 millions, shows how ripe present-day society has become for the transition to socialism. If this is possible under the leadership of a handful of aristocratic Junkers in the interest of a handful of financial magnates, it will certainly be no less possible under the leadership of class-conscious workers in the interest of nine tenths of the population who are exhausted through starvation and war.
In order to be able to lead the masses, the class-conscious workers must realise the whole rottenness of such leaders of socialism as are Turati, Kautsky & Co. These gentlemen fancy themselves as revolutionary Social Democrats and are highly indignant if they are told that their place is in the party of Messrs Bissolati, Scheidemann, Legien & Co. Turati and Kautsky, however, have not the least understanding for the fact that only the revolution of the masses is capable of solving the great questions which are on the order of the day; they have not the slightest faith in the revolution, they are not in the least interested in how the revolution is maturing through the war in the consciousness and the attitude of mind of the masses. Their attention is concentrated solely on reforms, on the haggling between the separate sections of the ruling classes; it is to them that they appeal, it is they whom they wish to “persuade”, it is to them that they wish to adapt the Labour Movement.
It is of chief importance that the class-conscious vanguard of the proletariat should concentrate its thoughts and its forces on the revolutionary fight, on the overthrow of the Government in its own country. There are no such revolutions as those which Turati and Kautsky “are prepared” to recognise, in which it is possible to foretell when the revolution will break out and what are its prospects of victory. A revolutionary situation actually exists in Europe. Great discontent, fermentation and indignation prevail among the masses. Revolutionary Social Democracy must concentrate all its forces on reinforcing this current. It will depend on the force of the revolutionary movement how much of the “promised” reforms are realised, and whether these reforms are of any value at all for the further fight of the working class. Should the revolutionary movement be successful, the victory of socialism in Europe and the realisation, not of an imperialist armistice between the war of Germany against Russia and England and a war of Russia and Germany against England or a war of the United States against Germany and England etc., but of a really permanent and really democratic peace will depend on the force of this revolutionary movement.
International Press Correspondence, widely known as”Inprecor” was published by the Executive Committee of the Communist International (ECCI) regularly in German and English, occasionally in many other languages, beginning in 1921 and lasting in English until 1938. Inprecor’s role was to supply translated articles to the English-speaking press of the International from the Comintern’s different sections, as well as news and statements from the ECCI. Many ‘Daily Worker’ and ‘Communist’ articles originated in Inprecor, and it also published articles by American comrades for use in other countries. It was published at least weekly, and often thrice weekly. A major contributor to the Communist press in the U.S., Inprecor is an invaluable English-language source on the history of the Communist International and its sections.
PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/inprecor/1927/v07n16-feb-25-1927-inprecor-op.pdf
