anarchy archives

An Online Research Center on the History and Theory of Anarchism



About Us

Contact Us

Other Links

Critics Corner


The Cynosure

  Michael Bakunin
  William Godwin
  Emma Goldman
  Peter Kropotkin
  Errico Malatesta
  Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
  Max Stirner
  Murray Bookchin
  Noam Chomsky
  Bright but Lesser Lights
  Cold Off The Presses
  Anarchist History
  Worldwide Movements
  First International
  Paris Commune
  Haymarket Massacre
  Spanish Civil War

<--Previous  Up  Next-->

build, saw, plant and go on starving. The idiotic plan of forced collectivization has resulted in the most fertile lands of Russia becoming barren, and in the complete devastation of whole sections by death from starvation. The most effective projects in the center, and the most devastating destruction in the provinces,--- such is the tragic irony of forced collectivization.

The case has been presented. We can now sum up the evidence above and see if progress is possible under the Bolshevik state, or to make it more general, under ANY state socialism.

First of all we observe a merging of State and Party in Russia, similar to the merging of State and Church in the Middle Ages. This merging created a monstrous State which is the Party, and a Party which is the State,--- which a monstrous centralization and regimentation---all dependent upon centralization; the planting of potatoes, the manufacture of show-polish, and... human life.

The functioning of this monstrous machine of centralization called for a great many people who have developed into a large class of bureaucrats possessing dictatorial powers. This means that we have in Russia a bureaucratic despotism, a dictatorship of bureaucracy. The fact that the bureaucracy is composed of peasants, workers and intelligentsia does not change the essence of the dictatorship, nor its harmfulness. Any dictatorship, no matter what its purpose, regardless of its aims, is despotism, and no freedom is compatible with despotism. Under this regime the people have many responsibilities, and practically no rights. That is why at present all elementary rights, as well as all elementary liberties, without which no culture or progress is possible have been destroyed in Russia.

What does the USSR represent politically? To answer this question let us examine the political content of this "socialistic" union. In it, there is no freedom of press, but stringent censorship; no freedom of speech, not only for the general population but no even for party members; no freedom of assemblage or organization; no freedom of thought and scientific research,---everyone is compelled to think in a Marxian way, the brand of which is prescribed by the ruling sect.

Scientific research must evolve from and be based on Marxian theory. The Dialextic method must be used even in medicine. Is this not medieval Catholicism? Where freedom of thought is absent, there can be no freedom of conscience, and Russia does not have this freedom. There is no freedom of training and education,---the Bolshevik schools are Catholic seminaries. There is no freedom of moving from place to place, no freedom of occupation and initiative and artistic creativeness. Literature and are must follow in the channel of Marxism and must serve as tools of agitation and propaganda in the hands of the Party-State. The rights of the individual and the home are violated.

This page has been accessed by visitors outside of Pitzer College times since September 12, 2001.


[Home]               [Search]               [About Us]               [Contact Us]               [Other Links]               [Critics Corner]