GOVERNMENT IS VIOLENCE

THE FIRST COLLECI10N OF TOLSTOY'S ESSAYS

ON ANARCIllSM AND NON - VIOLENT REVOLUTION
•••
GOVERNMENT IS VIOLENCE
People can only be freed from slavery
by the abolition of Governments essays en
•••
ANARCIHSM and PACTFTSM
A Government, and especially a Government
entrusted with military power.
is the most dangerous organization possible
•••

As long as Governments with armies exist,

the termination of
armaments and wars is impossible
•••

The Anarchists are right in everything ...

they are mistaken only in thinking that Anarchy
can be instituted by a violent revolution
•••

Freedom, not imaginary but actual, is attained

not by barricades and murders,
nor by any new kind
of institution coercively introduced, but
only by the cessation of obedience
to any human authority whatever
•••

TOLSTOY TOLSTOY
GOVERNMENT IS

VIOLENCE
GOVERNMENT IS VIOLENCE CONTENTS
5
TOLSTOY
On this book

Tbe non-violent anarchism or Leo Tolstoy 7

GOVERNMENT ISVIOLENCE

essays on anarchism and pacifism

The End of the Age 21

An Appeal to Social Rdormers 53

Edited and introduced by
David Stephens
On Anarchy 67

Thou Sbalt Not Kill 71

Phoenix Press
London
1990 Patriotism and Government 77

The Kingdom of God is Within You 9J

Leo Tolstoy
GOVERNMENT IS VIOLENCE
The Slavery of Our Time 111
essays on anarchism and pacifism
ISBN: 0 94898 4 15 5
On Socialism, State and Christian 157

Published by Phoenix Press

PO Box 824
London Sources 168
NI9DL
Further Reading on Tolstoy 170

Typeset by Kaw-djer and Ie Vieux Foudrc

Notes 174
Arlwork by Penny Rimbaud

Printed and bound by spec Whcatons, Exeter

Cover photo: To]SLOy in 1908

 ON THIS BOOK
This book has been designed to complemCnl lhe 1987 republication
by New Society of Toistoy's Writings on Civil Disobedience and Non­
violence, which contains many of Tolstoy's Christian pacifist essays.
However, the New Society collection docs not include the classic anar­
chist texts that Tolstoy wrote around the lum of the century, which,
although oflen republished, remain scattered in pamphlets and magazines
long out-of-print and hard to find. The aim, therefore,of this collection is
to present in onc volume the most important of Tolstoy's writings on
anarchism and revolution, some of which (On Anarchy, On Socialism,
Slate and Christian) have not, to my knowledge, been republished in
English since Tolstoy's death in 1910. One essay lhal appears in the New
Society collection, Thou Shall NOI Kill, is also reproduced here, as its dis­
cussion of anarchist terrorism is ccntralLO the theme of this book. Both
collections include extracts from The KingdomojGod is Within You; they
are, however, from different chapters and do not overlap.

Tolstoy often covered lhesame ground in several essayswilh slightly

different emphasis; whilst all of Ihe eight essays republished here deal wilh
the State and revolution, they have been arranged to give a rough
progression from an evaluation of anarchist theories and tactics to a
criticism of militarism, capi13lism and Marxism. The essays appear
essentially in meir original form with a minimum of editing to remove
superfluous references to contemporary circumstance; some of the b'ans­
lators' more obsolete English expressions have, however, been updated
where necessary. Details of the editing and sources are indicated at the
back of the book, as arc suggestions for further reading on Tolstoy and
anarcho-pacifism. Besides gi ving details of events or persons mentioned
by TolsLOy, the footnotes also refer to modern illustrations of points raised
in me essays. For ease of consultation,mey have been grouped at lheend
of me book, rather than appearing at the end of each essay.

My thanks must go to Michael Holman of Leeds University for

academic advice and research, and to all the people overme lasl five years
who have kept Ihe idea of the book going: Pen,Bron and G of Crass,Alben
and Chris of the War Resisters' International/Pcacc News, Kaw-djcr who
had the unenviable task of typing it all and, above all, Mo who was the first

5
 THE NON·
to hear of it and the one who finally brought it into being. This book is for
Rachel, as it always was.

David Stephens
VIOLENT
ANARCHISM OF
LEO TOLSTOY
Eightyyearshavenowelapsedsincc LeoTolstoy'sdeath i n 191O.and
yet the many essays whichTolstoy wrote in the last twenty years of his life
to expound his innovative brand of non-violent anarchism raise issues that
are still of importance today. The twentieth century has seen increasing
convergence (and expansion)of anarchist and pacifist ideas: theanarchist
Wildcat by Donald Rooum appears in Freedom every momh. movement has seen the vast escalation of militarism and the seemingly
invincible annoury of repression as perhaps the greatest threat posed by
the State; the pacifist movement has gone beyond a simplistic rejection of
violence on a personal level to consider the role of the State in militarism,
and has embraced direct action as a means of combatting it. Both
anarchism and pacifism have as their common enemy the State as the
'organ of violence', and yet some anarchists refuse to recognize this com­
munity of interest - the OclObcr 1986 issue of Black Flag comments:

'Many paciflSts have come to think of themselves as anarchists. But

their "anarchism" remained militant liberalism ... "non-violent anar­
chism" is not a variant of anarchism: it is an attack on it'.

This uncompromising stand is not echoed in other countries; indeed,

in Germany, where anarchism is much more alive than in Britain, the
numerically strongest and most active anarchist group is theFederation of
Non-violent Action Groups with their magazineGrqssroots Revolutwn
There is no reason for the antipathy that exists between different currents
of anarchist thought; it has long been an unfortunate feature of anarchists
that they tend lO emphasize the differences between themselves ratherthan
recognize the similarities. This has prevented anarchists from meeting the
need for a reappraisal of their revolutionary hislOry; whilsl authoritarian
ideologies have each had their day, anarchism has never succeeded i n
consolidating a large-scale and durable libertarian society beyond thelem­
porary and partial achievements born of civil war. Anarcho-pacifists
would argue that this is because of the unique model of society anarchism
represents; in being alone in rejecting the State and coercion. anarchists
must develop a non-coercive strategy for revolution different from thai
Proposed by authoritarian ideologies. In order lO do this, anarchists must
6
7
be prepared to listen to one an other instead of each fighting from their
comer, to listen too to theexampJes from the past of anarchist revolution­
aries like Kropotkin, Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman who,
having espoused violence, came to be disillusioned by it as a means of
struggle. TolslOY'S arguments on the incompatibility between anarchism
and violence and his proposed strategy of non-violent revolution are a
useful starling-point for discussion, but the debate is not made any easier
if such ideas arc rejccted out of hand by some anarchists. Albert Meltzer,
for example, writing in hisAnarchism, Arguments For and Against, even
seeks to deny the historical and ideological links between Tolstoy and the
anarchist movement:
'The "Pacifist-Anarchist" approach differs radically from revolu­
tionary anarchism. Il is too readily conceded that "this is. after all,
anarchism" ... popular opinion made such figures as Tolstoy into an
anarchist· he was not; neither was he in the normal sense of the word a
Christian or a pacifist. as popularly supposed'.
The history of the anarchist movement and the essays contained in
this book show otherwise. TOlstoy's political writings express an uncom­
promising rejection of Authority and all its trappings, a scathing criticism
of Church and State, capitalism and Marxism, militarism and patriotism.
Historically,Tolstoy'S conversion from a dissolute and privileged society
author to the non-violent and spiritual anarchist of his latter days was
brought about by two trips around Europe in 1857 and 1860-61. At that
time,stifled by the polilical and literary repression ofTsaristRussia, many
Russian nobles left to taste the winds of change then blowing through
WesternEurope; other Russian aristocrats radicalized by their travels in
Westem Europe were Kropotkin, Bakunin and Herten. During his first
visit toEurope,Tolstoy had a traumatic experience which was to mark the
beginning of his evolution; after wilnessing a public execution in Paris, he
wrote to his friend V. P. Botkin on April 6, 1857:
'The truth is that the State is a conspiracy designed not only to exploit,
but above all to corrupt its citizens ... I understand moral and religious
laws, not compulsory for everyone, but leading forward and promising a
more harmonious future; I feel the laws of art, which always bring
happiness. But political laws seem to me such prodigious lies, that I fail
to see how one among them can be bcUeror worse than any of the others
... Henceforth I shall never serve any governmcnt anywhere'.
However, it was during his second trip toEurope that Tolstoy met the
man who was to shape his political lransformation. In 1860-61, Tolstoy
visited Britain, France, Italy, Germany and Belgium (NOTE No 1) to
8 9
gather ideas on education, ideas which would lead him to set up severa1
libertarian schools near his home of Yasnaya Polyana. During his visit to
Brussels in March 1861, armed with a leuer of recommendation from
Alexander Herzen, Tolstoy called on a mathematics lea cher by the name
of Emile Durfon, in reality the French anarchistPierre-JosephProudhon,
then living in exile after the publication of his On Justice in the Revolution
and in the Church in 1858. Tolstoy later chronicled his meeting with
Proudhon in his educational notebooks:
'Last year, I had the chance to speak to Mr. Proudhon about Russia.
At that time, he was engaged in writing a book on the laws of war. I
described to him the latest news from Russia - the freeing of the serfs - and
I told him that amongst the goveming classes there was a strong desire to
develop popular education, and also that sometimes this desire took on a
somewhat comic form and became a kind of fashion. "Is that really so?"
he remarked. I replied that, as far as I could judge, Russian society was
beginning to understand that, without popular education, no State struc­
ture can be stable.Proudhon stood up and began pacing around the room.
"lfthis is true", he said in an almost envious tone, "then the future belongs
to you, theRussians". If l recount this conversation with Proudhon, it is to
show that, in my personal experience, he was the only man who under­
stood the significance of education and of the printing press in our
time'(NOTE N02).
Tolstoy's views on property were alsodecply innuenced byProudhon,
in particular by Proudhon's What is property?, published in 1840, which
Tolstoy had read some time before his meeting with Proudhon. Criticiz­
ing the constitutional moves inRussia which had emancipated the serfs but
delivered them intothepowerofthe landowners,Tolstoy noted in his diary
for August 18, 1865:
'The mission of Russia in world history consists in bringing into the
world the idea of a socialized organization of land ownership. "Property
is theft" will remain a greater truth than the truth of the English constitu­
tion, as long as mankind exists ... This idea has future. The Russian revo­
lution can be founded only on this idea. The revolution will not be against
the Tsar and despotism, but against private property in land'.
Besides discussing education and property, Tolstoy andProudhon
also talked ofProudhon's fonhcomi ng book on war, still one of the French
author's most controversial works. The book, published a few months
afterTolslOy's visit, was entitled On War and Peace; three years later, i n
1864, t h e year which saw the publication ofProudhon's book i nRussian,
Tolstoy used the same title when he began writing his grealest literary
 circles, culminating in a police raid on TOlStoy's house in July 1862.
work which contains much of Proudhon's philosophy. Tolstoy, who was not there at the time, narrowly escaped arrest when
Maria Tolstoy managed to conceal a sheaf of leuers from Alexander
On his return to Russia, TolstOy threw himself intO educational
Herzcn by sitting down on them and refusing to move until the police had
activities founding thirteen schools for peasants in and around his estates
left their home(NOTENo 4). Although hi s experiments in libertarian edu­
;
at Yasna aPolyana(NOTE No 3). The schools w�re to r:un in�iuenlly
cation were sporadic (1849,1859 - 1863, 1868 - 1875), Tolstoycontinued
for the next ten years and functioned on purely hbertanan pnnclples, as
to write on education and to produce elementary school books for many
Tolstoy described in his essay, The School at Yasnaya Poiyana (1862):
years. His New ABC (1875) is still used in the Soviet Union today; his
school, however, was taken over by the Ministry of Education and no
'The school has evolved freely from the principles introduced into it
longer runs on his pioneering principles,
by teachers and pupils. In spite of the preponderating influence of �e
teacher, the pupil has always had the right not to come to SC:hool, or, havm �
Tolstoy'S relationship with Proudhon was brought loan untimely end
come, not to listen to the teacher. The teacher has had the nghtnot toadmn
by the death ofProudhon in January 1865, but in the 1890s, when Tolstoy
a pupil ... Now we have pupils in the first class, who themselves dema�d
that the programme be adhered to,who are d� satisfied �hen �ey are diS·
was writing many of his greatest anarchist essays, he came into contact
with Kropotkin and they corresponded through the intermediary of Tol­
turbed in their lessons,and who constantly dnve out the httlechlldrcn who
stoy's exiled follower Vladimir Tchertkoff (NOTE No 5), Tolstoy ex­
run in to them. In myopinion, this outward disorder is useful and valuable,
pressed great admiration at the Russian prinee's rejection of his privileged
however strange and inconvenient it may seem to the teacher ... Obeying
position in favour of his ideals, an example Tolstoy was himself to follow
only natural laws,flowing from their nature,they revoltand gru� ble �hen
in 1891 when he gave up his estates and renounced copyright on all his
they have to obey your untimely interference. They do nOl be�eve m �e
o dlscovenng works wriuen after 1881. Tolstoy and Kropotkin had much in common in
legality of your bells, rosters and rules ... I have succeeded m
their private lives - Russian ex-aristocrats and ex-soldiers who became
among them some rough sense of justice. How often are affalfs settled by
.
revolutionaries, drawing their ideals from the simple life of rural agricul­
lhem by reason of one knows not what law, and yet seuled in a manner
tural communities: both believed that life without Authority was only
possible if communitarian principles were followed (NOTE No 6). Tol­
satisfactory to both parties! .,. The best policy and administrative system
for a school is to allow the scholars perfect freedom of learning and of
stoy even developed Kropotkin's idea of mutual aid further, calling it
governing themselves as they like'.
mutual service. Kropotkin valued Tolstoy both as a thinker and as an
author, and wrote to Vladimir Tchertkoff saying:
Tolstoy returned to the question of forced learning in his Lefler on
'In order to understand how much I sympathize with the ideas of
Education (1902):

Tolstoy, it is sufficient to say that I have written a large volume to

'That children grow up without having learnt certain subjects is nOl
demonstrate that life is created, not by the struggle for existence, but by
nearly so bad as what happens to almost all children· they get educational
mutual aid' (NOTE No 7).
indigestion andcometodetcsteducation. A child,or a man,can learn when
he has an appetite for what he studies. Without appetite, instruction is an
Kropotkin also wrote several essays on TOlStoy's literary achieve­
evil · a terrible evil, causing people to become mentally crippled'.
ments; apart from a section in his Ideals and Realities in Russian Litera­
lure, Kropotkin devoted an essay to Tolstoy entitled uo Tolstoy:HisAn.
In many respects, Tolstoy anticipated the ideas of voluntary lessons
His Personality which was written in 1910 but which remained unpub­
and self-government for children that A. S. Neill put into practice in his lished until 1958 (NOTE No 8).
school Summerhill, founded in 1921 and still running today. Indeed, one
could say that libertarian education started in practice in 1861 when
Tolstoy in tum recommended Kropotkin's Conquest ofBread and
Tolstoy'S school atYasnaya Polyana opened with the motto 'Come and go Fields, Factories and Workshops to his readers in his Appeal to the
freely'. Although the schools themselves functioned well. Tolstoy was
Working People. The two Russians, whilst agreeing on the evils of the
subjected to increasing official harassmen t as knowledge of their methods
State and the need for communitarian anarchism, differed on the question
spread. Many of the teachers were young radical students from Moscow,
of revolutionary violence; whilst Tolstoy totally rejected violence as a
and the Tsarist secret police dispatched several agents to infiltrate their
"
10
means of reaching anarchy,Kropotkin regretted that sometimes violence
might be nccessary. Tolstoy never called himself an anarchist because of
its contemjX>rary connection with violence, but showed great understand­
ingofKrojX>tkin 'sfeelings on thesubjcct in a letlerto VladimirTchertkoff
in 1897:
'His arguments in favour of violence do not seem to me the expres­
sion of his opinions, but only of his fidelity to the banner under which he
has served so honestly all his life. He cannOI but see that in order to be
strong, a protest against violence must be solidly based, and that a protest
which permits itself the usc of violence has not a leg to stand on and is, as
a consequence, doomed to failure' (NOTE No 9).
Botll however agreed tIlat the wave of assassinations by anarchists
that rocked Europe and America in the 1890s was counter-productive;
David Miller comments in his Anarchism:
'After having endorsed the insurrectionary strategy in the 1870s, and
then individual acts of terror in the early 1880s, Kropotkin had come by
tile 1890s to disapprove of acts of violence except those performed in self­
defence in the course of a revolution' (NOTE No 10).
MirroringTolstoy's views expressed in his Thou ShaltNot Kill, Kro­
potkin contributed a critical essay entitled On the murder ofthe Austrian
Empress to the first issue of Tchertkoff's Free Word N�s-sheel, pub­
lished in November 1898.
KropoLldn gives us an excellent insight into Tolstoy'S political
philosophy in tile section on anarchism that he contributed to LheEneyc/o­
paedia Britannica in 1905:
'Without naming himself an anarchist, Leo Tolstoy,like his prede­
cessors in the popular religious movements of the 15m and 16th centuries,
Chojecki, Denk and manyothers,took the anarchist position asregards the
State and property rights, deducing his conclusions from me general spirit
of the teachings of Christ and from the necessary dictates of reason. With
all the might of his talent, he made (especially in The Kingdom ofGod is
Within You) a powerful criticism of the ChurCh, the State and Jaw
altogether, and especially of the present property Jaws. He describes the
State as the domination of me wicked, supported by brutal force. Robbers,
he says, are far less dangerous than a well-organized Government. He
makes a searching criticism of the prejudices which are now current
concerning the benefits conferred upon men by the Church, the State and
the existing distribution of propeny, and from the teaching of Christ, he
12
deduces the rule of non-resistance and lhe absolute condemnation of all
wars. His religious arguments are, however, so well combined with
arguments borrowed from a dispassionate observation of the present evils,
that the anarchislportions of his works appeal to the religious and the non­
religious reader alike' (NOTE No 11).
Kropotkin rightly identifies religious faith as the spring of Tolstoy's
anarchism and pacifism: in essence, Tolstoy argues that the fundament of
spirituality rests on the principle of non-violence, and that pacifism must
inevitably lead to anarchism due to the State's role as the 'organ of
violence', waging war and repressing internal dissent. Tolstoy succinctly
described his beliefs in an undated letter to Dr. Eugen Heinrich Schmitt,
editor of the Budapest magazine Ohne Staat:
'Government is violence, Christianity is meekness, non-resistance,
love. And, therefore, Government cannOt be Christian, and a man who
wishes to be a Christian must not serve Government'.
These ideas arc most fully expounded in Tolstoy'S major
work on Christian anarchism, The Kingdom of God is Within You,
published in 1894, in which Tolstoy described the State as follows:
Take a man of our times, whoever he may be ... he lives on quietly
until one day people come and say to him: "Firstly, you mUSt give your oath
and promise Lhat you will submit like a slave toall we may command you,
and that you will obey and believe to he absolute truth whatever we may
wish to decide and 10 call laws; secondly, you must give us a pan of your
labour to be used at our discretion, and we shall employ it to keep you in
slavery and to prevent you from resisting our dccisions; thirdly,you must
elect and be elected among those who are supposed to take part in
Government, knowing all the while that me Government will go on quite
regardless of the foolish speeches you and others like you may pronounce,
and solely i n accordance with our will, that is, with me will of those who
have the army at their disposal; fourthly, you must appear at cenain times
at the law court and take pan in the senseless cruelties which we perpetrate
against misguided men, for whose depravity weare ourselves responsible,
but whom we subject to imprisonment, exile, solitary confinement and
death. Fifthly, and most important of all, although you may be on the most
friendly terms with men of other nations, you must be ready ata moment's
notice, and whenever we command you, to look upon mose whom weshall
point out to you as your enemics. and to help personally or by money in
ruining, murdering and robbing mese men and women, children and aged
IlCOple, and todo the same towards your rell ow-countrymen or even your
Own parents, if we happen to require it" '.
13
 The Kingdom ofGod is Within You was the fruition of a long period sorcery, which completely conceals the whole meaning of Christ's teach­
of reflection that started in 1881 when Tolstoy announced his withdrawal ing'.

from literature and wrote My Confession, followed in 1884 by What I

Tolstoy's understanding of Christianity was an essentially revolu­
believe and in 1886 by What then must we do? The religious faith which
tiOnary and liberatory one; in the words of Herbert Newton:
moved Tolstoy topolitical and social criticism should,as Kropolkin noted,
not distance the atheist, for, as TolsLOY wrote in What is religion? (1902):
'Christ founded no church. established no Stale, made no laws,
imposed no government or external authority; he simply set himself to
write the law of God in the hearts of men in order that they might be able
'True religion is a relationship that man establishes with the infinite
life surrounding him, and it is such as binds his life to that infinity and
to govern themselves'.
guides his conduct'.

Tolstoy's spiritual anarchism rested on the principle of total non­

George Woodcock notes in his Anarchism
violence, and in his essays Tolstoy gives numerous reasons for rejecting

.
� �
'I thin I ave said enough LO show lhat in its essentials Tolstoy's
violence as a means of attaining anarchy. Quite apart from the practical
consideration that to take up armed struggle is to fight the Stale on its own
SOCial teaching IS a true anarchism, condemning the authoritarian orderof
ground where itis strongest, Tolstoy argues that the grip of the State over
existing society, proposing a new libertarian order, and suggesting the
the media will ensure the 'hypnotization' of the people in support of State
means by wh ich it may be attained. Since his religion is a natural and
violence - either wars or internal repression - through the elaborate
rational one, and seeks its Kingdom in the reign of justice and loveon this
earth, it does not transcend his anarchist doctrine, but is complementary maintenance of 'enemy images' and the gut reaction of fear. Far from
enlightening people, 'murder only increases the hypnotism', 'dynamite
to it'.
and the dagger only cause reaction'. The popu larreputation that anarchism
acquired during its espousal of terrorist tactics in Tolstoy's time has
Tolstoy's idea of religion, then, was nota mystical doctir ne buta new
�o�ption of life that had no need ofChurch and clergy, litany and ritual; �
conti ued to be a handicap to broad support for its ideas today. Our

Ifl hiS ulter to a Non-Commissioned Officer (1899), Tolstoy wrote:

twenlleth-century experience with terrorism has shown that violence has
not helped to challenge the State credo, but actually drives the people

'It is only necessary to a c t towards others as we w i s h

t��ards it. Panicked by media hysteria and skilfully manipUlated by State
�
th m toact towards us. In that i s all the law and all th e prophets,asChrist
dlsmfo
.
� ation, thepeople themselves call for increased powers of repres­
slon.In hIS utter toRussianLiberals(1896), Tolstoyargued that violence
said. And to act in this way we need neither icons, nor relics, nor church
was counter-productive:
services, nor priests, nor catechisms, nor Governments, but on the con­
uary, we need perfect freedom from all that; for to do unto others as we
'The violence of the Revolutionists only strengthens the order of
wish them to do unto us is only possible when a man is free from the fables
things they strive against ... for it drives the whole crowd of undecided
which the priests give out as the only truth'.
people - who stand wavering between the two parties - into the camp of the
conservative and retrograde party'.
Not surprisingly, the Orthodox Church would not tolerate such
'heresy' and excommunicated Tolstoy in 1901 for his persistent con­
This mechanism has been well understood by States; they do not
demnations of the Church as a reactionary body which supponed the .
heSitate to make use of agents provocateurs and to orchestrate fake
miliwism of the State. Tolstoy was unconcerned by his excommunica­
terroristauacks whenever they feel that the legislation on internal surveil­
tion; he had long ago become convinced of the' false Christianity' of the
Church as he wrote in his Reply to the Synod's Edict ofExcommunication
lance �d repression needs reinforcing. The 'strategy of tension' in Italy,
the SUICide of West German democracy in the 1970s and British manipu-
(1901):
Iallon
. .

of the Northern Ireland conniCt are eloquent examples of this

process. To use violence is then merely to play into the Sta te's hands.
'I �ame convinced that Church doctrine is theoretica IIy a crafty and
harmful he, and practically a collection of the grossest superstitions and
But perhaps Tolstoy's most persuasi ve argument against revolution-

IS
14
ary violence as a strategy to reach anarchy is that the means and the end
are incompatible; reasoning that violence is the most naked form of
coercion,he assen s that allempts to introduce an anti -authoriwian society
through violent revolution can only end in dictatorship. In his evaluation
of other anarchist thinkerS,AnAppeal to SocialReformers, Tolstoy wro te:
'lf power is to be abolished, this can be accomplished in nowise by
force, as power having abolished power will remain power'.
Echoing the concerns ofKropotkin and Alexander Berkman that the
defcnceofthe revolution may destroy therevolution itself, Tolstoy argued
in his Letter to Russian Liberals:
'Even ifan attempt to alter the existing regime by violent means could
succeed, there would be no guarantee that the new organization would be
durable, and that the enemies of that new order would not,at someconven­
ientoppor tunitY,triumph by using violence such as had been used against
them ... And so, the new order of things,established by violence, would
have continually to be supported by violence - i.e. by wrongdoing. And
conscquent1y, it would inevitably, and very qui ckly,be corruptcd, like the
order it replaced'.
In a leUer com.meming on the 1905 revolution to his friend V. V.
S!aSOv on September 20, 1906, Tolstoy foresaw the fate of the Russian
Revolution of 1917:
'What is going on now amongst the people (not the proletariat) is very
important and. of course, good. but what is being done by all these comic
parties and com minees is not important and not good ... From the direction
things are taking, unless the people, the real people, the hundred million
peasants who work on the land, by their passive non-panicipation in
violence make all this frivolous, noisy. irritable and touchy crowd harm­
less and unnecessary, we shall surely arrive at a military dicultorship,and
arrive at it by way of the great crimes and corruption which have already
begun ... SO this is what I think: I rejoice for the revolution, bUlgrieve for
those who, imagining that they are making it, are destroying it'.
Tolstoy's thoughts on the impossibility of rcaching anarchy through
violence are echoed in an exchange of leuers in 1928 between veteran
revolutionaries Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman, the latter im­
prisoned Cor nearly fifteen years for his participation in the anarchist
terrorism of the 1890s:
'There are moments when I fccl [hat the revolution cannot work on
16
Anarchist principles. But when the old methods are followed, they never
lead to Anarchism' (Berkman).
'I feel that violence i n whatever form never has a n d
probably never will bring constructive results' (Goldman).
'Unless we set our face against the attitude to revolution as a violent
eruption desuoying everything of what has bee n built up over centuries of
painful and painstaking effort not by the bourgeoisie but by the combined
effort of humanity, we must become Bolsheviks,and accept terror and all
that it implies,or become Tolstoyans. There is no other way. I insist that
if we can undergo changes in every other method of dealing with social
issues,we will also have to learn to cha nge in the methods of revolution'
(Goldman) (NOTE No 12).
Tolstoy'S suggested means of attaining anarchy were those that have
now become well-known as civil disobedience and non-violent direct
action. Tolstoy called his strategy 'non-resistance' after the Biblical
quotation (so often partially cited as a justilication for revenge):
'Ye have heard, it was said of old, An eye for an eye, a tooth for a
tooth, but I say uO(o you, Resist not evil' (Matthew V, v. 38-39).
Tolstoy's choice of terms - 'non-resistance' and 'passive submis­
sion' - is unfonunate, suggesting mute acceptance of oppression,and this
has led to Tolstoy being accused ofbcing a quietist. This is, however, far
from what To Istoy recommends; contrasting 'passive submission' with
violent retaliation, Tolstoy advocates unbending moral resistance to
Authority. Theanarchist historian,Max NeuJau,commented on this in the
following words:
'It would be a complete misunderstanding of Tolstoy to see
his philosophy as one of resignation. of submission to evil in a spirit of
"Christian" patience and of obedience due to all authority. Tolstoy upheld
exactly the contrary: he wanted resistance to evil I and added to one
method of resistance - that of active force - a second: resislance through
disobedience, in other words, passive force. He did not say: suffer the
wrong that is done to you, or turn the other cheek once you have been
Struck, but instead: do nOI do what you are ordered 10 do ,do not take the
rifle which is given to you to kill your brothers .. If Tolstoy had read
.
Godwin's book, he would have found the same idea expressed there ... The
Emerson-Tolstoy-Gandhi approach is as valid a means of struggle as is
revolutionary action in the form of strikes and, above ail, the Genera]
Strike'(NOTE No 13).
17
 'To attain this society where the State and law and property wiD all
be abolished, Tolstoy - like Godwin and to a great extent like Proudhon -
Il was from Tolstoy's ideas of non-compliance, refusal of taxes and
non-violent resistance to Authority that Gandhi developed his lhCOry of
advocates a moral rather than a political revolution. A political revolution,
saryagraha. Therelationship between Tolstoy and Gandhi wasa brief one,
he suggests, fights the Stateand property from without; amoral revolution
lastingjustovcra year, but Tolstoy's writings had already had a profound
works within the evil society and wears at its very foundations. Tolstoy
influence on the future exponen t of non·violence. In his autobiographyAfl
does make a distinction between the violence of a government, which is
whoUyevil because it is dcliberate and works by the perversion of reason
men are brothers Gandhi acknowledged his debt to Tolstoy:

'Il was forty years ago, when I was passing through a severe crisis of
and the violence of an angry people, which is only partly evil because i �
arises from ignorance. Yet the only effective way he sees of changing
society is by reason, and, ultimately, by persuasion and example. The man
scepticism and doubt that I came across Tolstoy's book The Kingdom of

who wishes to abolish the State must cease lO cooperate with it, refuse
God is Within You, and was deeply impressed by it. I was at that time a
believer in violence. Its reading cured me of my scepticism and made me
military service, police service, jury service, the payment of taxes. The
a finn believer in ahimsa (non-violence) .. . He was the greatest apostle of
refusal to obey, in other words, is Tolstoy'S great weapon'.
non-violence that the present age has produced'.

Tolstoy has this to add:

Gandhi corresponded with Tolstoy from October 1909 until Tol­

'There can be only one permanent revolution - a moral one: the

stoy's death in November 1910, informing Tolstoy of his non-violent
resistance to race laws in South Africa and obtaining TolSlOY's pennission
regeneration of the inner man. How is this revolution to take place?
to publish an Indian translation of Tolstoy's uller to a Hindu. In this
Nobody knows how it will take place in humanity, but every man feels it
essay, TOlStoy's influence on Gandhi can be secn in the following passage:
clearly in himself. And y.cI in our world, everybody minks of changing
.
�
'A com e .rcial company enslaved a nalion comprising
humanity, and nobody thinks of changing himself.

two hundred mllhons ... do nOl the figures make it clear that it is not the
David Stephens
English who have enslaved the Indians, bUI the Indians who have enslaved
themselves? .If the people of India are enslaved, it is only because they
themselves hve and have lived by violence, and do not recognize me
elCrnal law of love inherent in humanity. As soon as men I..ive entirely in
accord with the law of love natural to their hearts and now revealed to
them, which excludes all resistance by violence, and thererore they hold
al ?Df from all participation in violence - as soon as this happens, not only
Will hundreds be unable to enslave millions, bUI not even millions will be
able lO enslave a single individual' (NOTE No 14).

The man
For Tolstoy, the State could only survive with the consent of the
gove �ed; a revolution to overthrow it had to take a personal rather than Of virtuous soul commands not nor obeys.

a �
htJcal form. Th.e German anarchist Gustav Landauer developed this
Power like a desolating pestilence
Pollutes whate'er it lOuches: and obedience,
Bane of all genius, virtue, freedom, truth,
pomt further, argumg that government was not an institution but the
produc t o f a n authoritarian mentality:
Makes slaves of men, and of the human frame
A mechanized automaton.
. 'Th: � tate is nOt something thatcan be destroyed by a revolution, but
IS a condlUon, a certain relationship between human beings; we destroy it
by conltacting other relationships, by behaving differently.'
Sheffey

George Woodcock comments in his Anarchism:

19
18
OF THE AGE

THE END OF THE
AGE
An Essay on the
Approaching
Revolution
(190 5)
In Gospel language "the age" and "the end of the age" does not
. .
sigmey the end and beginning of a century, but theend ofone view oClife
of one faith, of one melhod of socia1 intercourse between men, and th�
commencement of another view of life, another faith, anomer melhod of
social intercourse. [.. J Every revolution begins when Society has Qut­
.
grown the view of life on which the existing fonns of social life were
founded. when lhe contradictions between life such as it is. and Life as it
shO�ld be. �n� might be, become so evident to the majority that they feel
. Buthistory does not repeat itself. Violent revolution has outlived its
the IffiJX>SSlbility of continuing existence under fonner conditions. The
revolution begins in that nation wherein the majority of men become
conscious of this contradiction. As to the revolutionary methods these
depend on the object towards which the revolution tends.
In 1793 the consciousness of the contradiction between the idea of
equality of men and the despotic power ofkings, priesthood, nobility, and
bureaucracy was felt not only by the nations suffering from oppression,
but also by thc best men of the ruling classes in all Christendom. But
nowhere were these classes so sensitive to this inequality, and nowhere
�as the consciousness of the people so little stultified by the servitude as
In France, and therefore the revolution of 1793 actually began in France.
The most adequate means of realizing equality naturally seemed to be to
take back that which the authorities possessed, and therefore those
revolutionaries realized their aims by violence.
22
At the present dale. 1905. the contradiction between the conscious­
ness ofthe possibility and the lawfulness, offree lifeon the one hand, and
•
the unreason and disaster of obedience to coercive authority. arbitrarily
depriving people of the product of their labour for armaments which can
have noend. of authority capable at any momentof compelling nations to
participate in insensaleand cruel manslaughleron the other is feltnotonly
by the masses suffering from this coercion, but also by the best men of the
ruling cIasses. Nowhere is this contradiction felt so strongly as in Russia.
This is partly due to the insane and humiliating war into which they have
been drawn by the Governmentand to the agricultotal life yet retained by
the Russian people, but above all to the particularly viUll. Christian
consciousness of this peoplc. That is why 1 think that the revolulion of
1905 having as its objective the liberation of men from coercion must
begin and has already begun in Russia. The means of realizing the
objcctives of arevolution for the freedom of men obviously must be other
than that vio1enceby which men have hitherto attempted to raise equality.
The men ofthe great French revolution wishing 10 retain equality might
make the mistake of thinking that equality is attainable by coercion,
although it would seem evident that equality cannot be secured by
coercion, as coercion is in itself the keenest manifestation of inequality.
But the freedom constituting the chiefaim of the present revolution cannal
in any case be attained by violence. Yet at present the people who are
producing the revolution in Russia think thai the Russian revolution.
having repeated all that has laken place in European revolutions with
solemn funera] processions, destruction of prisons. brilliant speeches,
Allez dire a votre maitre. constitutional assemblies and so fonh. and
having ovenhrown the existing Government and instituted constitutional
monarchy oreven a socialistic republic, will attain the objective at which
the revolution aimed.
time. All it can give men, it has already given them, butat the same time
it has shown what itcannotattain. The revolution nowbeginning in Russia
amongst a popUlation of one hundred million souls of quite a peculiar
mental attitude. and taking place not in 1793 but in 1905.cannot possibly
have the same objectives, and be realized by the same methods, as the
revolutions of sixty, eighty, a hundred years ago amongst German and
Latin nations quite differently constituted.
The Russian agricultural nation which, as a matter of fact, means the
,,:,hole nation, required not a Duma and not the grant of a certain kind of
fights. the enumeration of which more than anything clearly demonstrates
the absence of simple true freedom, not the substitution of one form of
coercive power for another, but a true and complete freedom from all
coercive power.
The significance of the revolution beginning in Russia and hanging
23
ovcr aU the world does not consist in thc establishmcnt of income tax or
other taxes, nor the separation ofChurch from State, nor in the acquisition
by the State of social institutions, nor in thc organization of elections and
the mi aginary participation of the peoplc in the ruling power, nor n i the
founding of the most democratic, or even socialistic republic with univer­
sal suffrage. It consists only in actUlllfreedom.
Freedom not imaginary, bUl actual, is attained not by barricades or
murders, nor by any kind of new institution coercively introduced, but
only by the cessation of obedience 10 any human authority whatever.
II
Thefundamental cause ofthe impending revolution, as ofall past and
future revolutions, is a religious onc. By the word rcligion is usually
undcrstoodeithercertain mystical definitions of the unseen world, certain
riles. a cult supporting, consoling and inspiring men in life. or else the
explanation of the origin of the universe, or moral rules of life sanctioned
by divine command; bUl truereligion is before all else the disclosure ofthat
law common to all men which at any given time affords them the greatest
welfare.
Amongst various nations, even before the Christian teaching, there
was expressed and proclaimed a supreme religious law, common to all
mankind and consisting in this, that men for their welfare should live not
each for himself, but each for the good of all, for mutual service (Buddha.
Isaiah. Confucius, Laotze, the Stoics). Thelaw was proclaimed. and those
who knew it could not but see all its truth and beneficence. But custom
founded not upon mutual service but on violence had penetrated to such
an extentinto all institutions and habits that, whilst peoplerecognized the
bencficenceofthe law ofmutual servke, they continued to live according
to the laws of violence, justifying this by the necessity of threats and
retribution. It seemed to them that without threats, and without returning
evil for evil, social life was impossible. Certain people for the establish­
ment oforder and the correction ofmen took upon themselves the duty of
applying laws, and while they commanded, others obeyed. But the rulers
were inevitably depraved by the power they used. Then being themselves
depraved, instead of correcting men, they transmitted to them their own
depravity. Meanwhile those who obeyed were depraved by panicipation
in the coercive actions of the rulers by the imitation of the rulers and by
servile submission. One thousand nine hundredyears ago Christianity ap­
peared. Christianity confinned with new force the law of mutual service
and further explained the reasons why this law had not been fulfilled.
With extraordinary clarity the Christian teaching showed that this
reason was the false idea about the lawfulness and the necessity of
coercion for retribution. Having demonstrated from various sides the un-
24
lawfulness and harmfulness of retribUlion it showed thaI the greatest
calamities ofmen proceeded from acLS of violence which undertheexcuse
of retribution are commiued by some men upon others. The Christian
teaching demonstrated not only the injustice but the harmfulness of
vengeance, it showed thatthe only means of deliverance from violence is
the submissive and peaceful endurance of il.
'Ye have heard that it was said. an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a
tooth: But I say unto you, thatye resist not him that is evil: but whosoever
smiteth thee on thy rightchcek, tum to him the other also. And if any man
would go to law with thee and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak:
also. And whosoever shall compel thee to goone mile, go with him twain.
Give to him thatasketh thee, and from him thatwould borrow ofthee tum
not thou away.' (Matl v. 38-42).
This teaching pointed out that ifthejudge as to the cases when force
is admissible, is the man who uses force, then there will be no limit to
violence, and therefore, that there may not be violence it is necessary that
no-one under any pretext whmever should use violence, especially under
the moSI usUlll pretext ojrelribution.
ThisLeachingconflftlled thesimple self-evidenltruth thatevil cannot
be abolished by evil, and that the only means of diminishing the evil of
violence is abstinence from violence.
This Leaching was clearly expressed and established. But the false
idea ofthejustice ofretribution as a necessary condilion ofhuman life had
become so deeply rooted, and so many people did not know the Christian
teaching, or knew itonly in a distorted form. that those who had accepted
the law ofJesus yet continued to liveaccording to the law ofviolence. The
leaders of the Christian world thought that it was possible to accept the
teaching of mutual service without that teaching of non-resislance which
constitutes the keY-Slone of the whole teaching of the mutual life of
mankind. To accept the law of mutual service without accepting thecom­
mandment of non-resistance was the same as to build an arch without
securing it where it meets.
Christian people, imagining that without having accepted the com­
mandment of non-resistance, they could arrange a life better than the
pagan, continued todo notonly whatnon-Christian nations did. but things
much worse, and increasingly departed from the Christian life. The
esscnceofChristianity, owing to its incomplete acceptance. became more
and more concealed. and Christian nations at last attained the position in
which they are now, namely, the transformation of Christian nations into
inimical camps giving all their powers to arming themselves against each
other, and ready at any moment to devour each other; and they have
reachedtheposition that they notonly ann themselves againsteach other.
but have also armed and are anning against themselves the non-Christian
nations who hate them and have risen againsl lhem; and above all they
25
 b·eelSthatviolenceand murdermight be perpetrated when they werere­
havereached the complel.e repudiation notonly ofChristianity bUl ofany
:�ed to for just retribution and in defen� of the oppress� .and weak.
highee law in life whal.ever.
Beside this, by forcing men to swear aJleg13.nce to the autho�lJes, 10 vow
.
The fundamental religious cause ofthe Impending revoluuon lIes In
. . . .

the distortion of the higher law of mutual service, and of the command­
mentofnon-resistanee given by the Christian teaching which renders this
law possible.
III
Not only did the Christian teaching show that vengeance, lrnd the
return of evil for evil, is disadvantageous and unreasonable since it
increases the evil - it showed, moreover, that non·resistance to evil by
violence, the bearing of every kind of violence without violently strug­
gling againstit, is theonly means for the attainmentofthatfreedom which
is natural to man. The teaching showed that the moment a man enters into
strife against violence he thereby deprives himself of freedom, for by
before God that they would unreservedly fulfil all th�t ml�ht be com-
m ded by the authorities, the Governments reduced their subjects to such
:1e thatpeople regarding themselves as Christians ceased to look upon
�i�lence and murder as forbidden. Committing violence and murder
themselves. they naturally submitted to the same.when perpetrated upon
them. And it came to this, that Christian men, ms� of the freedom
proclaimed by Jesus. instead of as formerly regardmg as a duty the
endurance of every violence while obeying no-one except God began to
understand their duties in adirectly opposilesense. Th�y began tofeel that
peaceful endurance was humiliating and to regard their mostsacred duty
obedienceto the authority ofGovernments, and became slaves. Educated
.
in these traditions they were not only unashamed of thelf slavery, but were
proud ofthepower oftheir Governments as slaves are aJways proud of the

greatness of their masters.

admitting violence on his part towards others, he thereby admits also the
violence against which he has striven; and even ifhe remain the victor yet
From this distortion of Christianity there has latterly developed yet
a new deceitwhich secured the Christian nations in their oppressio�. This
entering into the sphere of external slrife he is always in danger of being
in the future conquered by a yet stronger violence.
deceitconsistsin inculcating in a given nation -by means ofacomphcated
This teaching showed that only that man can be free who sets as his
aim the fulfilment of the higher law, common to all mankind, and for
organization of suffrage and representation in governmen�1 institutions ­
that by electing the one who will then with others el.oct thl� or that score
which there can be no obstacle. The leaching showed that the one means
of candidates unknown to him, or by directly elecung therr representa­
to achieve both the diminution of violence in the world and the attainment
tives, theybecome participators in governmental power, and that therefore
of complete freedom is the submissive peaceful enduranceofall violence
in obeying the Government they are but obeying themselves and s� are
presumably free. This deceit, it would seem. ou�ht to have been obvlO�s
whatsoever.
The Christian teaching proclaimed the law of the complete freedom
both theoretically and practically, as even wit h the most dem�rabc
organization and universal suffrage the people canno� express the� WIll;
of man, but under the necessary condition of submitting to this higher law .
in all its significance.
'And fearnot them which kill thebody, butarenotable 10 kill the soul:
they cannot express it. flCst, because there does nOlexlst such a �mversaJ
will of a nation of many millions; and secondly, because even If such a
but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.'
universal will ofthe whole people did exist, a majority ofvotes could never
(Matt X. 28).
express it, and they do not themselves know nor can know what they
Those who accepted this teaching in all its significance, obeying the
require. This deceit, apart from the circumstances that the elected repre­
higher law, werefree from any other obedience. They submissively bore
sentatives who participale in the Government, institute laws and rule
violence from men, but they did not obey men in things incompatible with
people, not with a view to their welfare, but in most cases are g�ided only
the higher law.
by the aim of retaining their position and power amidst the stofe of par­
Thus acted the flfSt Christians when they were a small number
ties. Not to mention the corruption of the nation by every kind of fraud,
amongstpagan nations.
stultification and bribery produced by the deceit. the deceit is especiaJly
They refused toobey Governrnents in maners incompatible with the
pernicious in the voluntary slavery to which itreduces men who fall under
its influence Those fallen under the influence of this deceit imagine that
higher law which they called the law of God; they were persecuted and
executed for this. but they did not obey man and were free. But when the
in obeying th� Government they obey them selves, and nevermake up their
whole nations living in established State organizations supponed by
minds todisobey theordinancesofhuman authority, even though the Ialter
violencewereby means oftheexternalriteofbaptism recognized as Chris­
tians, the relation of the Christians 10 the authorities completely allered.
be COntrary not only to their personal tasl.eS, inlerests and desires, butatso
to the higher law and to their consciences. Yet the actions and measures
Governments by the help of a servile priesthood inculcated into their
27
26
ofthe Governments of such pseudo-selfgoverning nations detennined by
the complex strife of parties and intrigues, by lhe strife of ambition and
greed, depend as little upon me will and desire ofthe whole nation as the
action and measures or lhe majority imagining that they are free if they
have the right to vote in the election of the gaolers and for me internal ad­
ministrative measures in the prison.
A subject of the most despotic Government can be completely free
although he may be subjected to cruel violence on the pan of the
authorities he has not established; but a member of a constitutional State
is always a slave because, imagining that he has participated or can
participate in his Government, he recognizes the legality of all violence
perpetrated upon him; he obeys all the orders of the authorities. So that
people in constitutional States imagining that mey are free, owing to this
very imagination lose the idea itselfof what true freedom is, and more and
more surrender themselves imo increasing slavery to their Governments.
Nothing demonstrates so clearly the increasing enslavement of nations as
thegrowth, spread and success of socialistic theories: thatis, the tendency
towards greater and greater slavery.
Although the Russian people in this respect are placed in more
advantageous conditions since hitherto they never have participated in
power. and so have not yet been depraved by such participation, stiU the
Russian people like other nations have been subjected to all the deceits of
the glorification ofauthority, of oaths, of the prestige and greatness of the
State and of the Fatherland, and they also regard it as their duty toobey the
Government in everything. Latterly, too, shortsighted men of Russian
society have endeavoured to reduce the Russian people also to that
constitutional slavery in which the other European nations find them­
selves.
So that the chief consequence to the non-acceptance of the law of
non-resistance, besides the calamity of universal armament and of war,
has been the greater and greater loss of freedom for those who profess the
distorted law of Jesus .
IV
The distortion ofthe teaching ofJesus with thenon-acceptance ofthe
commandment ofnon-resistance has brought Christian nations to mutual
enmity and to consequent calamities as well as to continually increasing
slavery, and people ofme Christian worldarcbeginning to feel the weight
of this slavery. This is the fundamental general cause of the approaching
revolution. Theparticularand temporary causes, owing to which this revo­
lution is beginning at this very time, consist first in the insanity ofgrowing
militarism of the peoples of the Christian world as it stands revealed in the
Japanese war, and secondly, in the increasing state of calamity anddissat­
isfaction of the working people proceeding rrom their being deprived of
28
their legitimate and natural right to usc the land.
These twO causes are common to all Christian nations, but owing to
pedal historical conditions of me life of
the Russian nation they arc felt
� ��
y it more acutcl � �
an by ther nations a d at this particular time. This
misery of its postuon flowlOg from obe chence to the Government has
beCOme especially evident to the Russian people, not, I think,only through
the dreadful insane war into which theirGovernment has drawn them, but
also beCause the attitude ofRussian people to therulingpower'S has always
been different from that of European nations. The Russian people have
never struggled with theirruiers, and, above all, having neverparticipated
in power, have not been depraved by such participation.
The Russian people have always regarded power, notas agood thing
towards which it is natural for every man to strive, as the majority of
European nations regard power (and as unfortunately some corruptpeople
of the Russian nation are already regarding it), but it has always looked
upon power as an evil which man should avoid. The majority of the
Russian nation have therefore always preferred to bear all kinds of
physical misery proceeding from violence rather than accept the spiritual
responsibility of participating in it. So that the Russian people in its
majority has submitted to power, and is submitting to it, not because they
cannotoverthrow it as the revolutionaries wish to teach them todo, and not
because they cannot attain such participation as the liberals wish to teach
them to allain. but because in their majority the Russian people have
always preferred, and do prefer, submission to violence rather than strife
wim it or participation in it. This is how a despotic Government was
established and has maintained itselfin Russia, that is, thesimple violence
of the strong and pugnacious over the weak or those not desirous of
struggling.
The legend of the call of the Varangians (NOlE No 15), obviously
composed after the Varangians had already conquered the Slavonians.
fully expresses the relation of the Russian people towards power even
before Christianity. 'We ourselves do not wish to participate in the sins of
power. Uyou do notregard itasa sin,comeand govern us.' By this same
attitude towards power can be explained me submission of the Russian
people to the most cruel and insaneaulOCrats often notevenRussian, from
Ivan IV down to Nicholas II.
Thus in older times did the Russian people regard power and their
relation towards it. Even now the majority look upon it in the same way.
Ilistruethatas in other States, the same deceits, by which Christianpeople
have been unconsciously compelled not only to submit but to obey in
deeds contrary Lo Christianity, have been perpetrated also in relation to the
Russian people. But these deceits reached only the upper, corrupt layers
of the people, whereas the majority have retained that view or power by
Which man regards it as better to bear suffering from violence than to
29
 lence.
Participate in we vio the unla�fulness and sinfulness of obedience to a Government requiring
of such. an attit.ude of the Russian people towards power
The cause such acllons.
more than in other
consists I thinlc. in th1S: that 10 the Russian nation This consc�ousness has ell.pressed itself, and is now ell.pressing itself,
ity asa teaching ofbrothcrhood.
nations has been conserved true Christian in the most ...aned and momentous events: in the conscious refusals of
equality humil it y �� love, �e Christianity � hich sees a radical differ­
reservists to enter the army; in desertions from the army; in equally con­
, obeylOg it . A true Christian may
ence between sub mltUng to violence and sciouS refusals 10 shoot and fight, especially in refusals to shoot atone's
violence. but he
submit, he cannot even but submit without strife to every comrad.es during suppression of revolts; and above all, ni the continually
r.:uch
cannotabey it, that is. recognizc its lawfulness:
How� ver Govern­
. increaSing number of cases of refusal to lake the oath and en�r the mili­
ments in general. and the Rus�lan Government In parucular. have striven, tarY service. Such are the conscious manifestations of the 11�Iz.wfulness
and are striving, to replace thiS truly Christian attitude towards power by and needlessness of obeying the Government; whilst the ;.;
nCOilscious
the distinction
the Onhodox -Christian' teaching. the Christian spirit and manif�tions of it are to be �oun� in all that which is now being
between 'subrlliSsion' to power and 'obedience' continues to live in the accomplishedboth by therevoluuonanes and by their enemies: sllch as the
great majority of �e �ussian working people.
sailors' revolts in the Black Sea and in Kronsladt, the military fe'/olts in
fllpaob,IUY of governmental coercion and Christianity has
The inco �iel and othe� places, wrcckings, self-constituted violence, peasants'
felt by the majority of the Russian people, and this
never ceased to be no�. -:he presllge of theaulhorities is destrOyed,and before the enormous
.
COntr S been especially keenly and distinctly felt by the more
adiction lla maJonty of the RUSSian people of our time there has arisen in all its great
tians, who did not embrace the distorted teaching of
sen Sitive Chris significance the question as to whether onc should - whether it is one's
orthOdoxy, that is,. by th.e so-called �t members. These Christians of
dUI� to -0tx:y the Government. In thisqueslion arisen amongsttheRussian
various rninalJOns did not recognize the lawfulness ofgovernmental nallon consIsts one ofthecausesoflhe great revolution which is approach­
deno
Po r the majority submitted to Government demands alt­
wer. From fea ing and perhaps has already begun.
hought hey kn ew �em to � unlawful, but some of the minority circum­
vented them bY van ousdevlccs, or else fled from them. When, with the in­ v
t rOduction of u nive rsal � o�scription, State coercion threw, as it were, a
The second external cause of the approaching revolution consists in
true Chfl sllans, demanding from every man readiness to .
Challenge to all . thIS: that the working people are deprived of their natural and lawful right
�i , usslan people began to.understand the incompatibil­
U many ortJ'l� ox � to the use �f �e land, and that this deprivation has brought to the nations
Ity ofChristiamty with power. At the same lime non-orthodox Christians
of the ChnSll� �orld �e continuall� increasing misery of the working
of the most ...arious denominations began categorically to refuse to people an� �elf IOc�slOg exasperauon againsllhose who exploit their
bec
ome soldie
(N�re
rs No 16). Although there were not many such
labour. Thl IS.especla lly perceptible in Russia because it is only in Russia
10 a thou nd conscripts), still their significance was
�
one
refUsals (hardlY � that the maJoflty of the working people still live an agricultural life and
great since lfICSC
refusals, which called forth cruel executions and perse­ �he Russian people. owing to the increase of the population and lhe
cuti � lfI part of the Government, opened the eyes no longer of sect
s on e
o .
msufficlen�y ofth� land, are only now placed under the necessity eilher
of all Russian people to the un-Christian demands of
members onlY, but of a�a��oO!ng their accustomed agricultural life in which they see the
An enormous rnajority ofpeople who previously had not
the Go...ernment. poss.lblhty of the realization of the Christian commonwealth, or else of
�e contradiction belwe�n t.he divine and human law saw
thought aboLlt ceasing toobey the Government which keeps in the hands of the landown­
and amongst the majority of the Russian nation there
this contradiCtion, ers the land taken from the people.
e, persisten�, �nca1culable work of the liberation of con­
began the in...isibl It is generally thought that the cruellest slavery is personal slavery:
was the poSition of the Russian nation when the utlerly
SCiousness. SLlch ",:hen one man can do anything he likes with another torture, mutilate, kill
s bl Jap anese war broke out It is this war, coupled with the him ."':h'l
'

Un ju tifia e t . we do nOleven call slavery, the deprivation of the

.' e hat which
reading and �riting, ,:ith the universal dissatisfaction, '
of. POSSibility of using the land, is thought merely a certain somewhat unjust
development
wllh the necessity of calling out for the first time hundreds
abo...e all
and economical institution.
e-a
of lhousandS Ofmiddl �ed men dispersed all over Russia, and now lorn But this view is quitefalse.Thatwhich Joseph did with the Egyptians,
(rom ilics and rauonal labour(the reservists) for a glaring, insane .
w�lchallconquerors havedone with the vanquished nations, which is now
theirfam
�nd purPOse: whic� has served as the �nal impetus to transform the
cruel
ersistent Inner development Into a clear consciousness of
�� g �one by men to men in the deprivation ofthepossibility ofusing the
lnvisible and p -IS themostdreadful and cruel slavery. The personal slave si the slave

31
ofone, but the man deprived of the right to use the land is the slave of all.
Even this is not the principal calamity of the land slave. However cruel
might have been the owner of the personal slave, in view of his own
ad vantage and that he mightnot lose the slave, he did not force him to work
incessantly, did not torture him, did not starve him, whereas the man
deprived of the land is always obliged to work beyond h.is strength, to
suffer, and to starVe, and can neverforone minute be completely provided
for and be set free from the arbitrary will of men, especially from that of
evil and avaricious men. Yet even this is not the chiefcalamity of me land
slave. The worst is that he cannotlive a moral life. Not living bylabouron
the land, not struggling with nature, he is inevitably obliged to suuggle
with men, to endeavour to take from them by force or cunning that which
they have acquired from the land and from the labour of others.
Land slavery is not, as is thought even by those who recognize
deprivation of land as slavery, one of the remaining forms of slavery, but
is the radical and fundamental slavery, from which has grown and grows
every form of slavery, and which is incomparably more painful than
personal slavery. Personal slavcry is merely one of the particular cases of
exploitation by land slavery, so that the emancipation of men from
personal slavery without their emancipation from land slavery, is not
emancipation, but merely the cessation of exploitation by one form of
slavery, and in many cases, as it was in Russia (when the serfs were
emancipated with but a small portion of land), is a deceit which can only
for a time conceal from the slaves their uue position.
The Russian people always understood this, during serfdom, saying,
'We are yours, but the land is ours', and during the emancipation of the
land. During the emancipation from serfdom the people were cajoled by
a little land being given mem, and for a time they subsided, but with
increase ofpopulation the question ofme insufficiency ofland again arose
before them, and that in the clearest and most definite fonn.
While the people were serfs they used the land as much as was
necessary for theirexistence. TheGovemmentand Ihe landowners had Ihe
care ofdistributing the increasing population on the land, and so thepeople
did not see the essential injustice of the seizure of the land by private
individuals. But as soon as serfdom was abolished the care of the
Government and landowners concerning the people's economic agricul­
tural - 1 shall not say welfare but · possibility of existence was also
abolished. Thequantityofland which the peasants might possess was once
and for all determined without the possibility of increasing it as the
population increased, and the people saw more and more clearly that it was
impossible lO live thus. They waited for the Government to rescind the
laws which deprived them of the land. They waited ten, twenty, thirty,
fony years, but the land has been seized even more and more by private
landowners, and before the people was placed the choice: of starving,
32
ceasing to multiply, or altogether abandoning rural life and fonning
generation ofnavvies, weavers or locksmiths. Halfa century passed, their
pOSition kept � oming worse and worse, and reached �u�h a�late that lhe
order of life whIch they regarded as necessary for Chnstlan hfe began to
fall to pieces, and the Government not only did not give them land, but
gave it to its minions, and, securing it forthe latter, intimated to thepeople
that they need never hope for the emancipation of Ihe land, while on the
European model it organized for them an industrial life, with labour
inspection, which the people regarded as bad and sinful.
The deprivation of the people of their legitimate right to the land is
the principal cause of the calamitous position of the Russian people. The
same cause lies at the basis of the m iscry and discontent with theirposition
felt by the working people of Europe and America, the difference is only
this: that theseizure of the land from theEuropean peoples by recognition
of the lawfulness of landed propeny has taken place long ago; so many
new relations have covered up this injustice that the men of Europe and
America do not see the true cause of their position, but search for it
everywhere: in the absenceofmarkets, in tariffs, in unfair taxation, in capi­
talism' in everything save in the deprivation of the people of their right to
the land (NOTE No 17).
To the Russian people the radical injustice - not having yet been
completely perpetrated upon them - is clearly seen.
The Russian people living on the land clearly see what people wish
to do with them, and they cannot reconcile themselves to iL
Senseless and ruinous armaments and wars, and the deprivation of
the people of their common right to the land - these, in my opinion, are the
causes of the revolution impending over the whole of Christendom. And
this revolution is beginning in no other place but in Russia, because
nowhere except amongst theRussian people has the Christian view oflife
been preservedin such strength and purity, and nowhere save in Russia has
been so far conserved the agricultural condition of the majority of the
people.
VI
The Russian people before other nations of the Christian world,
owing to their special qualities and conditions of life, have been brought
to the consciousness of the disasters proceeding from obedience to
coercive State power. In this consciousncss and in the aspiration to free
themselves from the coercion of their rulers lies, in my opinion, me es­
sence of the revolution which is approaching, not only for the Russian
people, but also for all nations of the Christian world. But topeople living
in States founded upon violence, it seems that the abolition of the power
ofGovemment will necessarily involve the greatest of disasters.
But the assenion that the degree of safety and welfare which men
33
enjoy is ensured by State power is ahogether an arbitrary one. We know
those disasters and such welfare as exist among people living under State
organization, but we do not know the position in which people would be
were they to get clear of the Stale. Ifone takes into consideration the life
of those small communities which happen to have lived and are living
outside great States, such communities, whilst profiting from all the
advantages ofsocial organization, yet being free from State coercion, do
notexperience one-hundredth part ofthe disasters which are undergoneby
people who obey State authority.
The people of the ruling classes for whom the Stale organization is
advantageous speak most about the impossibility of living wiL�out State
organization. But ask those who bear only the weight of State power, ask
theagriculturallaoourers, lhe one hundred million peasants in Russia, and
you will find they feci only itsburden, and, far from regarding themselves
assafer for Slate power, they could altogetherdispense with it In many of
my writings I have repeatedly endeavoured to show that what intimidates
men - the fear that without govemmenta1 power the worst men would
triumph whilst thebest would beoppressed - is precisely whathas long ago
happened , andis still happening, in allStates, since everywhere thepower
is in the hands of the worst men; as, indeed, cannot be otherwise, because
only the worst men could do all thesecrafty, dastardly and cruel acts which
are necessary for participation in power. Many times I have endeavoured
to explain that all the chief calamities from which men suffer, such as the
accumulation of enormous wealth in the hands of some people and the
deep poverty of the majority, the seizure of the land by those who do not
work on it, the unceasing armaments and wars, and thedeprivation ofmen,
flow only from the recognition of the lawfulness of governmental coer­
cion; I have endeavoured to show that before answering the question
whether the position of men would be the worse or the better without
Governments, one should solve the problem as 10 who makes up the
Government. Are those who constitute it bettcr or worse than the average
level of men? If they are better than the average run, then theGovemment
will be beneficent; but ifthey are worse it will bepernicious.And thatthese
men - Ivan IV, Henry VIII, Marat, Napoleon, Arakcheyef. Mettemich,
Tallyrand, and Nicholas - are worse than the general run is proved by
history.
In every human society there are always ambitious, unscrupulous,
cruel men, who, I have already endeavoured to show, areeverready toper­
petrate any kind of violence, robbery or murder for their own advantage;
and that in a society without Government these men would be robbers,
restrained in their actions partly by strife with those injured by them (self­
instituted justice. lynching), but partly and chiefly by the most powerful
weapon ofinfluence upon men - publicopinion. Whereas in asociety ruled
by coercive authority. these same men are those who will seize authority
34
and will make use ofiL, not only without the restraint ofpublic opinion, but,
on the contrary.supported,praised and extolledby a bribedand artificially
maintained public opinion.
I t is said: 'How can people live without Governments and coercion?'.
On the contrary, one should say: 'How can people, if they are rational
beings, live recognizing violence and not rational agreement as the inner
connecting link of their life?'.
Eitherone or the other: men arc either rational or irrational beings. If
they arenOlrational beings,then all matters betwccn them can and should
be decided by violence. and there is no reason for some to have and others
not to hav e this right to violence. But if men are rational beings, then their
relations should be founded, not on violence, but on reason.
One would think that thisconsideralion would be conclusive to men
recognizing themselves as rational beings. But those who defend State
power do not think of man, of his qualities, of his rational nature; they
speak of a certain combination of men to which they apply a kind of
supernatural or mystical signification.
What will happen to Russia, France, Britain, Germany, say they, if
peoplecease toobeyGovernments? What will happen toRussia? -Russia?
What is Russia? Where is its beginning or its end? Poland? The Baltic
Provinces? The Caucasus with all its nationalities? The Kazan Tartars?
Ferghana Province? All these are not only not Russia, but all these are
foreign nationalities desirous of being freed from the combination which
is called Russia. The circumstance that these nationalities are regarded as
parts ofRussia is an accidental and temporary one, conditioned in the past
by a whole series ofhistorical events, principal!y actsofviolence, injustice
and cruelty. whilst in the present this combination is mainlained only by
the power which spreads over these nationalities. During our memory.
Nice was Italy and suddenly became France; Alsace was France and
became Prussia. The Trans-Amur Province was China and became Rus­
sia. Sakhalin was Russia and became Japan. At present the power of
Austria spreads over Hungary, Bohemia and Galicia, and that of the
British GovernmenloverIreland, Canada.Australia,Egyptand India, that
of the Russian Government over Poland and Guria. But tomorrow this
power may cease. The only force uniting all these Russias, Austrias,
Britains and Frances is coercive power, which is the creation of men who,
contrary to their rational nature and the law of freedom as revealed by
Jesus, obey those who demand of them evil works of violence. Men need
only become conscious of their freedom, natural lO rational beings. and
cease to commit acts contrary to their conscience and the Law, and then
these artificial combinations of Russia, Britain, Germany, France. which
appear so splendid, will no longer exist. and that cause, in the name of
which people sacpfice not only their life but the libenyproper to rational
beings will disappear.
35
 It is usual to say that the formation of great States outof small oncs
continually struggling wiLh each other, by substituting a great external
frontier for small boundaries, diminishes strife and bloodshed and Lheir
attendant evils. But Lhis assertion also is quite arbitrary, as no-one has
weighed the quantities of evil in the one and the other positions. It is
difficult to believe that all the wars of the confederate period in Russia, or
of Burgundy,Flanders and Normandy in France, cost as many victims as
the wars of Alexander or of Napoleon or as the Japanese war latelyended.
The only justification for the expansion of Lhe State is the formation
of a universal monarchy, the existence of which would remove all
possibility of war (NOTE No 18). But all auempts at forming such a mon­
archy by Alexander of Macedon, by the Roman Empire, or by Napoleon,
never attained this objective ofpacification. On thecontrary, they were the
cause of !he greatcstcalamities for !he nalions. So that !he pacification of
men cannot possibly be attained except only by the opposite means: !he
abolition of States with their coercive power.
There have existed cruel and pernicious superstitions, human sacri­
fices, burnings for witchcraft, 'religious' wars, lOnures ... but men have
freed !hemselves from !hese; whereas the superstition of !he State as
some!hing sacred conti nues its hold upon men, and lO this superstition are
offered perhaps more cruel and ruinous sacrifices !han lO aU the others.
The essence of this superstition is !his: thal men of different localilies,
habits and interests are persuaded that Lhey all compose one wholebecause
one and the same violence is applied lO all of them, and these men believe
this, and are proud of belonging to this combination.
This superstition has existed for so long and is so strenuously main­
tained that not only those who profit by it - kings, ministers, generals, !he
military and officials - are certain that lhe existence, confirmation and
expansion of these artificial combinations is good, but even the groups
within the combinations become so accustomed to this superstition that
they are proud of belonging LO Russia, France. Britain or Germany,
although this is not at all necessary to them, and brings them nothing but
evil.
Therefore iftheseanificial combinations inLO greatStatcs were to be
abolished by people, meekly and peacefully submitting to every kind of
violence, while ceasing to obey the Government, then such an abolition
would only lead to there being among such men less coercion, less
suffering, less evil, and to its becoming easier for such men to live accord­
ing to the higher law of mutual service, which was revealed to men two
thousand five hundred years ago, and which gradually enters more and
more into the consciousness of mankind.
In general for the Russian people, both the lOwn and the country
population it is, in such a critical time as the present, imponant above all
not to live by the experience of others, not by others' thoughts, ideas,
36
words, not by various social democracies, constitutions. expropriations.
bureaux, delegatcs,candidaturesand mandates, but to think with theirown
mind, to live theirown life, constructing outoftheirown past, out of their
own spiritual foundations new forms of life proper to this past and these
foundations.
VII
Therevolution now impending overmankind consists in their libera­
tion from the deceit of obedience to human power. As the essence of this
revolution is quite different from the essence ofall former rtlfOiutions in
theChristian world , thereforealso the activity ofthose participating in this
revolution must be quite different from !he activity of those who partici­
pated in former revolutions.
The activity of those involved in formerrevolutions consisted in the
violent ovenhrow of power and in its reseizure. The activity of mose
people involved in the present revolution should, and can, consist in the
cessation of that obedience lOany violent power whatever, which has now
lost its meaning, and in !he ordering of one's life independently of
Government
Besides the activity ofthose engaged in the coming revolution being
different from that of the people who panicipated in former revolutions,
the principal participants in this revolution are themselves also quite
different, as is !he locality where it musl W:e place, and the number of
panicipants.
The panicipants in formerrevolutions were principally people ofthe
higher professions, free from physical labour, and the urban workers led
by these men; whereas the participants in the coming revolution must, and
will, be chieOy the agricultural masses. The localities where former
revolutions began were towns; !he locality of the present revolution must
be chieOy the country. The number of participants in former revolutions
was ten or twenty per cent of the whole nation; now the number of
Participants in the revolution which is taking place in Russia must be
eighty or ninety per cent
Therefore all the activity of the agitated urban population of Russia,
�ho. imitating Europe, combine into unions, prepare strikes, demonstra­
lions and revolts, and invent new forms of Government, not to mention
those unfonunate brutalized men who commit manslaughter, thinking
thereby to serve Ihedawning revolution, the activity of all these men, far
from being in harmony with the impending revolution,arrests its progress
much more effectually than Governments do (for, without knowin g it
�emselves, they are the truest assistants ofthe Government), and falsely
dlfccts and impedes it.
�hedangernow thre'atening the Russian nation is notthattheexisting
coercive Government may notbe v iolently overthrown and that in its place
37
may not be established another Government also coercive, however
democratic oreven socialistic, but that this struggle with the Government
may draw the nation itself into an activity of violence. The danger lies in
this: that the Russian people, called by peculiar circumstances in which it
is placed to point out a peaceful and certain way of liberation, instead of
this may, by those who do not understand all the significance of the
revolution taking place, be attracted into a servile imitation of former
revolutions, and that, abandoning the way ofsalvation on which they are
now standing, they may advance along the false way by which other
nations of Christendom are advancing to their certain ruin.
In order to avoid this danger the Russian people should first ofaU be
lhemselves; they should not seektoascertain how they shouldactand what
they should do from European nations and American constirutions, or
from socialistic programmes. They should inquire and seek advice only
from their own conscience. The Russian people, in order that they may
fulfil the great work now before them, should not only refrain from
concerning themselves with the political government of Russia and with
the securing of freedom to the citizens ofthe Russian State, but should first
of all free themselves from the very idea of the Russian State, and
consequently also from all concern in the rights of the citizens of such a
State (NOTE No 19). At the present moment the Russian people, so that
they may obtain freedom, should n010nly refrain from taking this or that
action, but should refrain from all undertakings, from those into which the
Governmentis luring them aswellas from those into which the revolution­
aries and liberals desire to draw them.
The peasants, the majority ofthe Russian people, should continue to
live as they have always lived, in their agricultural. communal life,
enduring all violence, both governmental andnon-governmental, without
struggle, but not obeying demands to panicipate in any kind of govern­
mental coercion; they should not willingly pay taxes, they should not
willingly serve in the police, the administration, the customs, in the army,
in the navy, nor in any coercive organization whatever. Likewise, and still
more strictly, the peasants should refrain from the violence to which they
are being incited by the revolutionaries. All violence of peasants towards
the landowners will call forth strife with reacting violence, and will end in
any case by the establishment ofa Govemmentofthis or that kind, but un­
avoidably coercive. And with any coercive Govemment, as happens in the
frecstcountries ofEurope and America, the same sensclessand cruel wars
will be prOClaimed and carried on, and in the same way the land will
continue to be the propeny ofthe wealthy. It is only the non-participation
ofthe people in any violence whatever which can abolish all coercion from
which they suffer, and prevent all possibility of endless armaments and
wars, and also abolish private property in land.
Thus should the agricultural peasants act in order that the revolution
38
now taking place may produce good results.
As to the urban classes, the nobles, merchants, doctors, scientists.
writers, mechanics and soon, who are now occupied with the revolution,
they should flfSt of all understand their insignificance, be it only numeri­
cal, ofone to a hundred n
i comparison to the agricultural population; they
should undersrand that the objective of the revolution now laking place
cannot, and should not, consist in the foundation of a new political
coercive order, with whatever universal suffrage, whatever improved
socialistic institutions, but that this Objective can, and should, consist in
theliberation of the whole peopleand especially of their majority, the one
hundred million agricultural workers, from every kind of coercion: from
military coercion - soldiery; from economic coercion - taxes and tariffs;
and from agrarian coercion - the seizure ofthe land by the landowners. For
this purpose that fretful, unreasonable and unkind activily with which
Russian liberals and revolutionaries are now occupied is not at all
necessary, but something quite differenL These men should understand
that Revolutions cannot be made to order. 'Let us organize a revolution';
that revolution cannot be produced by imitating the ready-made patterns
ofwhat has taken place a hundred years previously under utterly different
conditions. Above all. these men should understand that a revolution can
improve the condition of a people only when they, having recognized the
unreasonableness and calamity of fonner foundations of life, strive to
arrange a life on new foundations capable of giving them true welfare,
when people possess ideals of a new better life.
Those who are now endeavouring to produce in Russia a political
revolution according to the model of European revolutions, however.
possess neither any new foundations nor any new ideals. They strive
merely to substitute for one old form of coercion another new one, also to
be realized by coercion, and carrying with it the same calamities as those
from which the Russian people now suffer, as we see in Europe and
America, groaning under the same miIi tarism, the same taxation, the same
seizure of the land.
Themajority ofrevolutionaries put forward as their ideal a socialistic
organization which could be obtained only by the cruellest coercion. and
which, if it ever were attained, would deprive mcn of the last remnants of
liberty.
In order to free themselves from all the evils which now oppress
them. the working men should, without strife, without coercion, cease to
obey the authorities. And this same is also necessary for the fulfilment of
that law which Christian nations profess. A Christian, as a Christian,
cannot obey (and obeying thereby nece�arily participate in) an authority
which is entirely based on violence, maintained by violence, and unceas­
ingly committing acts of violence the most contrary lO the Christian law:
SOldiery, wars, prisons, ex.ecutions, thcdepriving ofthe people ofthc pos-
39
sibility of using the land. So, both the bodily welfare ofman, as well as the
higher spiritual welfare. can only be attained in one way: by the suffering
wilhout suuggle of all violence, but at the same time by the abstinence
from participation in it, by disobedience to the authorities.
So, if people of the urban classes really desire to serve the great
revolution which is taking place. the first thing they should do is to desist
from thecruel,revolutionary, unnatural, artificial activity with which they
are now occupied. and to settle down in the country and share the people's
labour. learning from the people their patience, their indifference and
contempt towards the e,;ercise of power, and. above aU, their habits of
industry endeavouring nOl only to refrain from inciting people, as they
now do, to violence, but, on the contrary, restraining them from all
participation in acts ofviolence and from any obedience to coercive power
of whatever kind, and to serve them. should it be necessary, with their
scientific knowledge, to clarify those questions which will inevitablyarise
with the abolition of Governmcnt.
VllI
Buthow and in what formscan men ofthe Christian world live ifthey
will not live in the form of States obeying Government rule?
Theanswerto this question lies in those very qualities ofthe Russian
people. owing to which I think that the impending revolution must begin
and must happen in Russia rather than in other countries.
The absence ofGovernmentpowerin Russia has never prevented the
social organization ofagricuhural communes. On the contrary, the inter­
vention of Government power always hindered this inner organization
naturai lO the Russian people. The Russian people, like the majority ofag­
ricuhural nations. natura1ly combine like bees in a hive into definite social
relations fully satisfying the demands of the common life of men. Wher­
ever Russian people sel11e down without the intervention of Government
they have always established an order not coercive but founded upon
mutual agreement, communal, and with communal possession of land,
which has completely satisfied the demands of peaceful social life.
Without the aid oftheGovernment such communes havepopulated all the
eastern boundaries ofRussia. Such communes haveemigrnted to Turkey,
like the Nekrassovisi, and retaining their Christian communal organiza­
tion. quietly have lived, and are living there. under the power of the
Turkish Sultan. Such communes have without knowing it passed into
Chinese territory, into Central Asia. and have lived there for a long time,
without needing any Government beyond their own inner organization
(NOm No 20). In precisely the same way do the Russian agricultural
people, the enonnous majority of the population of Russia live without
needing the Government, but merely suffering it. The Government for the
Russian people has never been a necessity but always a burden.
40
The absence ofGovemment, ofthat same Governmentwhich retains
by force the right of putting the land into the hands of the non-labouring
landowners. can only contribute to that communal agricultural life which
the Russian people regard as a necessary condition of good life. It will
contribute to it, in that power of maintaining property in land being
abolished. the land will be freed and all will have equal right to it.
Therefore the Russian people, when aboliShing Government, need
not invent any new forms of combined life with which to replace the
former. Such forms of combined life exist amongst the Russian people,
have always been natura1 to them, and have satisfied their social demands.
Thesefonns are a communal organization with theequality ofall the
members, aco-operative system in industrial undertakings, and acommon
possession ofthe land. The revolution which is impending over Christen­
dom and is now beginning amongslthe Russian people. s i distinguished
from former revolulionsprecisely by this. that the lauerdestroyed without
substituting anything for that which was destroyed by them, or else
replaced one form of violence by another; in the impending revolution
nothing need be destroyed, it is only necessary to cease participating in
violence. not to root up the plant. putting in its place something artificial
and lifeless, but merely to remove all which has hindered its growth.
Therefore these hasty, bold-faced and self-assured people who, without
understanding the cause of the evil with which they are violently strug­
gling, and who. without admitting the reality of any form of life without
violence. blindly and thoughtlessly overthrow the ex.isting violence in
order to replace it by new violence, will not contribute anything to the
revolution now taking place. Those whowillcontribute to itare those who,
withoutoverthrowing anything. without breaking anything, will organize
their life independently of the Government, will peacefully endure any
violence inflicted upon them, but will not participate in the Govcmment,
and will not obey it.
The Russian nation, the agricultural nation. the enonnous majority,
need only continue to live as it lives now, an agricultural communal life,
only with no participation in the works of the Government and with out
obedience to it.
The closer the Russian people will stick to the combined life which
is natural to them, the lesspossible will be the interference ofgovernmen­
tal coercive rule in their life, and the more easily will this be removed,
finding fewer and fewer occasions for interference, and fewer and fewer
assistants in the doing of its deeds of violence.
Therefore to the question as to what consequences will follow the
cessation of obedience to Government. one can say for certain that the
consequence will be the abolition of the coercion which compelled men
to fight with each other an d deprive them of the right to use the land. Men
liberated from violence. no longer preparing forwarnor fighting with each
41
other, but possessing access 1.0 the land, will naturally return 1.0 the most
joyous, healthy and moral agriculwral labour proper to all men, in which
man's effort will be direcled to a struggle with nature and not with men;
to a labour on which rest all other branches of labour, and which can be
abandonedonly by those who liveby violence. Thecessation ofobedience
to Govemmentmust bring men to agricultural life, and agricultural life in
its tum will bring them to the communal organization most natural under
the conditions of life in small communities placed in similar agricuhural
conditions.
It is very probable that these communities will not live in isolation,
but owing to unity ofeconomical, racial orreligiousconditions, will enter
into new free mutual combinations, completely different, however, from
the former State combinations founded upon violence. Therepudiation of
coercion does not deprive men of the possibility of combination, but
combination founded upon mutual agreement can be formed only when
those founded upon violence are abolished.
In order mat one may build a new and durable house in the place of
one falling into ruins, one musttake down the old wall, Stone by stone, and
build it anew.
So it is with mose combinations which may develop amongst men
after the abolition of the combinations founded on violence.
IX
But what is to become of all wh.ich mankind has elaborated? What
will become of civilization?
'The return of monkeys' - Voltaire's leuer to Rousseau about
learning to walkon all fours - 'the return to some kind ofprimitive, natural
life', say those who are so certain lhat the civilization they possess is so
great a good that they cannot even admit the idea of the loss of anylhing
which has been attained by civilization.
'What! a coarse agricultural commune in rural solitude long ago
outlived by mankind instead of our cities with underground and over·
ground electric ways, with electric suns, museums, lheatres and manu·
ments? 'cry these people. 'Yes,and with paupers' quaners, with lheslums
ofLandon, New York and all large cities. with the houses of prostitution,
the usury, explosive bombs against external and internal foes, with
prisons, gallows and millions of military', I say.
'Civilization, ourcivilizalion, is a greal boon', people say. But those
who are so certain of this are the few people who nOl only live in this
civilization, but live by iI, they live in complete content, almost idly in
comparison with the labour of the working people, just because this civi·
lization does exist.
All these people - k.ings. emperors, presidents, princes, ministers,
officials, the milir..ary , landowners, merchants, mechanics, docl.Ors, seien·
42
Lists. artists, teachers, priests, writers · they know for certain that our
civilization is such agreat boon that one cannotadmit the idea not only of
any possibility of its disappearance, but even of its alteration. But ask the
enormous mass of the Slav, Chinese, Indian. Russian agricultural people,
nine-tenths of humanity, whether the civilization which appear so pre·
cious to the non·agricultural professions is indeed a boon or not (N01E
No 21).
Strange to say, nine-tenths of humanity wiII answerquite different!y .
They know that they require land, manure, water, irrigation, thesun,rain,
woods, harvests, certain simple implements of labour which can be
manufactured without interruptingagricultural pursuits; butas to civiliza·
tion, either they are not acquainled with it or else when it appears to them
in the form oftown depravation or unjustlaw-courts with theirprisons and
hard labour; or in the form oftaxes and the erection ofunnecessary palaces,
museums, monuments; or in the form of customs impeding the free
exchange of products; or of guns, ironclads, armies devastating whole
countries, they will say that if civilization consists in these things then it
is not only unnecessary but cxcccdingly harmful to them.
Those who profit by the advantages ofcivilization say that it is a boon
for the whole ofmankind, but then in this question they are not thejudges,
nor the witnesses, but one of the litigants.
It isbeyond doubt that greatadvanceshavebeen madealong the road
oftechnical progress, but who has advanced along this road? That small
minority which lives on the shoulders of the working people; whilst the
working people themselves. those who serve these other men who profit
by civilization, continue in all Christendom to live even as they lived five
or six centuries ago. profiting only at times and in rare cases by the refuse
of civilization. If they do Jive better then lhe difference separating their
position from that of the wealthy classes is not less, but is rather greater,
than the one which separated them from the wealthy six centuries ago. I
do not say that when we have understood that civilization is not the
absolute advantage that so many think it is. we should throw aside all that
men have attained in their struggle with nature; but I do say thatbefore we
can know that what has been attained by men does indeed serve their wei·
fare, it is necessary that all should profit by these advantages. and not a
small number; it is necessary that people should not be compulsorily
deprived oftheirown weifare for other people's benefitin the hope that the
same advantages shall some day reach their descendants.
We look upon the Egyptian pyramids and are horrified by thecruelty
and insanity of those who ordered their erection. as well as of those who
fulfilled theseorders. But how much more cruel and insane are those than
the thiny·six storey houses which men of our time erect in cities and are
proudof. Around lies the land with its grass, its woods, its purewater, pure
air, sun, birds, animals, but men with dreadful eITon shut the sun from
43
others and erecl thirty-six storey houses, rocked by the wind, where there
is neither grass nor trees. and where everything, both water and air. is
contaminated, all the food adulterated and spoilt, and life itself is tedious
and unhealthy. Is not this a sign of manifest madness in a whole society of
men, not only to accomplish such insanities but also to pride themselves
upon doing so?This is not the only example: look around you and you will
see at every step what equals these thirty-six storey houses and Egyptian
pyramids.
Thejustifiers ofcivilization say: 'Weare ready to correct the evil, but
only on the condition that all which mankind has attained should remain
intacL' Why, this is what a dissipated man who has ruined his life. his
position and his health, says ID his doctor. He is ready to agree with alilhe
doctor will prescribe. but only on condition that he may continue his
depraved life. To such a man, we say that if he is to improve his state, he
must cease to live as he is living. It is time for Christian humanity to say
and understand the same. The unconscious mislake which those who
defend civilization make is that they regard civilization. which is only a
means, as an end or a result, and deem it always an advantage. It mightbe
an advantage if only the rulers of society were good. Explosive gasses are
very useful for opening means of communication by blasting rock. but
they are pernicious in bombs. Iron is useful for ploughs but pernicious for
shells and for prison bars.
ThePress may disseminate good feelings and wise thoughts but with
yet more success. that which is immoral and false. The question as to
whether civilization is useful or otherwise depends upon whether in a
given society good prevails or evil. In our society, where the minority
crushes the majority, civilization is a great evil. It s
i merely an extra
weapon for the oppression of the masses by the ruling minority.
his time forus to understand that our salvation lies, not in continuing
along the road on which we have been moving. and not in the retention of
what we have elaborated. but in the recognition that we have advanced
along a false road and have entered a bog out of which we must cxtricatc
ourselves. and that weshould beconcerned. not in retaining that which we
have, but, on the contrary. should boldly throw aside all the most useless
things we have been dragging upon ourselves. so that in some way (be it
on all fours) we may scramble out upon a fum bank.
A rational and righteous life consists only in man choosing amongst
the many actions or paths before him the most rational and good. Christian
humanity in its present condition has before it the choice of two things;
either to continue on the path in which existing civilization will give the
greatest welfare tothe few,keeping the many in wantand servitude, orelse
alonce, without postponement to some far future. to abandon a portion or
even all those advantages which civilization has attained for the few, if
such advantages hinder the liberation of the majority from servitude.
44
X
That men of our time talk about scpar.ue liberties, the freedom of
speech. of the Press. of conscience. of assembly, of this or that kind of
elections, of associations, of iatx>ur, and of much else. clearly demon­
strateS that such people -as at the present time our Russian revolutionaries
possess a very fallacious idea, or have no idea whatever of freedom in
general. Thatsimple freedom, which is comprehensible to all. consists in
_
there being no power over man demanding from him actions contrary to
his desires and advantages.
In this non-comprehension of what constitutes freedom and in the
consequent idea that the permission of certain people to do certain actions
is freedom, lies a great and most pernicious error. This error is that men of
our times imagine that the servile SUbjection to violence in which they
stand, in relation to the Government, is a natural position and that the
authorization by governmental power of certain actions defined by this
power, is freedom; somewhat as if slaves were to regard as freedom the
permission to go to church on Sundays, or to bathe in hot weather, or in
their leisure time to mend their clothes, and so forth.
One need only for one minute reject established customs, habits and
superstitions. and examine the position of every man in Christendom,
whether belonging to the most despotic or to the most democratic State.
in order to behorrified at the slavery underwh ich men are now living while
imagining that they are free.
Over every man, wherever he may have been born, there exists a
group of individuals completely unknown to him, who establish the law
of his life. What he should and what he should not do. The more perfect
the State organization. the closer is the net of these laws. It is defined to
whom and how he shall swear allegiance - to whom he shall promise to
fulfil any laws that may be invented and proclaimed. It is defined how and
when he should marry (he may marry only one woman but he may make
use of prostitution); it s
i defined how he may divorce his wife, how he
should maintain his children, which of them he should regard as legiti­
mate, which as illegitimate, and from whom and how he should inheritand
to whom transmit his property. It is defined for what transgressions of the
law and how and by whom he shall be judged and punished. It is defined
when he must himself appear in court, in the capacity ofjuror or witness.
Theage at which he may make useor the labouror assistants. ofworkmen,
is defined, and even the number of hours a day which his assistants may
work, and the food he must give them; it is dermed when and how he
should inoculate preventive diseases into his children. The methods are
defined which he must undertake. and to which he must submit in case of
this or that disease afflicting him, his family or his cattle. The schools into
which he must send his children are defined as well as the proportion and
45
the stability of the house which he must build. It is defined how he should
maintain his animals, horsesand dogs, how he mustmake useofwater, and
where he may walk withouta road. For the non-fulHlmentof all these and
many other laws the punishments are defined. It is impossible to enumer­
ate all the laws upon Jaws and rules upon rules to which he must submit,
and the ignorance of which (although it is impossible to know them)
cannot se.....eas an excuse for a man even in the most democratic State. He
is, moreover, placed in such a position that in buying every anicle which
he consumes: salt,beer, wine, cloth, iron,oil, lea,sugar, and soon, hemuSl
surrender a great portion of his labour for certain undertakings unknown
lO him, and for the paying of interest on debts contracted by somebody or
other in times of his grandfather and great-grandfathers. He must also
surrender a part of his labour on the occasion of any removal from place
to place, or of any inheritance he may come into, or of any transaction
whatever with his neighbour. Further, for the portion of the land he
occupies, either by his abode or by cultivation, a yet more considerable
part of his labour is demanded from him. SO that if he lived by his own
labour and not by that of others, the greater part of his labour, instead of
being used for that alleviation and improvement of his own position and
that of his family, goes lO pay these taxes, tariffs, and monopolies.
More than this! This man, in some States (themajority), as he comes
of age, is ordered to enter for several years the military service, the most
cruel servitude, and to go and fight, and in other States (Britain and
America), he must hire other people for this same purpose. Yet people
placed in this position not only fail to see !heir own slavery, butare proud
of it... regarding themselves as free citizens of the great States of Britain,
France orGermany; they areproud of this just as lackeys are proud of the
importance of the masters they se.....e.
It would appear natural to man with undepraved and unweakened
spiritual powers, on finding himself in so dreadful and humiliating a
position to say himself: 'But why should I go !hrough all this? I desire to
live my life in the best way! I wish to decide for myself what is pleasant...
useful and necessary for me to do. Leave me in peace with your Russia,
France, Britain. Whoever wishes all this, lethim takecareofthese Brimins
and Frances, but I do not require them. By force you can seize from me
everything you Iikeand kill me butof my own accordI do not wish my own
enslavement and shall not participate in it.' It would appear natural to act
thus, yet no-one does act in this way.
The belief that to belong to some State or other is a necessary
condition ofhuman life has become so finnly rooted thatmen cannOl make
up their minds to act as their own reason, their own sense of right, or their
direct advantage bids them.
People maintaining their se....itude
. in the name of their belief in the
State are exactly like those birds which, notwithstanding that the door of
46
their cage is open, continue to sit in their prison partly by habit and partly
beCause th Y do not realize they are free.
This error s
i more remarkable in those who themselves satisfy their
own necessities, such as the agricultural population of Germany, India,
Canada. Australia, and especially of Russia. These have neither need nor
advantage in the slavery to which they voluntarily submit
One can understand why the townsfolk do not thus act because their
interests are so intertwined with the interests of ruling classes that the
enslavement in which they find themselves is advantageous to them. Mr
Rockefellercannot desire to refuse toobey the laws of his country because
the laws ofthatcoumry give him the possibility of gaining and conserving
his billions, to the delJ'iment of the interests of the masses of the people;
neither can the directors of Mr Rockefeller's undertaking and those who
serve these directors, and the servants or these se.....ants, desire to refuse
obedience. So it is with the inhabitants or towns. Their position is similar
to that of the Russian household retainers or old times towards the
peasants, the enslavement of the peasants is advantageous to the former.
But why should agricultural nations submit to this power so unnec­
essary tothem?There lives a family in the GovernmentofTula (NOTE No
22) or in Posen, in Kansas, in Normandy, in Ireland, in Canada. These
people ofTula have no concern whatever in the Russian State, with its St
Petersburg, Caucasus, Baltic Provinces, its Manchurian annexations and
diplomatic artfulness. So also a family live in Posen and have no concern
in Prussia, with its Berlin and its African colonies; nor has the Irishman in
Britain, with its London and its Egyptian, Boer and other interests; nor the
man in Kansas in the United States, with their New York and the Philip­
pines. Yet these families are compelled to surrender a stipulated portion
oftheirlabour,areobtiged toparticipate in preparations forwar, and in war
itself, also broughton not by themselves but by someone else, are obliged
to obey laws established not by themselves but by others. They are, it is
true, assured that whilst obeying certain unknown individuals in all these
cases of the uunost importance for their life, they obey not others but
themselves, since they have elected one out of a thousand representatives
unknown to them. But this can be believed only by him who wishes and
needs to deceive himself and others.
Whilst belonging toaStatea man cannot be rree. And the greater the
State, the more is violence necessary, and the less is true freedom possible.
To form one combination outofthe most diverse nationalities and people
- such asBritain, Russia, Austria - and to retain them in this combination,
very much coercion is necessary.
Although less coercion is necessary formaintaining the unity of men
in small States, such as Sweden, Portugal or SwilZerland, yet, on the other
hand, in these small States it is more difficult for the subjects to evade the
demands oftheauthorities. !herefore the sum or non-freedom. ofcoercion.
47
is the same as in large States.
To bind and keep together a bundle of wood, a sU'Ong rope is
necessary and a certain degree of tension. So also to kccp together in one
State a great collection of men, a certain degree of applied coercion is
necessary. In thecaseofthewood,the differencemay beoruy in its relative
position, in such and nOlother pieces of wood being directly submitted to
the pressure of the rope, but the power holding them together is one and
the same in whatever position the pieces may be placed. 1l is thesame with
anycoercive Stateof whateverkind, a despotism, a constitutional monar­
chy' an oligarchy or a republic. If the union of men is maintained by
coercion, by me establishment by some people of laws forcibly applied to
omers, then there will always exist coercion, equal in extent, of some
people over others. In one place it will manifest itselfin coarse violence,
in another- in me power ofmoney. Thedifference will beonly that in one
coercive State organization, the coercion will weigh more upon a certain
section of people, whilst in another organization on anOlher.
State coercion may be compared to a black thread upon which beads
are loosely strung. The beads are men. The black thread is the State. So
long as the beads are on tbe thread, they will not be able to move freely.
They may all be gathered together on one side, and on this side the black
thread will nOl be visible between them; but on tbe other side a large
portion of me thread will be bare (despotism). One may arrange the beads
together in separate groups, leaving corresponding intervals of black
tbread between these groups (constitutional monarchy). One may lcave a
small portion of thread between each bead (republic). But so long as the
beads are nOt taken offthe mread, so long as the tbreads are not severed,
it will not be possible to conceal tbe black thread.
So long as the State and the coercion necessary for its maintenance
exist, in whatever form, there will not, mere cannot, be freedom, lrUe
freedom. that which all men have always understood. and so understand,
by that word.
'But howcan men possibly live without the Stale? ' is generally asked
by mose who have become soaccustomed toevery man nmonly being tbe
son of his parents, the descendant of his ancestors, living by the labour he
has chosen, but , above all, being also a Frenchman or an Englishman, a
German, an American, a Russian - and, belonging to this or that coercive
organization which is called France, with its Algeria, Annam or Nice; or
Britain, with its alien population of India, Egypt, Australia or Canada; or
Auslria, with its nationalities not united internally in any way; or to such
mixed and enormous Statcsas theUnited States orRussia. Thesemen have
become so accustomed to this, that it seems to them as impossible to live
withoutbelonging to these combinations, possessing no internal union, as
tho�nds of years ago it appeared to people to live without offering
sacnficcs 10 gods. and without oracles directing the actions of men.
48
How can men live without belonging to any Government?
Why, exactly as mey live now, only without doing those silly and
objectionable things which they now do for me sake of this dreadful
superstition. They wili liveas they now live. but wimout depriving their
families of the products of their labours that mey may give n i the form of
uue sand duties for the evil deeds of men unknown to them; they will live
with out participating either in coercion, or in Jaw courts, or in wars
organized by these men. Yes. it is only this superstition which in our time
haS no sense, which gives te some hundreds of men an insane and utterly
unjustifiable power over millions. and deprives these millions of lrUe
freedom. A man living in Canada. Kansas, Bohemia. Little Russia or
Normandy, cannot be free so long as he considers himself. and often 'With
pride. a subjectofGreat Britain, me United States. Auslria.Russia. France.
Norcan Governments, whose vocation consist in maintaining the unity of
such impossible and senseless combinations as RUSSia. Britain, Germany
or France, give their subjects real freedom, but only its mere counterfeit,
as is tlte case with all the anfuJ constitutions, monarchic, republican or
democratic. Theprincipal, ifnot the only. cause ofthe absenceoffreedom
is the State superstition. People can indeed be deprived of liberty in the
absence of the State. Bul whilst they belong to a State. there cannot be
liberty.
Those now participating in me Russian revolution do not understand
this. They are slriving for various liberties for the subjects of the Russian
State imagining that in this consists the purpose of the revolution now
taking place.B u titspurposeandultimate result is much more far-reaching
than therevolutionaries see. Thegoal s i emancipation from State coercion.
Towards this great revolution is leading that complex work of mistakes
andevil-doings now taking placeon the decaying surfaceofthe enormous
Russian population, amongst a small portion of urban classes. me so­
called intellectuals and factory workmen. AU this complex activity.
chiefly proceeding from the lowest impulses of vengeance. spite or
ambition, has for the mass of the Russian nalion only one significance: it
serves to show the nation what they should not do and what theycan and
should do. It must serve to demonstrate all the futility of the substitution
for one form of Government coercion and evil-doing, of another form of
Government coercion and evil-doing, and to destroy in their conscious­
ness the superstition and spell of Statedom.
The great majority of the Russian people, observing present events
and all the new fonns of violence manifested in the cruel revolutionary
activity of wreckings, devastations, strikes, depriving wholepopulationof
their livelihood, and above all, fratricidal strife, are beginning to under­
stand meevil notonly of me former Stale coercion under which they have
lived and from which they have already suffered so much, but also of that
new thing. still Stale coercion, which isnow being manifested by similar,
49

but new. deceits and evil-doings. and that neither theone nor the other is
bener or worse but that both are bad and that therefore they should free
themselves from all State coercion. and thatthis is very easy and possible.
The poople. especially the Russian agricultural people. the great
majority who have lived and are living, solving all their social questions
through the village assembly without needing any Government. contem­
plating present events will unavoidably come to understand that they
require no Government at all, whether the mOSt despotic or the most
democratic, just as a man does not require to be bound by any chains
whether of brass or iron, whether short or long. The nation requires no
special separate freedom, but only one true. complete, simple freedom.
As is always the case, so now, the solution of apparently difficult
problems is most simple. In order toattain, not thisor that fonn offreedom,
butofthe one, true, complete freedom, it is not strife with the governmen­
tal power which is necessary, nor the intervention of any particular kind
of representation which could but conceal from men their State slavery,
but only one thing - disobedience.
Let the people only cease to obey the Government and there will be
neither taxes, norseizureofland, norprohibitions from theauthorities, nor
soldiery. nor wars. This is so simpieand appears so easy. Then why have
not men done this hitherto and why are they still not doing it?
Why, because ifone is nOt to obey the Government, one has to obey
God and live a righteous life.
Only in that degree in which men live such a life can they cease to
obey men and become free.
One cannot say to oneself, I will not obey men. It is possible not to
obey men only when one obeys the higher law ofGod,common to all. One
cannot be free whilst transgressing the higher universal law of mutual
service. as it is transgressed by the life of the wealthy, and of the urban
classes who live by the labour of the working, especially the agricultural,
people. A man can be free only in the degree in which he fulfils the higher
law. The fulfilment of this law is not only difficult but almost impossible
in the town and factory organization of society. where man's success is
founded upon contest with other men. Il is only possible and easy under
agricultural conditions of life. when all man's effort are directed to a
struggle with nature. Therefore the liberation of men from obedience to
Government.and from the beliefin the artificial combination ofthe States
and of the Fatherland. must lead them to natural, joyous in the highest
degree. moral life of agricultural communities, subject only to their own
regulations realizable by all and founded not on coercion but on mutual
agreement.
In this lies the essence of the great revolution approaching for all
Christian nations.
How this revolution will take place, what steps it will go through, is
50
not given to us to know. but we do know, it is inevitable, for it is taking
� y has already been realized in the consciousness of men.
place and
The life of men consists in this: that time keeps further and further
unfolding that which was concealed, and showing the correctness or
!ncorrec�ess of the way along which they have advanced in thepast. Life
IS the enltghtenmentofthe consciousness, concerning the falsity offonner
foundations. and the establishment of new ones and the realization of
them. The life ofmankind as well as that ofthe individual man, isa growth
�
out of a f nner condition into a new one. This growth is inevitably
accomparued by the recognition of one's mistakes and liberation from
them.
Thereareofcourseperiods in the life ofthe whole ofmankind as well
as in that of the separate individual. when the mistake becom � clear.
These are periods of revolution. In such a position the Christian nations
now find themselves.
Mankind lived according 10 the law of violence and knew no other.
The time came when the progressive leaders of humanity proclaimed a
new law of mutual service, common to all mankind. Man accepted this
�
law, butnot in its full m ing, and although they tried to apply it, they still
contInued to hve accordmg to the law of violence. Christianity appeared
.
.
and confllIDed the truth that there is only one law common to all men which
gives them the greatest welfare - the law ofmutual scrvice and indicated
_
the reason why this law had not been realized in life. It was not realized
because man regarded the use of violence as necessary and beneficent for
good ends,and regarded the law ofretribution as just. Christianity showed
that violence is always pernicious, and that retribution cannot be applied
by men, But Christian humanity, not having accepted this explanation of
the law of mutual service common to all men, although it desired to live
according to
�is law, involuntarily continued to live acCOrding to the
pagan law of Violence. Such a contradictory state of things kept increasing
�e criminaliry oflife and the external comforts and lUXury of the minor­
Ity, at the same time increasing the slavery and misery of the majority
amongst Christian nations.
In latertimes thecriminality and luxury ofthe life ofoneportion, and
,
the mlSCry and slavery ofthe other portion of Christendom have attained
the highest degree, especially amongst those nations which have long
ban oned the natural life of agriculture and fallen under the deceit of
? �
Imagmary self-government.
:hese nations, suffering from the misery of their position and the
�onSClousness of the contradiction they are involved in, search for salva­
lion everywhere; in imperialism, SOCialism, the scizure ofother people's
�ands, in every kind ofstrife, in tariffs, in technical improvements in vice
In anything except the one thing which can save
�ing of
them the f
_
themselves from the superstition of the State, of the Fatherland,
and the
51
cessation of obedience to coercive State power of any kind whatever.
Owing to their agricullUral life. to the absence of the deceit of self­
government. to the greaUless of their number. and above all. to the
Christian attitude towards violence preserved by the Russian people. this
people. afteracruel. unnecessary and unfortunate war n
i to which they had
been drawn by their Government. and after the neglect of their demands
that the land taken from them should be returned. have understood sooner
than others the principal causes of the calamities of Christendom of our
time. and therefore the great revolution impending over all mankind.
which can alone save it from its unnecessary suffering. must begin
amongst this nation.
Herein lies the significance of the revolution now beginning in
Russia. This revolution has not yet begun amongst the nations of Europe
and America. but the causes which have called it forth in Russia arc the
same for all the Christian world; the same Japanese war which has
demonstrated to the whole world the inevitable advantage in military art
of pagan nations over Christian. the same armaments of the great States
reaching the utmostdcgreeofstrainand unable ever tocease. and the same
calamitous position and universal dissatisfaction of the working people
owing to their loss of their natural right to the land.
The majority of Russian people clearly see that the cause of all the
calamities they suffer is obedience to power. and that they have before
them the choice either of declining to be rational. free beings. or else of
ceasing to obey t he Government And if the people ofEurope and America
do not yet see this. owing to the bustle of their life and the deceit of self­
government. they will very soon sec it Participation in the coercion ofthc
governing of great States. which they call freedom. has brought and is
bringing them to continually increasing slavery and to the calamities
nowing from this slavery. These increasing calamities will. in their tum.
bring them to the only means of deliverance from them; to the cessation
of obedience. to the abolition of the coercive combinations of StaleS.
For this great revolution to take place it is only necessary that men
should understand that the State. the Fatherland. is a fiction. and that life

AN APPEAL
and true liberty arerealities; and that, therefore. it is not life and liberty that
should besacrificed for the artificial combination called the State. but that
men ought in the name of true lifeand liberty to free themselves from the
superstition ofthe Stateand from iLSouLCome -criminal obedience to men.

TO SOCIAL
In this alteration of men's attitude towards the Stale and the authori­
ties is the end of the old and the beginning of the new age.

REFORMERS
52

AN APPEAL TO
SOCIAL
REFORMERS
(1903)
In my Appeal to the Working People I expressed the pinion that if
� though theyregard the existing State organization as subject to ruteration,
the working men are to free themselves from opp�lon, It 15 n e ��
. .
�
that they shouldthemselves cease to live as they now hve, strug lmg With
their neighbours for their personal welfare, and thal, according to the
Gospel rule, they should 'act towards others as one desires that others
should aCllOwards oneself.' The method I had suggested called forth. as
1 expected. one and the same condemnation fro � people �f the, most
�
opposite views. 'It is an Utopia. impractical. To WllIl fo the liberation of
, established anew one, which according to their opinion, beuerensured the
mcn whoare suffering fromoppression and vIolenceunul they all become
virtuouswouldmean,whilstrecognizing the existing evil, to doom on�lf
to inaction.' Therefore 1 would like to say a few words as to why I believe
this idea is not so impractical as it appearS, but, on the contrary. deserves
that more attention be directed to it than to all the other methodsproposed
by scientific men for the improvement of the social o �er. � now address
these words to those who sincerely desire to serve their neighbours.
I increased the m eans of its defence, and became yet more injurious to the
The ideals of social life which direct the activity ofmen change. and
togetherwith them the orderof human life also changes. There was time �
when the ideal of sociai life was complete animal freedom. accordmg to
which one portion of mankind, as far as it was able, devoured �e other,
both in the direct and in the figurative sensc. Then followed a ume when
the social ideal becamethe powerofone man, and men deified their rulers,
��
and not only willingly, bUlenthusiastically submiUed to them a i Egypt
and Rome. Morituri Ie salutanL Next, people recognized as their Ideal an
organization of life in which power was recognized, not for its ow � �e,
but for the good organization or men's lives. Attempts for the real �uon
of such an ideal were at one time forunivcrsal monarchy. then a umvcrsal
church uniting various States and directing them, then came the ideal of
representation, then of a republic, with or without universal suffrage. At
54
the present time, it is imagined that this ideal can be realized through an
economic organization wherein all the means of production will cease to
be private property, and will become the property of the whole nation.
Howeverdifferent all these ideals may be, yet to introduce them into
life, power wasruways postulated. That is. coercive power, which forces
men to obey established laws. The same is a1so postulated now.
It is supposed that the realization of the greatest welfare for aU is
attained by certain people (according to the Chinese teaching. the most
virtuous; according to the European teaching, the anointed, or elected by
the people) being entrusted with power. They will establish and support
the organization which will secure the greatest possible safety of the
citizens againstencroachments on each other's labour and on freedom and
life. Not only those who recognize the existing State organization as a
necessary condition ofhuman life, butalso Revolutionists and Socialists.
nevertheless recognize power, that is. the right and possibility of some to
l
compel others to obey estabished laws as the necessary condition ofsociru
order.
Thus it has been from ancient times, and still continues to be. But
those who werecompelled byforce to submittocertain regUlationsdidnot
always regard these regulations as the best. and therefore, often revolted
against those in power, deposed them, and. in place of the old order.
welfare of the people. Yet as those possessed of power always became
depraved by this possession, and thererore used their power not so much
for thecommon welfare as for their own personal interests. the new power
has always been similar to the old one, and often still more unjusL
It has been like this when those who had revolted against authority
overcame it On the other hand. when victory remained on the side of the
existing power, then the latter, triumphant in self-protection, always
liberty of its citizens. It has always been like this, both in the past and the
present. and it is most instructive to study the way this has taken place in
ourEuropean world during the wholeofthe nineteenth century. In the first
half, revolutions had been for the most part successful, but the new
authorities which replaced theold ones. Napoleon I, CharlesX, Napoleon
1II. did not increase the liberty of the citizens. In the second halr. after the
year 1848, all attempts at revolution were suppressed by the Governments.
and owing to former revolutions and attempted new ones, the Govern­
ments entrenched themselves in greater and greater self-defence; and
having furnished men with hitherto unknown powersover nature and over
each other, they have increased their authority. until towards the end ofthe
�ast century they have developed it to such a degree that it has become
Impossiblefor the people to struggle against it. The Governments have not
55
only seized enonnous riches collected from the people, have not only
disciplined artfully levied troops, bUl have also grasped all the spiritual
means ofinnuencing the masses, the direction ofthe Press and ofreligious
development, and above all, of education. These means have been so
organized and, have become so powerful thatsince the year 1848 there has
not been any successful attempt at revolution in Europe.
II
This phenomenon is quite new and absolutely peculiar to our time.
However powerful were Nero, Khengis Khan or Charles the Great, they
could not suppress risings on the borders of their domains and still less
could they direct the spiritual activity oftheir subjects, their education, sci·
entific and mora1, and their religious tendencies. Whereas now all these
means are in the hands of the Governments.
It is not only the Parisian 'macadam' which, having replaced the
previous stone roadways, renders barricades impossible during revolu·
tions in Paris, but the same kind of 'macadam' appeared during the latter
half of the nineteenth century in all branches of State Government. The
secret police. the system of spies, bribery of the Press, railways, tele·
graphs, telephones, photography, prisons, fortifications, enonnous riches,
the education ofthe younger generations and, above all, the anny are in the
hands of the Government (NOTE No 23).
All is organized in such a way that the most incapable and unintelli·
gent rulers (from the instinctive feeling of self·preservation) can prevent
serious preparations for a rising, and can always, without any effort, sup­
press those weak attemplS atopen revolt which from time to time are yet
undertaken by belated revolutionislS who by these auemplS only increase
the powers of GovemmenlS.
The only means atpresentforovercoming GovernmenlS lies in this:
that the anny. composed of the people. having recognized the injustice.
cruelty and injury ofthe Governmenttowards themselves, should cease to
support it But in this respect also, the Governments knowing that their
chief power is in the anny have so organized its mobilization and its
discipline that no propaganda amongst the people can snatch the annyout
of the hands of the Government. No man, whatever his political convic·
tions. who is serving in the anny, and has been subjected to that hypnotic
breaking.in which is called discipline, can, whilst in the ranks, avoid
obeying commands, just as an eye cannot avoid winking when a blow is
aimed at it. Boys of the age oftwenty who are enlisted and educated in the
false ecclesiastic or materialistic and moreover 'patriotic' spirit, cannot
refuse to serve, as children who are sent to school cannot refuse to obey.
Having entered the service, these youths, whatever their convictions ·
thanks to artful discipline, elaborated during centuries · are invariably
u-ansfonned in one year into submissive tools in the hands of the authori·
56
ties. Ifrare cases occur· one out of 10.000 · ofrefusals of military service,
this is accomplished only by so·called 'sect members', who act thus out
ofreligious convictions unrecognized by the Governments. Therefore, at
present, in the European world · if only the Governments desire to retain
theirpower, and they cannot but desire this, because the abolition ofpower
would involve the downfall of the rulers • no serious rising can be
organized. and if anything ofthe kind be organized, it will always be sup·
pressed and will have no other consequences bUl the destruction of many
light·minded individuals and the increase of Government power. This
may not be seen by Revolutionists and Socialists who, following outlived
traditions, arecarried away by strife, which for some has becomeadefmite
profession; but this cannot fail to be recognized by all those who freely
consider historical evenlS.
This phenomenon is quite new, and therefore the activity of those
who desire to a1ter the existing order should confonn with this new
position of existing powers in the European world.
III
The struggle between the State and the people which has lasted
during long ages at first produced the substitution of one power for
another, of this one by yet a third, and SO on. But in our European world,
from the middle ofthe last century the power ofthe existing Governments,
thanks to the technical improvemenlS of our time, have been furnished
with such means of defence that strife with it has become impossible. In
proportion as this power has attained greater and greater degree it has
demonstrated more and more ilS inconsistency: there has become even
moreevidentthatinnercontradiction which consists in combination ofthe
idea of a beneficent powerand of violence, which constitutes the essence
ofall power. Itbecame obvious that power, whiCh, to be beneficent, should
be in the hands of the very best men, was always in the hands of the worst,
as the best men, owing to the very nature of power, which consists in the
use of violence towards one's neighbour, could not desire power, and.
therefore, never obtained or retained it.
This contradiction is so self·evident that it would seem everyone
must have always secn it. Yet such are the pompous surroundings of
power, the fear which it inspires, and the inertia of tradition, that centuries
and. indeed. thousands of)'ears passed before men understood their error.
Onl), in latter days have men begun to understand that notwithstanding the
solemnity with which power always drapes ilSelf, ilS essence consislS in
threatening people with the loss of properl)', liberty and life. and in
carrying out these threalS, and that therefore, those who, like kings,
emperors, ministers, judges and others, devote their life to this activity
without an)' other objective except the desire to retain their advantageous
position, not only are not the best, but arealwa)'s the worst men, and being
57
such, cannot by their power contribute to the welfare ofhumanity, but on
the contrary, have always represented, and still represent, one of the
principal causes of the social ca1amities of mankind (NOTE No 24).
Therefore power, which fonnerlyelicited in thepeopleenthusiasm and de·
votion, at present, amongst the greater and best portion of mankind ca1ls
fonh not only indifference, but often contempt and hatred. This more
enlightened section of mankind now understands that a1l that pompous
show with which power surrounds itself is naught else than the red shirt
and velvet trousers of the executioner, which distinguish him from other
convicts because he lakes upon himself the most immoral and infamous
work, that of executing people.
Power, being conscious of this attitude towards itself continually
growing amongst the people, in our days no longer leans upon the higher
foundations of anointed right, popular election or inborn virtue of the
rulers, but rests solely on coercion. Resting thus merely on coercion,
therefore it still more loses the confidence of the people, and losing this
confidence it is more and more compeJled to have recourse to the seizure
of all the activities of natural life, and owing to this seizure it inspires
greater and grealer dissatisfaction.
IV
Power has become invincible, and rests no longer on the higher
nationa1 foundations ofanointed right, ofelectionorrepresentation, but on
violence alone. At the same time, the people ceaseto believe in JX>werand
to respectit, and they submit to it only because they cannot do otherwise.
Since the middle of the last cenwry, from the very time when JX>wer
had simultaneously become invincible and lost its prestige, there begins
toappear amongst the people the teaching thallibeny is incompatible with
the power ofcenain men over others. Not that fantastical libeny which is
preached by the adherents ofcoercion when they affinn that a man who is
compelled, under fear of punishment, to fulfil the orders of other men, is
free, but that only true liberty, which consists in every man being able to
live and act according to his own judgement, to pay or not pay taxes, to
enter or not enter the military service, to be friendly or inimical to
neighbouring nations.
According to this teaching, power is not. as was fonnerly thought,
something divine and majestic, neither is it an indispensable condition of
social life, but is merely the result ofthe coarse violenceofsome men over
others. Be the power in the hands of Louis XVI, or the Committee of
National Defence, orthe Directory, or thcConsulateofNapoleon, or Louis
XVIII, or the Sultan. the President, the chief Mandarin or the Prime
Minister -whosoever it be, there will exist the JX>werofcertain men over
others. and there will not be freedom, but there will be the oppression of
one portion of mankind by another. Therefore power must be abolished.
S8
Buthow toabolish it, and how, when it is abolished, to arrange things
so that, without the existence ofpower, men should not return to the savage
state of coarse violence towards each other?
All Anarchists (NOTE No 25) - as the preachers of this teaching are
called· quiteunifonnly answer the firstquestion by recognizing that ifthat
power is to be really abolished, it must be abolished not by force but by
man's consciousness of its uselessness and evil. To the second question,
as to how Society should beorganized without power, Anarchists answer
variously.
The Englishman Godwin, who lived at the end of the 18th and the
beginning ofthe 19th centuries, and theFrenchman, Proudhon, who wrote
in the middle of the last century, answer the first question by saying that
for the abolition of power the consciousness of men is sufficient, that the
general welfare (Godwin) and justia (Proudhon) are transgressed by
power, and that if the conviction were disseminated amongst the people
that general welfare and justice can be realized only in the absence of
power, then power would of itself disappear.
As to the second question, by what means will the order of a new
Society be ensured without power, both Godwin and Proudhon answer
that people whoare led by the consciousness of general welfare (accord·
ing to Godwin) and ofjuslice (according to Proudhon) will instinctively
find the most universally rational and just forms or life.
Whereas other Anarchists, such as Bakunin and Kropotkin. a1though
they aisorecognize the consciousness in the masses of the harmfulness of
power and its incompatibility with human progress, nevenheless as a
means for its abolition regard revolution as possible, and even as neces­
sary. for which revolution they recommend men to prepare (NOTE No'
26). Thesecondquestion they answerby theassenion thatas soon as State
organization andproperty shall beabolished, men will naturally combine
in rational, free and advantageous conditions of life.
To the question as to the means of abolishing power, the Gennan,
Max Stirner, and the American, Tucker,answer almost in thesame way as
the others. Both of them believe that if men understood that the personal
interest ofeach individual is a perfectly sufficientand legitimate guide for
men's actions, and that JX>wer only impedes the full manifestation of this
leading factor of human life, then power will perish of ilSelf, both owing
to disobedience to it, and above all, as Tucker says, to non-participation
in it. Their answer to the second question is thaI men freed from the
superstition and necessity of power and merely following their persona1
interests would, of themselves, combine into fonns of life most adequate
and advantageous for each.
All these teachings areperfectly correct in this - that ifpower is to be
abolished, this can be accomplished in nowise by force, as power having
abolishedpowerwillremain power; but that this abolition ofpowercan be
S9
accomplished only by the realization in the consciousness of men of the
truth that power is useless and harmful, and that men should neither obey
it nor participate in it. This truth is incontrovertible: power can be abol­
ished only by the rational consciousness of mcn. But in what should this
consciousness consist? The Anarchists believe that this consciousness can
be founded upon considerations about common welfare, justice, progress
or the personal interests of men. But apart from the fact that all these fa
ctors are not in mutual agreement, the very definitions of what constitutes
general welfare,justice, progress orpersonal jnurest are understood by
man in infinitely various ways. Therefore it is impossible to suppose that
people who are not agreed amongst themselves and who differently
understand the baseson which they oppose power, could abolish power so
frrmly fixed and so ably defended. Moreover, the supposition that consid­
erations about genera] welfare, justice or the law of progress can suffice
to secure that men, freed from coercion, but having no motive for
sacrificing their personal welfare to the general welfare, should combine
in just conditions without violating thcir mutual liberty, is yet more
unfounded. The utilitarian, egoistic theory of Max Stimer and Tucker,
who affrrm that by each following his own personal inlerest,justrelations
would be introduced between all, is not only arbitrary, but in complete
contradiction to what in reality has taken place, and is taking place.
So that whilst correctly recognizing spiritual weapons as_the only
means of abolishing power, the Anarchistic teaching, holding an irrelig­
ious materialistic ife
l conception, does nOlpossess this spiritual weapon,
and is confined to conjectures and fancies which give the advocates of
coercion the possibility of denying its true foundations, owing to the in­
efficiency of the suggested means of realizing this teaching (N01E No
27).
This spiritual weapon is simply the one long ago known to men,
which has always destroyed powerand always given to those who used it
complete and inalienable freedom. This weapon is but mis, a devout
understanding of life, according to which man regards his earthly exis­
tence as only a fragmentary manifestation of me complete life, and con­
necting his life with infinite Iife,and recognizing his highest welfare in the
fulfLImentofmese laws as more binding upon himself than the fulfLIment
of any human laws whatsoever.
Only such a religious conception, uniting all men in the same
understanding of life, incompatible with subordination to power and
participation in it, can truly destroy power.
Only such a life-conception will give men the possibility, without
joining in violence, of combining into rational and just fonns of life.
Strange to say, only after men have been brought by life ilSeIf to the
conviction that existing power is invincible, and in our time cannot be
overthrown by force, have they come to understand the ridiculously self-
60
evident trot h that power and all the evil produced by it are but results of
bad life in men, and that thererore for !he abolition of power and the evil
it produces, good life on the part of men is necessary.
Men are beginning to understand this. Now they have further to
understand that there s
i only one means for a good life amongst men: the
profession and realization of a religious teaching natural and comprehen­
sible to the majority of mankind.
Only by means of professing and realizing such a religious teaching
can men attain me ideal which has now arisen in their consciousness, and
lOwards which they are striving.
All other attempts at the abolition ofpowerandat organizing, without
power, a good life amongst men areonly a futile expenditure ofeffortand
do not bring near the aim towards which men are striving, but only
removes them from it.
V
This is what I wish to say to you, sincere people, who, not satisfied
with egoistic life, desire to give your strength to the service of your
brothers. If you participate, or desire to participate, in governmental
activity, and by this means to serve the people, then consider the nature of
every Governmentresting on power. Havingconsidered it, you cannotbut
see that there is no Government which does not prepare to commit, does
not commit, does not maintain itself by violence, robbery and murder.
A little-known American writer, Thoreau, in his essay on why it is
men's duty to disobey the Government, relates how he refused to pay the
Governmentofme UniLed States a tax ofone dollar,explaining his refusal
on the grounds mat he did not desire by his dollar to participate in the
activity of a Government which sanctioned the slavery of the negroes
(NOTE No 28). Cannot, and should not, the same thing be felt in relation
to his Government, I do not say by a Russian, but by a citizen of the most
progressive State, the United States of America, with its action in Cuba,
in the Philippines, with its relation to negroes, me banishment of the
Chinese; or of England, with its opium and Boers; or of France with its
horrors of militarism?
Therefore,a sincere man, wishing lO serve his fellow men, if only he
has seriously realized what every Government is, cannot participate in it
otherwise than on his strength of the principle that the end justifies the
means.
But such an activity has always been harmful for those in whose
interests it was undertaken, as well as for those who had recourse to it.
The thing is very simple. You wish. by submitting to the Government
and making usc of its laws, to snatch from it moreliberty and rights for the
people. But the liberty and the rights of the people arc in inverse ratio to
the power of the Government and, in general, of the ruling classes. The
61
more liberty and rights the people have, !.he less powerandadvantage will
the Governmentgainfrom them. Governments know this,and, having the
power in theirhands, they readily allow all kind of liberal prattle,and even
some insignificant liberal reforms which justify its power, but they imme­
diately coercively arrest liberal inclinations which threaLCn not only !.he
advantages of the rulers, but !.heir very existence. So that all your efforts
to serve the people through the power of governmental administration, or
throughParliaments. will only lead to you, by youractivity,increasing the
IXlwer of the ruling classes, and you will, according to the degree of your
sincerity, unconsciously or consciously. participate in this power.
If, on the o!.her hand, you belong to the category of sincere peopl e
desiring to serve the nation by revolutionary. Socialistic activity, then
(apart from the insufficiency of aim involved in thatmaterial welfare of
men towards which you are striving, which never satisfied anyone)
consider thosemeans which you possess for its auainmenL These means
are, in the first place and above all, immoral, containing falsehood.
deception, violence, murder; in the second place, these means can in no
caseattain their end. The strength and caution of Governments defending
their existence are in ourtime so great that not only can no ruse, deception
or harsh action overthrow them, !.hey cannot even shake them. All reva.
lutionary attempts only furnish new justification for !.he violence of Gov­
ernments, and increase their power.
But even if we admit the impossible - !.hat a revolution in our time
could becrowned with success - then, why should we expect that, contrary
to all which has ever taken place, the power which has overturned another
power can increase the liberty of men and become more beneficent than
the one i t has overthrown? Or, if that conjecture. though contrary to
common sense and experience, were possible. and one powerhaving abol­
ishedanotherpowercould give people the freedom necessary to establish
thoseconditions of life which they regard asmost advantageousfor them­
selves, then there would still be no reason whatever to suppose that people
living an egotistical life could establish amongst themselves better condi­
tions than the previous ones.
Let the Queen of the Dahomeys establish the most liberal constitu­
tion, and let her even achi eve that nationalization of the means of
production whiCh, in the opinion of the Socialists, saves people from all
theircalamities, it would be necessary for someone tohave power in order
that the constitution shouldwork, and themeans of production should not
be seized into private hands. But as long as these people are Oabomeys
with their life conception, it is evident that, although in anotherform. the
violence of a certain portion of the Oahomeys over the others will be the
same as without a constitution and without the nationalization of the
means of production. Before realizing the Socialistic organization, i t
would b e necessary f o r the Dahomeys to lose their taste f o r bloody
62
tyranny. Just the same is necessary for Europeans also.
In order that men may live a common life without oppressing each
other. there is necessary, not an organization supported by force, but a
moral condition in accordance with which people act from their inner
conviction and not coercion. Such a condition does not exist. It exists in
religious Christian communities in America. in Russia, in Canada. Here
people do indeed, without laws enforced by violence, live the communal
lf
i e without oppressing each other.
Thus the rational activity proper to our time formen of our Christian
Society i s only one: the profession and preaching by word and deed of the
lastand highest religious teaching known to us. of the Christian teaching;
not of that Christian teaching which, whilst submitting 10 the existing
order of life, demands of men only the fulfilment of external ritual, or is
satisfied with faith in and the preaching of salvation through redemption,
butof that vital Christianity, the inevitable condition of which is not only
non-participation in the action of the Government, but disobedience of its
demands. since these demands - from taxes and custom houses to law
courts and armies - are all opposed to this true Christianity. If this be so,
then it is evident that it is not to the establishment of new forms that the
activity ofmen desirous of serving their neighbour should be di rected, but
to the alteration and perfecting of their own characters and those of other
people.
Those who act in the other way generally think that the forms of life
and the character and life-conception of men may simullaneously im­
prove. But, thinking thus, they make the usualmistake of taking the result
for the cause andthecausefor theresult orforan accompanying condition.
The alteration of character and life-conception of men inevitably
brings with it the alleration of those forms in which men have lived,
whereas the alteration of the forms of life not only does not contribute to
the alteration of the character and life-conception ofmen, but.more than
anything else, obstructs this alteration by directing the attention and activ­
ity of men into a false channel. To alter the forms of life, hoping thereby
to alter the characterand life-conception ofmen, is like alteringin various
ways the position of wet wood in a stove, believing that there can be such
a position of wetfuel as will cause it 1O catch fire. Only dry wood will take
fire independently of the position in which i t is placed.
This error is so obvious that people could not fall into it if there were
not a reason which rendered !.hem liable to it. This reason consists in the
fact that the alteration of the character of men must begin in themselves,
and demands much struggle and labour, whereas the alteration of the
forms of the life of others is attained easily without inner effort over
oneself, and has the appearance of a vcry important and far-reaching
activity.
It is against this error, the source of the greatest evil, that I warn you.
63
men sincerely desirous of serving your neighbour by your lives.
VI
'But we cannot livc quictly occupying ourselves wilh lhe profession
and leaching of Christianity when we see around us suffcring people. We
wish lO serve lhem actively. For lhis weare ready to surrender our labour,
even our lives', say people wilh more or less sincere indignation.
How do you know, I would answer these people, that you are called
to serve men precisely by thaL method which appears LO you the most
useful and practical? What you say only shows that you have already
decided that we cannot serve mankind by a Christian life, and that true
service lies only in political activity, which auraclS you.
All politicians think likewise, and they are al1 in opposition to each
other, and thereforecenainly cannot all be right. It would be very wel1 if
everyonecould serve men as he pleased, but such is not the case, and there
exislS only one means of serving men and improving their condition. This
sole means oonsislS in the profession and realization of a teaching from
which flows the inner work of perfecting oneself. The self-perfecting of
a true Christian, always living naturally amongst men and !Wt avoiding
them, oonsislS in the establishment of beuer, more and more loving
relations between himself and other men. The establishment of loving
relations between men cannot but improve thcir gcneral conditions,
although the form of this improvement remains unknown to man.
It is true that in serving lhrough governmental activity, parliamentary
or revolutionary, we can determine beforehand the results we wish to
attain, and at the same time profit by all the advantages of a pleasant,
luxurious life, and obtain a brilliantposition.theapproval ofmen and great
fame. If those who participate in such activity have indeed sometimes to
suffer, it is such a possibility of suffering as in every strife is redeemed by
thepossibilityofsuccess. In military activity,suffering andeven death are
stiU more possible, and yet only the least moral and the egoistic choose it
On the other hand, the religious activity. in the first place does not
show us the results which it attains, and in the second place, such activity
demands the renunciation ofexternal success and not only does not afford
a brilliant position and fame, but brings men to the lowest position from
the social point of view, subjecting them not only to contempt and con­
demnation, but to the most cruel suffcrings and death.
Thus, in our time of universal conscription, religious activity com­
pels every man who is called to the service of murder to bear all those
punishments with which the Government punishes refusal of military
service. Therefore, religiollsactivity is difficult. but italonegives man the
consciousness of true freedom, and the assurance that he is doing that
which he should do.
Consequently, this activity alone is truly fruitful, attaining not only
64
its highest object, but also incidentally and in themost natural and simple
way, thoseresults towards which social refonners strive n i such artificial
ways.
There is only one means of serving men, which consists in oneself
living agood life. This means is not merely visionary, as it is regarded by
those to whom itis notadvantagcous, but is the only reality, all other means
being phantoms, by which the leaders of the masses lure them n
i to a false
way, distracting them from that which alone is true.
VII
'But if this be so, when will it come to pass?' say those who wish to
see lhe realization of this ideal as quickly as possible.
It would be very well f i one could quickly, immediately, grow a
forest. Butonecannotdo this, one must wait till lhe seeds shool, then the
leaves, then the branches and then the trees will grow up.
One can stick branches into the ground, and for a short time they will
resemble a wood, but it will be only a resemblance. The same applies to
a rapid establishment ofgood social order amongstmen. One can arrange
a resemblance ofgood order, as do the Governments, but these imitations
only remove the possibility of true order. They remove it - firstly, by
cheating men, showing lhem the appearance of good order where it does
notemt; and secondly.because Ihese imitations oforder are attained only
by power, and power depraves men, rulers as well as ruled, and therefore
makes true order less possible.
Therefore, attempts at a rigid realization of the ideal not only fail to
contribute to its actual realization, but more than anything impede it.
Whether the ideal of mankind, a well organized Society without
violence, will be realized soon, or not soon, depends upon whether the
rulers of Ute masses who sincerely wish the people good will soon under­
stand that nothing removes men so much from the realization of their ideal
as that which they are now doing, by either continuing to maintain old
superstitions, or denying all religions. and directing the people's activity
to the service of the Govemment. of revolution or of Sociilism. If those '
men who sincerely wish to serve their neighbour were only to understand
all the fruitlessness of those means of organizing the welfare of men
proposed by the supporters of the State and by revolutionists. if only they
were to understand that the one means by which men can liberated from
their sufferings consists in men themselves ceasing to Iivean egoistic, hea­
then life, and beginning to live a universal Christian one, not recognizing,
y
as they do now, thepobibilit and the legality o'fuSlng'violence overone's
neighoours, and participating in it for on!'s personal aims. If, on the
contrary, lhey were to follow in life the fundamental and highest law of
acting lOwards others as one wishes others to act lOwards oneself, then,
very quickly, those irrational and cruel forrns oflife in which we now live
65
would be ovenhrown and new ones would develop corresponding to the
new consciousness of men.
Think only what cnonnous and splendid mental powers are now
spent in the service of the State and in its defence from revolution; how
much youthful and enthusiastic effort is spent on attempts at revolution,
on an impossible struggle with the Stale; how much isspent on Socialistic
dreaming. All this is not only delaying, but rendering impossible the
realization oCme welfare towards which all men are striving. How would
itheiraU those whoarespending theirpowers so fruitlessly, and oflen with
harm to their neighbours, were to direct them aU to that, which alone
aCCords the possibility of good social ife
l to their inner self.perfection?
How many times would one be able 10 build a new house out of the
-

new solid material, ifall those efrons which have been and are now being
spent on propping up the old house were used resolutely and conscien­
tiously for the preparation of the material for a new house and the building
thereof, which, although obviously it could notat fll'St beas luxurious and
conveniem for the chosen few as was the old one, would undoubtedly be
more slable. and would afford thecomplete possibility for those improve­
ments which are necessary, not for the chosen few only, but also for all
men!
So, all I have said here amoums to the simple, generally comprehen­
sible and irrefutable truth, that in order that good Iifeshould exist amongst
men, it is necessary thal men should be good.
There is only one way of innuencing men towards a good life:
namely, 10 live a good life oneself. Therefore the activity of those who
desire to contribute 10 theestablishment ofgood life amongst men can and
should consist in efforts IOwards inner perfection in the fulfilment of that
which is expressed in theGospel by the words: 'Be ye perfect even as your
Father in Heaven is perfect.'

ON ANA RCJ-IY

66

ON ANARCHY
(1900)
TheAnarchislSareright in everything; n
i the negation afthe existing
order, and in the assertion that, withoutAuthority, therecouldnotbe worse
violence than that of Authority under existing conditions. They are
mislaken only in lhinking that Anarchy can be instituted by a [violent ·
Editor] revolution. 'To establish Anarchy'. 'Anarchy will be instituted'.
But it will be instituted only by there being more and morc people who do
notrequire the protectionofgovernmental power. and by there being more
and more people who will be ashamed of applying this power.
'The capitalistic organization will pass into the hands ofworkers, and
then there will be no more oppression of these workers, and no unequal
distribution of earnings.'
'But who will establish the works; who will administer them?'
'It will goon ofitsown accord; the workmen themselves will arrange
everything .•
'But the capilalistic organization was established just because, for
every practical affair, there is need for administrators furnished with
power. If there be work, there will be leadership, administrators with
power. And when there is power, there will beabuse ofit- the very thing
against which you are now striving.'
To the question, how to be without a Slate, without courts, armies,
and so on, an answer cannot be given, because the question is badly
formulated. The problem is not how to arrange a State after the pattern of
today, or after anew pattern.Neither, I, nor any ofus, is appointed to settle
that question.
But, though voluntarily, yet inevilably must we answer the question,
how shall I act faced with the problem which ever arises before me? Am
I to submit my conscience to the acts taking place around me, am I to
procfuim myself in agreement with the Government, which hangs erring
men, sends soldiers to murder, demoralizes nations with opium and spirits,
and soon.or am I to submit my actions to conscience. i.e., not participate
in Government, the actions of which are contrary to my reason?
What will be the outcome of this. what kind of a Government there
will be - of all this I know nothing; not that I don't wish to know; but that
I cannOl I only know that nothing evil can result from my following the
higher guidance of wisdom and love, or wise love, which is implanted in
68
me;justas nothing evil comes ofthe bee following the instinct implanted
in her, and flying out of the hive with the swarm, we should say. to ruin.
But, I repeal, I do not wish to and cannotjudge about this.
In this precisely consists the power of Christ's teaching and that not
beCause Christ is God or a great man, but because His teaching is
irrefutable. The merit of His teaching consists in the factthat it transferred
the matter from the domain of eternal doubt and conjecture on to the
ground of certainty. 'Thou art a man, a being rational and kind, and thou
knoweSl that today or tomorrow thou wilt die. disappear. Ifthere be a God,
then thou wilt go toHim, and He will askofthee an accountofthy actions,
whether thou hast acted in accordance with His law, or, at least, with the
higher qualities implanted in thee. Ifthere be no God, thou regardest rea­
son and loveas the highestqualities, and must submit to them thy other in­
clinations,andnotlet them submit to thy animal nature - to thecares about
the commodities oflife. to the fear ofannoyance and material calamities.'
The question is not, I repeat. which community will be the more
secure, the better - the one which is defended by arms, cannons, gallows,
or the one that is not so safeguarded. But there is only one question for a
man, and one it is impossible to evade: 'Wilt thou, a rational and good
being, having for a moment appeared in this world, and at any moment
liable todisappear - wiltthou take part in the murderof erring men or men
of a different race, wilt thou participate in the extermination of whole
nations of so-called savages. wilt thou participate in the artificial deterio­
ration of generations of men by means ofopium and spirits for the sake of
profit, wilt thou participate in all these actions, or even be in agreement
with those who permit them, or wilt thou not?'
And there can be but one answer to this question for those to whom
it has presented itself. As to what the outcome will be of it, I don't know,
because it is not given me to know. But wh,at should be done, I do unmis­
takably kno�. And ifyou ask: 'Whatwill happen?' Then 1 reply thatgood
will certainly happen; because. acting in the way indicated by reason and
love, I am acting in accordance with the highest law known to me.
g
The situation of the majority of men, enli htened' by true brotherly
enlightenment, at present crushed by the deceit and cunning of usurpers,
who are forcing them to ruin their own lives · this situation is terrible, and
appears hopeless.
Only two issues present themselves. and both are closed. One is to
destroy violenceby violence. by terrorism, dynamite bombs and daggers,
as our Nihilists and Anarchists have attempted to do. to destroy this
conspiracy of Governments against nations. from without; theother is to
come to an agreement with the Government, making concessions to it,
participating in it, in order gradually to disentangle the net which is
binding the people, and to set them free. Both these issues are closed.
69
 Dynamite and the dagger, as experience has already shown, only
cause reaction, and destroy the most valuable power, the only one at our
command, that of public opinion.
The other issue is closed, because Governments have already learnt
how far they may allow the participation of men wishing to refonn them.
They admit only thatwhich does not infringe, which is non-cssential; and
they are very sensitive concerning things harmful to them - sensitive
because the mauerconcerns their own existence. They admit men who do
not share their views, and who desire reform, not only n i order to satisfy

the demands of these men, but also in their own interest, in that of the
Government. These men aredangerousto theGovcmments if they remain
outside them and revolt against them · opposing to the Governments the
onlyeffective instrument the Governments possess - public opinion; they
must therefore render these men harmless, attracting them by means of
concessions, in ordertorenderthem innocuous (likecultivat.ed microbes),
and then make them serve the aims of the Governments, i.e., oppress and
exploit the masses.
Both thescissues being firmlyclosedand impregnable, whalremains
00 be done?
To use violence is impossible; it would only cause reaction. Tojoin
the ranks ofthe Government is also impossible · one would only become
its instrument. One course therefore remains · to fight LheGovcmmem by
means of thought. speech, actions, life. neither yielding to Government
norjoining its ranks and thereby increasing its power.
This alone is needed, will certainly be successful.
And this is the will of God, the teaching of Christ.

There can be only one pennanent revolution · a moral one: the

regeneration of the inner man.
How is this revolution to take place? Nobody knows how it will take
i himself. And yet in our
place in humanity, but every man feels ilcicarly n
world everybody thinks of changing humanity, and nobody thinks of
changing himself.

TI-IOU SHALT

70

THOU SHALT NOT
KILL
(1900)
When Kingsarecxecuted after tria), as in the case ofCharles I, Louis
XV]and Maximilian ofMexico; orwhentheyarekilled in Courtconspira­
cies, like Peter Ill, Paul, and various Sultans. Shahs and Khans - little is
said ab out it; but when they are killed without a tria1 and without a Court
conspiracy - as in the case of Henry IV ofFrance, Alexander II (NOTE No
29), the Empress of Austria (NOTE No 30). the late Shah of Persia and,
recently. Humbert (NOTE No 31) - such murders excite the greatest
surprise and indignation among Kings and Emperors and their adherents.
justas ifthey themselves nevertookpart in murders. nor profited by them,
nor instigated them. But, in fact, the mildest of the murdered Kings (Al­
exander II or Humben. for instance), nOl lO speak of executions in their
own coumries, were instigators of, and accomplices and partakers in, the
murder of tens of thousands of men who perished on the field of banJe;
while more cruel King s and Emperors have been guihy of hundreds of
thousands, and even millions, of murders.
The teaching ofChristrcpeals the law, An eye for an eye. and a rooth
• indignation evoked by the sufferings of an oppressed people, for which
for a tooth'; but those who have always clung to lhat law, and still cling to
it. and who apply it to a terrible degree - not only claiming 'an eye for;m
eye,' bUl without provocation decreeing the slaughter of thousands, as
lhey do when they declare war - have no right to be indignant at the
application of lhat same law to themselves in so small an insignificant a
degree that hardly one King or Emperor is killed for each hundred
thousand,orperhapseven foreachmillion, whoare killed by lhe orderand
with the consent of }(jngs and Emperors. Kings and Emperors not only
should not be indignant at such murders as those of Alexander II and
Humbert, but they should be surprised thatsuch murders are so rare. con­
sidering lhe continual and universal example of murder that they give to
mankind.
The crowd are so hypnotized lhat they see what is going on before
theireyes, butdo not understand its meaning. They see what constant care
Kings, Emperors and Presidents devote to their disciplined annies; lhey
seethereview s,paradesandmanoeuvresthe rulers hold, aboutwhich they
72
boaSt to one another; and the people crowd to see their own brothers,
brightly dressed up in fools' clothes. turned into machines to the sound of
drum and trumpet. al1, at lhe ShOUl of one man, making one and the same
movement atone and the same moment· butthey do not understand what
it all means. Yetlhe meaning of this drilling is very clearand simple: it is
nothing but a preparation for killing.
Jtis stupefying men inordertomakethem fitinstrumentsformurder.
And those who do this, who chieny direct this and are proud of it. are the
Kings. Emperors and Presidents. And it is just these men - who are
specially occupied in organizing murder and who have made murder their
profession. who wear miLitary uniforms and carry murderous weapons
(swords) at theirsides - that are horrified and indignant when one of them­
selves is murdered.
The murder of Kings - !he murder ofHumbert - is terrible. bUl not on
account of its cruelty. The !hings done by command of Kings and
Emperors - not only past events such as the massacre of SI Bartholomew,
religious butcheries. the terrible repressions of peasant rebellions. and
Paris coups d'etat. butthepresent-day Governmentexecutions, the doing­
to-death ofprisoners in solitary confinement, the Disciplinary Battalions.
the hangings. the beheadings. the shootings and slaughter in wars - are in­
comparably more cruel than the murders committed by Anarchists. Nor
are these murders terrible because undeserved. If A1exander D and
Humbeltdidnotdeserve death.stilllessdidthethousands ofRussians who
perished atPlevna,orofIta1ianswho perished in Abyssinia Such murders
are terrible, not because they are cruel or unmerited, but because of the
unreasonableness of those who commit them.
If the regicides act under the influence of personal feelings of
they hold AlexanderorCamot (NOTE No 32) orHumbert responsible; or
ifthey act from personal feelings ofrevenge. then · however immoraltheir
conduct may be · it is at least intelligible; but how is it that a body of men
(AnarchisLS, weare told) such as lhose by whom Bresci wassem, and who
are now threatening another Emperor - how is it that they cannot devise
any better means of improving the condition of humanity than by killing
people whose destruction can no more be of use than the decapitation of
that mythical monster on whose neck a new head appeared as soon as one
was cutoff? }(jngs and Emperors have long ago arranged for themselves
a system like that of a magazine-rifle; as soon as one bullet has been
discharged. another takes its place. Le roi est morl, \live it roil So what is
the use of killing them?
Only on a most superficial view can the killing of these men seem a
means of saving the nations from oppression and from wars destructive of
human life.
One only need remember that similar oppression and similar war
73
went on, no maner who was at the head of the Government - Nicholas or
Alexander, Frederick or Wilhelm, Napoleon or Louis, Palmerston or
Gladstone, McKinley (NOTE No 33) or any'one else - in order to under­
stand that it is nOlany particular person who causes these oppressions and
these wars from which the nations surrer. The misery of nations is caused
not by particular persons, but by the particular order of Society �nder
which the peopleareso tied up together that they find themselves all 10 the
power of a few men, or more often in the power of one single man: a man
so perverted by his unnatural position as arbiter of the falC and lives of
millions , that he is aJways in an unhea1thy state, and aJways surfers more
or less from a mania of self-aggrandizemenl, which only his exceptionaJ
position conceals from generaJ notice.
Apart from the fact that such men are surrounded from earliest
childhood to the grave by me most insensate luxury and an atmosphere of
falsehood and flauery which aJways accompanies them, their whole
education and aJl their occupations are centred on one object learning
aboul former murders, the best present-day ways of murdering, and the
best preparations for fulure murder. From childhood they learn about
killing in all its possible forms. They always carry about with them
murderous weapons - sword or sabres; they dress Lhemselves in various
uniforms; mey attend parades, reviews and manoeuvres; they visit one
another, presenting one another with Orders and nominating one another
to the command ofregiments - and not only does no-one tell them plainly
what they are doing, or say that to busy oneself with preparations for
killing is revolting and criminal, but from all sides they hear nothing but
approvaJ and enthusiasm for all this activity of theirs. Every lime they go
out , and at each parade and review, crowds of people flock to greet them
with enthusiasm, and it seems to them as if the whole nation approves of
their conduct. Theonly partofthe Press thatreaches them, and that seems
to them the expression of the feelings of the whole people or at ieastof its
best representatives, most slavishly extols their every word and action,
however silly or wicked they may be. Those around them, men and
women, clergy and laity all people who do not prize human dignity -
-
vying with one another in refined flauery, agree with them about anything
and deceive them about everything, making it impossible for them to see
life as it is. Such rulers might live a hundred years without ever seeing one
single really independent man or ever hearing the truth spoken. One is
sometimes appalled to hear of the words and deeds of these men; but one
need only consider theirposition in ordertounderstandthatanyone in their
place would act as they do. If a reasonable man found himself in their
place, there is only one reasonable action hecould perform and that would
be to getaway from such a position. Any one remaining in it would behave
as they do.[...)
So it is not the Alexanders and Humberts, nor the Wilhelms, Nicho-
74
lases and Chamberlains - though they decree these oppressions of the
nations and these wars - who are really the most guilty of these sins, but
it is rather those whop\aceand supportthem in the position ofarbiters over
the lives oftheir fellow-men. And, therefore, the thing to do is not kill AI­
exanders,Nicholases, Wilhelms and Humberts, butto cease to support the
arrangement of society of which they arc a result. And what supportS the
presentorder of society is the selrlShncss and stupefaction of the people,
who sell their freedom and honour for insignificant material advantages.
People who stand on the lowest rung of the ladder- partly asa result
of being stupefied by a palriOlic and pseudo-religious education, and
partly for the sake of personal advantages - cede their freedom and sense
of human dignity at the bidding of those who stand above them and offer
them material advantages. In the same way - in consequence of stupefac­
tion, and chiefly for the sake of advantages - those who arc a little higher
up the ladder cede their freedom and manly dignity, and the same thing
repeats itself with those standing yet higher, and so on to the topmoslrung
- to those who, or to him who, standing at the apex ofthe social cone have
nOlhing more to obtain: for whom the only motives of action are love of
power and vanity ,and whoare generally so perverted and stupefied by the
power of life and death which they hold over their fellow-men. and by the
consequentservility and flattery ofthose who surround them, that, without
ceasing to do evil, they feel quite assured that they arc benefactors to the
human race.
!tis the people who sacrifice their dignity as men formateriaJ profit
that produce these men who cannot act otherwise than as they do act, and
with whom it is useless to beangry for their stupid and wickedactions. To
kill such men is like whipping children whom one has first spoilt.
That nations should not be oppressed, and that there should be none
of these useless wars, and that men may not be indignant with those who
seem to cause these evils, and may not kill them - it seems that only a very
small thing is necessary. It is necessary that men should understand things
as they are, should call them by their right names, and should know that
an anny is an instrument for killing, and that the enrolment and manage­
ment ofanarmy - the very things which Kings , Emperors and Presidents
occupy themselves with so self-confidently - is a preparation for murder.
If only each King, Emperor and President understood that his work
of directing annies is not an honourable and important duty, as his
flatterers persuade him it is, but a bad and shameful act of preparation for
murder - and if each private individual understood that the payment of
taxes wherewith to hire and equip soldiers, and, above aJl. military service
itself, are not matters of indiffcrcnce, butare bad and shameful actions by
which he notonly permits but participates in murder - then this power of
Emperors, Kingsand Presidents, which now arouses our indignation, and
which causes them to be murdered, would disappear of itself.
75
 So. lhe Alexanders. Camots. Humberts and others should not be
murdered, but it should be explained to them that they are themselves
murderers, and, chiefly. lhey should not be allowed to kill people; men
should refuse to murder al their command.
If the people do not yet act in this way, it is only because Govern·
ments, to maintain themselves, diligently exercise a hypnotic influence
upon lhe people. And. therefore. we may help to prevent people killing
eilher Kings or one another, not by killing - murder only increases the
hypnotism · but by arousing people from their hypnotic condition.
And it is lhis I have tried to do by these remarks.

76

PATRIOTISM AND
GOVERNMENT
(1900)
I have already several times expressed the thought that in our day the
feeling of patriotism is an unnatural, irrational and harmful feeling, and a
cause ofa great partofthe ills from which mankind is suffering; and that,
consequently, this feeling should not becuitivaled, as is now being done,
but should, on the contrary, be suppressed and eradicated by all means
available 10 rational men. Yel, strange to say - Ihough it s
i undeniable that
the universal armaments and destructivewars which are ruining the people
rcsuhfrom that one feeling - all my arguments showing the backwardness.
anachronism and harmfulness ofpalriotism have been mel, and arc still
met, either by silence. by intentional misinterpretation, or by a strange
unvarying reply to the effect that only bad patriotism (Jingoism or
Chauvinism) is evil, but that rea1, goodpatriotism is a very elevated moral
feeling, to condemn which is not only irrational but wicked.
What.lhis real, good patriotism consists in, we are never told; or, if
�nylhing is said about it, instead of explanation we get declamatory,
Inflated phrases, or, finally, some other concept is substiwted for patriot­
ism - some thing which has nothing in common with the patriotism we all
know, and from the results ofwhich we all suffer so severely.[...]
Neither do the peculiarities of each people consUMe patriotism,
though these things arepurposely substituted for the conceptofpatriotism
by its defenders. They say that the peculiarities of each people are an
essential eondition of human progress, and that patriotism, which seeks to
maintain those peculiarities, is, therefore, a good and useful feeling. But
is it not quite evident lhat if, once upon a time, these peculiarities of each
peoplc - thcse customs, creeds, languages - were conditions necessary for
the life of humanity, in our time these same peculiarities form thc chief
obstacle to what is aJready recognized as an ideal - the brotherly union of
the peoples? And therefore the maintenance and defence of any nation
ality Russian, Gennan, French or Anglo-Saxon, provoking the corre-
•
5PO.nding maintenance and defcnce not only ofHungarian, Polish and Irish
nauonalities, but also of Basque, Provencal, Mordva, Tchouvash (NOTE
78
No 34 ) and many other nationalities - serves not to hannonize and unite
men, but to estrange and divide them more and more from one another.
So, not the imaginary but the real patriotism, which we all know, by
which mostpeople are swayed today and from which humanity suffers so
severely, is not the wish for spirituaJ bcnclits for onc's own people (it is
impossible to desire spiritual benelits for one's own people only), but is
a very definite feeling ofpreference for one's own people or State above
all olher peoples and States, and a consequent wish to get for that people
or State the greatest advantages and power that can be got - things which
are obtainable only at the expense of the advantages and power of olher
peoples or States.
It would, therefore. seem obvious that patriotism as a feeling is bad
and harmful, and as a doctrine is stupid. For it is clear that if each people
and each State considers itself the best of peoples and Slates, they aU live
in a gross and harmful delusion.
II
One would expccllhe harmfulness and irrationality of patriotism to
be evident to everybody. But the surprising fact is thaiculturedand learned
men not only do not themselves notice the harm and stupidity ofpalriot­
ism, but they resist every exposure of it with the greatest obstinacy and
ardour (though without any rational grounds), and continue to praise it as
benificent and elevating.
What does this mean?
Only one explanation of this amazing fact presents itself to me.
All human hislOry, from lhe carliesl limes to our own day, may be
considered as a movement of the consciousness, both of individuals and
of homogeneous groups, from lower ideas to higher ones.
The whole path travelled both by individuals and by homogeneous
groups may be represented as aconsecutive flight ofstepsfrom the lowest,
on the level of animal life, to the highestauained by the consciousness of
man at a given moment of history.
Each man, like each separate homogeneous group, nation or Slate,
always moved and moves up this ladder of ideas. Some portions of
humanity are in front, others lag far behind, others, again - the majority ­
move somewhere between the most advanced and the most backward. But
all, whatever stage they may have reached, arc inevitably and irresistibly
moving from lower to higher ideas . And always, at any given moment,
both the individuals and the separate groups of people -advanced, middle
or backward - stand in three different relations to the three stages of ideas
amid which they move.
AIways,forboth the individual and for the separategroupsofpeople,
therearethe ideas ofthepast, which are worn out and have become strange
to them, and 10 which lhey cannot revert as, for instance, in our Christian
79
world, the ideas ofcannibalism, universal plunder, the rape ofwives, and
other customs of which only a record remains.
And there are the ideas of the present, instilled into men's mind by
education, by eAampleand by the generalactivity ofall around them; ideas
underthepowerof which they liveatagiven time: for instance, in our Own
day, the ideas of property, State organization, trade, use of domestic
animals, etc;
And there are the ideas of the future, of which some are already
approaching realization and areobJiging people to change their way oflife
and to struggle against the fonner ways: such ideas in our world as those
of freeing the labourers, of giving equality to women, of giving up meat
(NOTE No 35 ), etc.; while others, already recognized, have not yet come
into practical conrnct with the old fonns of life: such in our times are the
ideas (which we call ideals) ohhe eradication ofviolence, the arrangement
ofa communal system ofproperty, ofa universal religion and ofageneral
brotherhood of men.
And, therefore, every man andevery homogeneous group ofmen, on
whatever level they may stand, having behind them the wom-outremem­
brances of the past, and before them me ideals of me future, are always in
a state ofstrugglebetween the moribund ideas ofme present and the ideas
of me future that are coming to life. It usually happens that when an idea
which has been useful and even necessary in the past becomes superflu­
ous, that idea. after a more or less prolonged struggle, yields its place to
a new idea which was till then an ideal, but which thus becomes a present
idea.
But it does occur that an antiquated idea, already replaced in people's
consciousness by a higher one, is of such a kind that its maintenance is
profitable to those people who have the greatest influence in their society.
And then it happens that this antiquated idea, though it is in sharp
contradiction to the whole surrounding fonn of life, which has been
altering in other respects. continues to influence people and to sway their
actions. Such retention ofantiquated ideas has always occurred, and still
does occur, in the matter of religion. The cause is that the priests, whose
profitable positions are bound up with the antiquated religious idea, pur­
posely use their power to hold people to this antiquated idea.
The same thing occurs, and forsimiiarreasons, in the political sphere
with reference to the patriotic idea, on which all arbitrary power is based.
People to whom it isprofitable to do so, maintain that ideaby artificial me
ans, though it now lacks both sense and utility. And as these people pos­
sess the most powerful means of influencing others, they are able to
achieve their object
In this, it seems to me, lies the explanation of the strange contrast
between the antiquated patriotic idea and that whole drift of ideas leading
in the opposite direction, which have already entered into the conscious-
80
ness of the Christian world.
III
Patriotism, as a feeling of exclusive love for one's own people. and
as a doctrine of the virtue of sacrifICing one's tranquillity, one's property
and even one's life in defence of one's own people from slaughter and
outrage by their enemies. was the highest idea of the period when each
nation considered it feasible and just, for its own advantage. to subject to
slaughter and outrage the people of other nations.
But, already some 2,000 years ago. humanity. in the �n of the
highest representatives of its wisdom, began to recognize the higher idea
of a brotherhood of man; and that idea, penetrating man's consciousness
more and more, has in our time attained most varied fonns of realization.
Thanks toimprovedmeans ofcommunication, and to theunity ofindustry,
oftrade, of me arts and of science, men are today so bound one to another
that the dangerofconquest, massacre or outrage by a neighbouring people,
has quite disappeared, and all peoples (the peoples, but not the Govern­
ments) live together in peaceful, mutually advantageous, and friendly
commercial, industrial, artistic and scientific relations, which they have no
need and no desire to disturb. One would think, therefore. that the
antiquated feeling ofpatriotism -being supert1uous and incompatible with
theconsciousness we have reached of the existence ofbrotherhood among
men of different nationalities - should dwindle more and more until it
completely disappears. Yet the very opposite of this occurs: this hannful
and antiquated feeling not only continues to exist, but bums more and
more fiezcely.
The people. without any reasonable ground. and contrary alike to
their conception ofright and to their own advantage, notonly sympathize
with Governments in their attacks on other nations. in their seizures of
foreign possesis ons, and in defending by force what they have already
stolen (NOTE No 36) but even themselves demand such attacks. seizures
and defences: are glad of them, and take pride in them. The small
oppressed nationalities which have fallen under the power of the great
States -thePoles, Irish, Bohema
i ns, Finns or Armenians -resenting the pa­
triotism of their conquerors, which is the cause of their oppression, catch
from them the infection of this feeling of patriotism - which has ceased to
be necessary , and is now obsolete. meaningless and harmful - and catch
it to such a degree that all their activity is concentrated upon it,and they,
themselves suffering from thepatriotism ofthe strongernations, areready,
for the sake of patriotism, to perpetrate on other peoples the very same
deeds that their oppressors have perpetrated andare perpetrating on them.
This occurs because the ruling classes (including not only the actual
rulers with their officials, but all the classes who enjoy an exceptionally
advantageous position: the capitalisL�. journalists and most of the artists
81
and scientists) can retain lheir position - exceptionally advantageous in
comparison wiLh that of the labouring masscs - Lhanks only the Govern­
ment organization, which rests on patriotism. They have in their hands all
the most powerful means ofinnuencing the people, and always sedulously
support patriotic feelings in themselves and others, more especially as
those feelings which uphold the Government's power are those that are
always best rewarded by that power.
Every official prospers the more in his career, the more patriotic he
is; soalso thearmy man getspromotion in time ofwar- the war isproduced
by patriotism.
Patriotism and its result - wars - give an enormous revenue to the
newspaper uade, and profits to many o!her trades. Every write::, teacher
and professor is more secure in his place, the morche preachespatriotism.
Every Emperor and King obtains the more fame, the more he is addicted
to patriotism.
The ruling classes have in their hands we army, money, the schools,
the churches and !he Press. In the schools they kindle pacriotism in the
children by means of histories describing their own people as the best of
all peoples and always in the right. Among adults !hey kindle it by
spectacies,jubilees, monuments, and by a lying patriotic Press. Aboveall,
they inname patriotism in this way: perpetrating every kind of injustice
and harshness against other nations, they provoke in them enmity towards
their own people, and then in tum exploit that enmity to embiUer their
people against the foreigner.
The intensification of this terrible feeling of patriotism has gone on
among the European peoples in a rapidly increasing progression, and in
our time has reached the uunost limits, beyond which there is no room for
it LO eXteCld.
IV
Within the memory of people not yet old, an occurrence took place
showing most obviously the amazing intoxication caused by patriotism
among the people of Christendom.
The ruling classes of Germany excited Lhe patriotism of the masses
of their people LO such a degree thal, in the second half of the nineteenth
century,a law was proposed in accordance wi!h which all the men had to
become soldiers: all the sons, husbands, fathers. learned men and godly
men, had to learn to murder, to become submissive slaves of those above
them in military rank, and be absolutely ready to kill whomsoever they
were ordered LO kill; to kill men of oppressed nationalities, and their own
working-men standing up for their rights, and even their own fathers and
brothers -as was publicly proclaimed by that most impudent ofpotentates,
Wilhelm II.
That horrible measure,oUlraging all man's bestfeelings in the gross-
82
est manner, was, under the innuenceof patriotism, acquiesced in without
murmur by the people of Germany. It resulted in !heir viCLOry over !he
French. That victory yetfurtherexcited the patriotism of Germany and, by
reaction, that of France, Russia and !he other Powers; and the men of the
European countries unresistingly submitted to the introduction ofgeneral
military service- i.e. toa state ofslavery involvinga degreeofhumiliation
and submission incomparably worsethanany slavery oftheancient world
After this servile submission of the masses to the calls of patriotism, the
audacity, cruelty and insanity ofGovernments knew no bounds. A comp­
etition in the usurpation ofother peoples'lands in Asia, Africa and Amer­
ica began - evoked partly by whim. partly by vanity, partly by covetous­
ness -and was accompanied by evergreaterand greaterdistrustandenmity
between the Governments.
The destruction of the inhabitants on the lands seized was accepted
as a quite natural proceeding. The only question was, who should be rust
in seizing o!herpeoples' landanddestroying the inhabitants? All theGov­
ernments not only most evidently infringed, and are infringing. the
elementary demands ofjustice inrelation LO the conquered peoples, and in
relation to one another. but they wereguiity, and continue to be guilty, of
every kind of cheating, swindling, bribing, fraud, spying. robbery and
murder; and the peoples not only sympathized, and still sympathize, with
them in all this, but they rejoice when it is their own Government and not
another Government that commits such crimes.
The mutual enmity between the different peoples and States has
reached lanerly such amazing dimensions that. notwithstanding the fact
that there is no reason why one State should attack another. everyone
knows that all the Governments stand with their claws out and showing
theirteeth. and only waiting forsomeone to be n i trouble,orbecomeweak,
in order to tear him to pieces with as little risk as possible.
All thepeoplcs ofthe so-called Christian world havebeen reduced by
patriotism to such a state of brutality, that not only those who are obliged
tokill or tobe killed desire slaughterand rejoice in murder. but all the peop
lesofEurope and America, living peaceably in their homes exposed to no
danger, are,at each war - thanks to easy means of communication and to
the Press - in theposition ofthe spectators inaRomancircus,and like them
deUght in the slaughter, and raise the bloodthirsty cry. Pollice verso
(NOTE No 37). Not only adults. but also Children. pure, wise children.
rejoice according to their nationality. when wey hear that the number
kiUed and lacerated by Iyddite orother shells on some particular day was
not 700 but 1 ,()(x) Englishmen or Boers.
And parenlS (1 know such cases) encourage their children in such
brutality.
Butthatisnot all. Every increase in theanny of one nation (and each
nation, being in danger, seeks to increase ilS army for patriotic reasons)
83
obliges its neighbours to increase their armies. also from patriotism, and
this evokes a fresh increase by the first nation.
And the same thing occurs with fortifications and navies: one State
has built ten ironclads, a neighbour builds eleven; then the fU"St builds
twelve, and so on to infinity (NOTE No 38).
'I'll pinch you.' 'And I'll punch your head.' 'And I'll stab you with
a dagger.' 'And I'll bludgeon you.' 'And I'll shoot you.' ... Only bad
children. drunken men, oranimals, quarrel or fight so, but yet it isjust what
is going on among the highest representatives of the most enlightened
Governments, the very men who undertake to direct the education and the
morality of their subjects.
V stop, was. nevertheless, of some use, though not atall in the way expected
The position is becoming worse and worse. and there is no stopping
this descent towards evident perdition.
Theone way of escapebeJieved in by credulouspeople has now been
closed by recent events. I refer to the Hague Conference. and to the war
between England and the Transvaal which immediately followed it
(NOlE NO 39).
If people who think little, or but superficially, were able to comfort
themselves with the idea that international couns of arbitration would
supersede wars and ever-increasing armaments, the Hague Conference
and the war that followed it demonstrated in the most palpable manner the
impossibility offinding a solution of the difficulty in that way (NOTE No
40). After the Hague Conference. it became obvious that as long as Gov­
ernments with armies exist. the tennination of annaments and of wars is
impossible.Thatan agreement should becomepossible. it is necessary that
theparties to itshouldlrust each other. And n
i order thatthePowers should
lrUsteach other, they must lay down their arms, as is done by the bearers
of a nag of lrUce when they meet for a conference.
So long as Governments, distrusting one another, not only do not
disband or decrease their armies, but always increase them in correspon­
dence with augmentations made by their neighbours. and by means of
spies watch every movement of troops. knowing that each of the Powers
will auack its neighbour as soon as it sees its way to do so, no agreement
is possible. and every conference is either a stupidity. or a pastime. or a
fraud, or an impertinence, or all of these together.
It was particularly becoming for the Russian rather than any other
Government to be theenfant terrible of the Hague Conference. No·oneat
home being allowed to reply to all its evidently mendacious manifesta­
tions and rescripts, the Russian Government is so spoilt, that - having
without the least scruple ruined its own people with armaments. strangled
Poland. plundered Turkestan and China, and being specially cngaged in
suffocating Finland· it proposed disarmament to theGovernmcnts, in full
84
assurance that it would be trusted!
But strange, unexpected and indecent as such a proposal was -
especially at the very time when ordcrs were being given to increase its
anny - the words publicly uuered in the hearing of the people were such.
that for the sake of appearances the Governments of the other Powers
could nOldecline the comical and evidently insincere consultation; and so
the delegates met-knowing in advance that nothing would come of it - and
for several weeks (during which they drew good salaries) though they
were laughing in their sleeves, they all conscientiously pretended to be
much occupied in arranging peace among the nations.
The Hague Conference. followed as it was by the terrible bloodshed
of the Transvaal War, which no one attempted. or is now a l�
t.
.
.npting. to
of it - it was useful because it showed in the most obvious manner that the
are suffering cannot be cured by Govem­
evils from which the peoples
ments. That Governments, even if thcy wished to. can tenninate neilher
armaments nor wars.
Governments. to haveareason forcxisting, must defend their people
from other people's attack. But no onc people wishes to attack. or does
attack. another. And therefore Governments, far from wishing for peace.
carefully excite the angerofother nations against themselves. And having
excited other people's anger against themselves. and stirred up the
palriotism of their own people, each Government then assures its people
that it is in danger and must be defended.
And having the power in their hands, the Governments can both
irritate other nations and excite patriotism at home. and they carefully do
both the one and the other; nor can they act otherwise. for their existence
depends on thus acting.
If, in fonner times;Governments were necessary to defend their
people from other people's attaCk. now on the conuary. Governments
artificially disturb the peace thatexists between the nations. and provoke
enmity among them.
When it was necessary to plough in order to sow. ploughing was wise;
butevidentlyit isabsurd and harmful to go on ploughing after theseed baS
been SOwn. But this is just what theGovernments areobliging theirpeople
todo: to infringe the unity which exists. and which nothing would infringe
if it were not for the Governments.
VI
In reality what are these Governments, without which people think
they could notexist? There may have been a time whensuchGovernments
wcre necessary, and when thc evil of supporting a Government was less
than thatofbeingdefencelessagainslorganized neighbours; butnow such
Governments have become unnecessary. and are a rar greater evil than all
85
lIle dangers with which they frighten lIleir subjects.
Not only military Governments, but Governments in general, could
be, I will not say useful, but at least harmless, only ifliley consisted ofim­
maculate, holy people, as is lIleoretically lIle case among lIle Chinese. But
lIlen Governments, by lIle nature of their activity, which consist in
commilting acts of violence (NOTE No 41), are always composed of
elements the mostconuary to holiness - of the most audacious, unscrupu­
lous and perverted people.
A Government, therefore, and especially a Government entrusted
with military power, is the most dangerous organization possible.
The Government, in the widest sense, including capitalists and the
Press, is nothing else than an organization which places the grealerpan of
the people in the power ofa smaller part, who dominate them; that smaller
part is subject to a yet smaller part, and that again to a yet smaller, and so
on, reaching at last a few people or one single man, who by means of
military force has power over all the rest So that all this organization
resembles a cone, of which all the parts are completely in the power of
those people or of that one person, who happen to be at the apex.
The apex of the COne is seized by those who are more cunning,
audacious and unscrupulous than the rest, or by someone who happens to
be the heir of those who were audacious and unscrupulous.{...)
And to such Governments is allowed full power, not only over
propeny and lives, but even over the spiritual andmoral development, the
education and the religious guidance of everybody.
People construct such a terrible machine of power, they allow any­
one 10 seize it who can (and the chances always are that it will be seized
by the mostmora1ly worthless) - they slavishly submit to him, and are then
surprised that evil comes ofil. They are afraid of Anarchists' bombs,and
are not afraid of this terrible organization which is always threatening
them with the greatest calamities.
People found itusefultotiethemselves togetherin order to resist their
enemies,as theCircassians(NOTE N042) did when resisting attacks. But
the danger is quitepast, and yet people go on tying themselves together.
They carefully tie themselves up so that one man can have them a1l
atmercy; then they throwaway the endofthe rope that ties them,andleave
it trailing forsome rascal or fool to seize and to do them whatever harm he
likes (NOTE No43),
Really, whatare people doing butjust that- when they set up, submit
to, and maintain an organized and military Government?
VII
To deliver men from the terrible and ever-increasing evils of arma­
ments and war, we want neither congresses nor conferences, nor treaties,
nor couns of arbitration, but the destruction of those instruments of
86
violence which are called Governments, and from which humanity's
greatest evils flow.
To destroy Government violence, only one thing is needed: it is that
people should understand that the feeling of patriotism, which alone
supports that instrument of violence, is a rude, harmful, disgraceful and
bad feeling, and, above all, is immoral. It isa rude feeling,becauseit isone
nawral only to people standing on the lowest level of morality, and
expecting from other nations such outrages as they themselves are ready
10 inflict; it is a harmful feeling, because it disturbs advantageous and
joyous, peaceful relations with other peoples, and above all produces that
Government organization under which power may falJ, and does fall, into
the hands ofthe worslmen; it is a disgraceful feeling, because ittcms man
not merely into a slave, but into a fighting cock, a bull or a gladiator, who
wastes his strength and hislifefor objectives which are not his own but his
Government's; anditisan immoral feeling. because, instcadofconfessing
oneselfa son ofGod (as Christianity teaches us) or even a free man guided
by his own reason, each man under the influence of patriotism confess
himself the son of his Fatherland and the slave of his Government, and
commits actions COnllary to his reason and his conscience.
It is only necessary that people should understand this, and the
terrible bond called Government, by which we are chained together, will
fall to pieces of itself without struggle; and with it will cease the terrible
and useless evils it produces.
And people are already beginning to understand this. This, for
inslance, is what a citizen of the United States writes:
'We are fanners, mechanics, merchants, manufacturers, teachers.
and all we ask is the privilege of attending to our own business. We own
our homes, love our friends, are devoted to our families, and do not
interfere with our ne ighbours - we have work to do, and wish to work.
Leave us alone !
But they will not- Ihese poiticians.
l They insist on governing us and
living offourlabour. They tax us, eatoursubstance. conscript us, draftour
boys into their wars. All the myriads of men who live off the Government
depend upon theGovcmmcntto tax us, and, in order to tax us successfully,
standing armies are maintained. The plea lhat the army is needed for the
protection of the country is pure fraud and pretence. The French Govern­
ment frightens the people by lClling lh em that the Germans are ready and
anxious to fall upon them; the Russians fear the British; lhe British fear
anybody; and now in America we are told we must increase our navy and
add to our army because Europe may at any moment combine against us.
This is fraud and untruth. The common people in France, Gennany,
Engiand and America are opposed to war. We only wish 10 be left alone.
Men with wives, children, sweetheans, homes, agedparents, do not want
� go offand fight someone. We are peaceable and we fear war; we hate
It
87
 We would like to obey the Golden Rule.
War is the sure result of the exislence of anned men. That coumry
which maintains a large standing anny will sooner or later have a war on
hand. The man who prides himself on fisticuffs is going some day to meet
a man who considers himself the beUer man, and they will fighL
Gennany and France have no issue save a desire to see which·is the
better man. They have fought many times - and they will fight again. Not
that thepeople want to fight, but the Superior Class fan fright into fury, and
make men think they must fight to protect their homes.
So the people who wish to follow the teaching of Christ are not
allowed to do so, but are taxed, outraged, deceived by Governments.
Christ taught humility, meekness, the forgiveness ofone's enemies,
and that to kiD was wrong. The Bible teaches men not to swear oaths; but
the Superior Class swear us in on the Bible in which they do not believe.
The question is. How are we to relieve ourselves of these connoranlS
who toil not, but whoareclothed in broadcloth and blue. with brass buttons
and many costly accoutrements; who feed upon our substance, and for
whom we delve and dig?
Shall we fight them?
No, we do not believe in bloodshed; and besides that. they have the
guns and the money, and they can hold out longer than we.
But who composes this anny that they would order to fire upon us?
Why, our neighbours and brothers - deceived into the idea that they
are doing God's service by protecting their country from its enemies.
When thefactis. ourcountry has no enemies save the Superior Class. that
pretends to look out for our interests f
i we will only obey and consent to
be taxed.
Thus do they siphon our resources and tum our true brothers upon us
to subdue and humiliate us. You cannot send a telegram to your wife. nor
anexpress package to your friend. nordraw a cheque for yourgrocer. until
you Urst pay the tax to maintain anned men, who can quickly be used to
kiD you; and who surely will imprison you if you do not pay.
The only reJieflies in education. Educale men that it is wrong to kill.
Teach them the Golden Rule. and "yet again teach them the Golden Rule.
Silently defy this Superior Class by refusing to bow down to their fetish
of bullets. Cease supporting the preachers who cry for war and spout
patriotism for a consideration. Let them go to work as we do. We believe
in Christ - they do not. Christ spoke what he thought; they speak what they
think will please the men in power - the Superior Class.
We will not enlist. We will not shoot on their order. We will not
charge bayonetupon a mild andgentlepeople. We will not fireupon shep­
herds and fanners, fighting for their flresides, upon a suggestion of Cecil
Rhodes. Your false cry of"Wolfl wolf1" shall not alann us. We pay your
taxesonly because we have to. and we will pay no longer than we have lO.
88
We will pay no pew-rents, no tithes to your sham charities. and we will
speak our minds upon occasion.
We will educate men.
And all the time our silent influence will be going out. and even the
men who areconscripted will be half-hearted and refuse to fight We will
educate men into the thought that the Christ Life of Peace and Goodwill
is better than the Life of Strife. Bloodshed and War.
Peace on earth! - it can only come when men do away with armies.
and are willing lO do unto other men as they would be done by'.
So wrileS a citizen of the United States; and from various sides, in
various fonns. such voices are sounding. [...J
People are beginning to understand the fraud ofpatriotism. in which
all the Governments take such pains to keep them involved.
VIII
'But,' it is usually asked, 'what will there be instead of Govern­
ments?'
There will be nothing. Something that has long been useless. and
therefore superfluous and bad. will be abolished. An organ that, being
unnecessary, has become hannful. will be abolished.
'But,' people generally say. 'if there no Government. people will
violate and kill each other.'
Why? Why should the abolition of the organization which arose in
consequence ofviolence,and which has been handed down from genera­
tion to generation to do violence - why should the abolition of such an
organization, now devoid of use, cause people to outrage and kill one
another? On the contrary, thepresumption is thattheabolitionof the organ
ofviolence would result in people ceasing to violate and kill one anotha.
Now. some men are specially educated and trained to kill and to do
violence to other people - there are men who are supposed to have a right
touse violence. and who make use ofan organization which exists for that
purpose. Such deeds ofviolence and such killing areconsidered good and
worthy deeds.
But then. people will not be SO brought up, and no-one will have a
right to use violence on others, and there will be no organization to do
violence, and -as is natural to people ofour time - violence and murder will
always be considered bad actions. no matter who commits them.
But should acts of violence continue to be committed even after the
abolition of the Governments. such acts will certainly be fewer than are
committed now. when an organization exists specially devised to commit
acts of violence, and a state ofthings exists in which acts of violence and
murders are considered good and useful deeds.
The abolition of Governments will merely rid us of an unnecessary
organization which we have inherited from the past. an organization for
89
 the commission of violence and for iLS justification.
'But there wiU then be no laws, no property, no courts ofjustice, no
police, no popular education,' say people who intentionally confuse the
use of violence by GovernmenLS with various sociaJ activities.
The abolition of the organization of Government fonned to do
violence, does not at all involve the abolition of what is reasonable and
good, and therefore not based on violence, in laws or law courts, or in
property, or in police regulations, or in financial arrangemenLS, or in
popular education. On the conuary, the absence of the brutal power of
Government, which is needed only for iLS own support, will facilitate a
juSleC and more reasonable social organization, needing no violence.
Courts ofjustice, and public affairs, and popular education, will .!i.ll exist
to the extent to which they are really needed by people, but in a shape
soldiers - slaves, and are all ruined, or are beingruined more and more, a
�d
cord Will
.
at any moment may and should expect that the light-stretched
snap, and a horrible slaughter ofyou and your children will commenc:e.
And however great that slaughter may be, and however thatconfilct
may end, the same state of things will continue. In the same way, with yet
greater intensity, the GovernmenLS will ann, and ruin, and perv��
you and
yourchildren, and no-one will help you to stop it orlopreventIt, if you do
not help yourselves.
And there is only one kind of help possible - it lies in the abolition of
that terrible linking up into a cone of violence, which enables the person
orpersons who succeed in seizing the ape,;. to havepower overall the rest,
and to hold that power the more fmnly the more cruel and inhuman.they
are, as we see by the cases of the Napoleons, Nicholas I, Bismarck, ham­
�

berlain, Rhodes and our Russian Dictators who rule the people Ul the
which will not involve the evils contained in the presentfonn of Govern­
ment. Only that will be destroyed which was evil and hindered the free
Tsar's name.
expression of the people's will.
But even if we assume that with the absence of Governments there
And there is only one way to destroy this binding together - it is by
shaking off the hypnotism of patriotism.
would bedisturbances and civil strife, even then the position of the people
Understand that all the evils from which you suffer, you yourselves
would be better than it is at present. The position now is such that it is
causeby yielding to the suggestions by which Emperors, Kings, Members
difficult to imagine anything worse. The people are ruined, and their ruin
ofParliament,Governors, omcers, capitalists, priesLS, authors, artists, and
is becoming more and morecomplete. The men areall converted into war­
all who need this frnudofpatriotism in order to live upon your labour, de­
slaves,and have from day today toexpectorders to go to kill and bekilled.
What more? Ale the ruinedpeoples to die of hunger? Even thatis already
ceive you!

beginning in Russia, in Italy and in India. Or are the women as well as the
Whoever you may be - Frenchman, Russian, Pole, Englishman,
Irishman or Bohemian - understand that all your real human interests,
men to go to be soldiers? In the TransvaaJ even that has begun.
whatever they may be - agricultural, industrial, commercial, artistic or
So that even if the absence of Government really meant Anarchy in
scientific - as well as yourpleasures andjoys, in no way run counter to the
the negative, disorderly sense of that word - which is far from being the
interest of other peoples or States; and that you are united, by mutual co­
case - even then no anarchical disorder could be worse than the position
operation, by exchange of services, by the joy of wide brotherly inter­
to which GovernmenLS have already led their peoples, a!ld to which they
course, and by the exchange not merely of goods but also ofthoughLS and
are leading them. feelings, with the folk of other lands.
And therefore emancipation from patriotism, and the destruction of
Understand that the question as to who manages to seize Wei-hai­
the despotism of Government that resLS upon it, cannot but be beneficial
wei, Port Arthur or Cuba - your Government or another - does not affect
to mankind.
you, or,rather, that every such seizure made by your Government, injures
you, by inevitably bringing in its train all sorts of pressure on you by your
IX
Government to force you to takepanin the robbery and violence by which
Men, recollect yourselves! Forthe sake of your well-being, physical
alone such seizures are made, or can be retained when made. Understand
that your life can in no way be beucred by Alsace becoming Gennan or
and spiritual, for the sake of your brothers and sisters, pause, consider, and
think of what you are doing!
Freoch, and Ireland orPoland being free or enslaved - whoever holds them,
you are free to live where you will, ifeven you be an Alsatian, an Irishman
Renect, and you will understand that your foes are not the Boers, or

or a Pole. Understand, too, that by stirring up palriotism you will only

the English, or the French, or the Gennans, or the Finns, or the Russians,

make the case worse, for the subjection in which yourpeople are kept has
but that your foes - your only foes - are yourselves, who by palriotism
maintain the GovernmenLS that oppress you and make you unhappy.
resuJtedsimply from the struggle between patriotisms, and every manifes­
They have undertaken to protect you from danger, and they have
tation of patriotism in one nation provokes a corresponding reaction in
brought that pseudo-protection to such a point that you have all become
another. Understand that salvation from your woes is only possible when
90
91
you free yourself from the obsolele idea of pauiotism and from the
obedience toGovemments that is based upon il, and when you boldly enler
inlO the region of that higher idea, the brotherly union of the peoples,
which has long since come to life, and from all sides is cal ling you 10ilSClf.
Ifthe people would understand thattheyare not the sons ofsome Fa­
thelland or other, nor of Governments, but are sons of God, and can
thererore neither be slaves nor enemies one to another - those insane. un­
necessary. worn-out, pernicious organizations called Governments, and
all the sufferings, violations, humiliations and crimes which they occa­
sion, would cease.

The T(i ngdom

O r God
92
Ts With i n Yol1

THE KINGDOM OF
GOD IS WITHIN
YOU
or Christianity not as a Mystical Doctrine
but as a New Conception of Life
(1893)
The Circle of Violence
Governments and the ruling classes now base themselves neither on
justice nor even on a semblance of right. but on an organization so
cunningly devised by the help of scientific progress, that men are caught
in a circle ofviolence. from which there is no possibility ofescape. That
circle is now composed of four methods of acting upon men · methods
connected with andsupponing eachother. as do lIlelinks ofa chainjoined
into a circle.
11leftrstandoldest method is terrorism. Itconsists in representing the
existing system of Government (be it a free republic or the most outra­
geousdespotism)as somelhing sacred and immutable, and in punishing in
memost barbarous manner all atlemplS to alterit. This method hasalways
i a Government
been used. and still continues to be used wherever there s
. in Russia against the so-called Nihilists, in America against Anarchists,
in France against Imperialists, Monarchists, Communists and Anarchists.
Railways, telegraphs, telephones, photographs and the perfected methods
of disposing of men without killing them, by confining them for life in
solitary cells where they are forgotten and die hidden from the eyes of
humanity, and many other new inventions employed by the Statemore fre­
quent1y than by other men, give Governments such power, that - if once
authority has been usurped by certain individuals, and if regular and secret
police, administrators of all sorts, Crown prosecutors, gaolers and execu­
tioners work with sufficient zeal - there is no possibility whatever of
overthrowing a Government however barbarous or senseless it may be.
The second method is that of bribery. It consists in extorting the
94
property ofthe working classes by taxation, and distributing that property
among officws, who in return for the payment maintain and increase the
slavery of the people.
These bribed officia1s, from the prime ministers to the humblest
scribe, composean unbroken chain of individua1s, united by one common
aim of drawing their subsistence from the labour of the people. They are
remunerated in proportion to their submission to the will of their Govern­
ments, and therefore, in a11 forms of activity they maintain by word and
deed, and defend, without hesitating at any measures, the State violence
upon which their wealth depends.
The third method is what I cancaU by no other name than the 'hypno­
tizing of the people'. It consists in impeding the spiritual development of
men and maintaining them, by all manner of influences and suggestions,
in a conception of life out1ived by humanity, but upon which is founded
the power of the State. At the present time this hypnotism is organized in
the most complete manner; it begins its influence in childhood and
continues until thehourofdeath. It begins in earliest youth in compulsory
schools, instituted specially for the purpose of hypnotism, wherechildren
are taught a conception of the world which, though held years ago by their
ancestors, is directly contrary to the presentconsciousnessofhumanity. In
countries possessing a State religion, children are taught the ridiculous
blasphemies ofChurch catechism, and are impressed with the necessity of
obedience to amhorily; in Republican States, they are taught the outra­
geous superstition ofpatriotism and the same imaginary duty ofobedience
to the State. In later years this hypnotic influence is maintained by the en­
couragement of the religious and patriotic superstitions. The religious
superstition is stimulated by processions, festivals, monuments and
churches, built with the moneycollecled from the people, by music,archi­
tecture, images and incense, which drug men, and especiallyby the main­
tenance or a so-called clergy, whose occupation consists in bewildering
the minds of men, and keeping them in a continual state of stupefaction,
by their stage-play, by the pathos of their services and sennons, by their
interference in men's private lives, in birth, marriage and death. The
patriotic superstition is encouraged by national SOlemnities, festivals,
monuments and pageants, organized by Governments and the ruling
classes with the money collected from the people, and which encourage
men to believe in the exclusive importance of their own country and the
greatness of their Government and their rulers, and excite unfriendliness
and even halted towards other nations. Besides this, despotic Govern­
menlS imperatively forbid all specches or lectures, all printing and circu­
lation of books which could enlighten the people, and they exile or
imprison all those who try LO rouse the people from their torpor. All
Governments, withoutexcepLion, conceal from the people everything that
might further their emancipation, and cncourage all that degrades and
95
demoralizes them · the writings which maintain them in the folly of their
religious and patriotic superstitions, all manner of amusements of the
senses, shows, circuses, theatres, andeven physical means ofstupefaction,
such as tobacco and alcohol, the tax on which constitutes one of the chief
revenues of the State. Even prostitution is encouraged, and is not only
recognized, but b)/ most Governments is even regulated. This is the third
method.
The founh methodconsists in selecting, with the helpof the aforesaid
methods, a cenain number of men from the mass of enslaved and stupe·
fled human beings, and subjecting them to a specially energetic processof
stupefaction and brutalization, converting them into passive inst".Jments
of all the cruelties and brutalities the State may require. This condition of
brutality and idiocy is attained by taking men in early youth, when they
have not yet fanned any clear conception of morality, separating them
from all the natural conditions of human life . home, family, birthplace
and reasonable labour · and shutting them up together in barracks. Here
they are dressed up in a peculiar costume, and forced to perfonn certain
specially appointed movements accompanied by shouts, drums, music
and glittering ornaments, by means of which they are reduced to a
hypnotizedcondition, in which they cease tobe men, and become obedient
and unreasoning machines in the handsoftheir hypnotizers. These young
men (all young men now on the Continent with universal military service
(NOtE No 44 ) physically strong, anned with weapons of mwUer and
reduced toa stateof hypnotism, everobedientto State authority, and ready
to commit any violence it may require, constitute the fourth and chief
method of enslaving men. This method closes the circle of violence.
Terrorism, bribery and hypnotism reduce men to the condition in
which they are willing to become soldiers; soldiers give power and make
it possible topunish and to hypnotize men, torob them (andbribe officials
with the stolen money), and to enlist others as soldiers who in their tum
increase the power of Governments to do all these things.
The circle is closed, and there is no possibility of escape from it by
force.
Some afflnn that the deliverance from, or at least the diminution of
violence would beeffected iftheoppresscd masses dcstroyed by force the
oppressing Governments and replaced them with new organizations
which would not require the use of violence or the enslavement of men;
some try to introduce this revolution, but by doing so only deceive
themsel vcs and others, and aggravaterather man improve the condition of
mankind. Their activities only increase the despotism of the State. Their
auempts at emanc ipation only give Governments a convenient pretext for
strengmening their power, and do actually give rise to its exacerbation.
Even supposing that, owing to some conditions peculiarly disadvanta­
geous to the State · as in France in 1870 · somc Govcrnment were to be
96
overthrown by force, and authority were to pass into other hands, this new
powerwould neverin anycase be Icssoppressivethan the first; on thecon·
traCY, it wouldhave todefend iLSClfagainstall its exasperated anddefeated
enem ies, and therefore would always be more cruel and tyrannical than the
fonner, as is proved by the history of all revolutions.
Socialists and Communists condemn the individualist and capitalist
system of society; Anarchists condemn all Government in itself; Monar·
chists, Conservatives and Capitalists condemn Anarchism, Socialism and
Communism; and all these panics have no way of uniting men except by
violence. Whateverparty were 10 triumph, it would have to use all the ex·
isting methods of violence n
i order to maintain power and to introduce its
own system of life, and would even have to invent new methods. Other
men would beenslaved and forced 10 do other things, butthe violence and
oppression would be the same and even more inexorable, because mutual
hatred wouldbeexasperated by struggle, and new methods ofenslavement
would be invented and imensified.
This has always been the case in all revolutions and violent subver·
sions of Government, in all plots and attempts at revolution. Every
struggle only increases the power of oppression in the hands of those
temporarily in authority.
The Significance of Military Service
Educated men of the higher classes try to stifle me ever·growing
consciousnessofthe necessity ofaltering the presentsystem oflife; butlife
continues to move in the same direction, developing in growth and com­
plexity, and increasing the contradictions and misery of human existence,
till it brings men to me extreme limit further man which it s
i not possible
to go. The utmost limit of contradiction is attained in general military
service.
People generally think that universal military service with its ever·
increasing armaments and the subsequent ever·jncreasing taxes and
national debts, is an incidental phenomenon caused by the presentpolitical
condition of Europe, and which can be suppressed by adequate politica1
measures, without alteration of the internal system of life.
This is utterly erroneous. General military service is nothing but the
innennostcontradiction ofthe social conception of!ife, which has attained
its utmost limits, and became flagrantly evident, consequent upon acertain
degree of material development.
The social conception of life consists in the transference of the
meaning of life from the individual to the community and succession of
97
individuals - family. tribe. race and State. The social conception of life
assumes that as the meaning of life is found in the community of human
beings. each individual, of his own free will, subordinates his personal
interests to the interests of the community. And this was and is really the
case in certain communities, in family and tribe (it is of no importance
which preceded theother), andeven n
i race, and patriarchal Slates. Incon_
sequence ofcustom, transmiUed by education and conrrrmed by religious
authority, individuals merged !.heir interests in the interests ofthecommu_
nity, and without coercion subordinated the personal to the general.
But !.he more communities grew in complexity and extent, the more
often violence arK! conquest drew men into socicties - SO more individu­
als strove to altain their own ends at the expense of the community; the
greater became the necessity of recourse to authority - mal is to say,
violence - for the suppression of these rebellious elements.
The defendersofthe social conception of Iife generally try toconfuse
the idea ofau!.hority, !.hat is, violence, with that of spiritual influence, but
such association is utterly incongruous.
Spiritual influence is !.he means by which a man's desires arc
changed, andhe voluntarily agrees to what is required ofhim. A man who
submits to spiritual influence acts in accordance with his own desiJes.
Authority, on the at her hand, as the word is generally used, is the means
of forcing a man to act contrary to his desires. A man who submits to
authority acts not as he wishes, but as he is compelled to act; and in order
tocoercea man into not doing what he wishes, and doing what he does not
wish, physical violence or !he threat of physical violence must be em­
ployed, such as deprivation of liberty, injuries and blows, or the easily­
executed threalS of these punishments. That is what constitutes power,
both now and always.
In spite of!hestrenuous efforts ofmen in authority toconceal all this,
and to invest power with another meaning, it still remains the application
to man of the ropeand chain that shall bind and drag him, of !he whip that
shall scourge him,ofthe knife and theaxe !.hat shall cut offhis head, hands,
feet, noseorears; itstill remainsthe application or the !hrcatofthese pun­
ishments. So itwasin the time ofNeroand Khenghis Khan and so it is now,
under the mosl liberal Governments, in !.he French and American Repub­
Iics. Ifmen submittoau!hority, it is only because !hey fear the punishment
that would follow their disobedience. All the requirements of the State ­
payment of taxes, fulfilment of public duties, submission 10 inflicted
punishments, exile, fines, ele. - which people seem to obey of their own
free will, are all based on physical violence or the threat of it
The basis of au!hority is physical violence. The possibility of exer­
cising physical violence is given by organizations ofarmed men, wherein
all act in unison, submitting to one will. Such assemblies of armed men
submitting to onc will constitute the army. The army has always been and
98
. the basis of power. Power is always in the hands of those who
" still
command theanny, therefore all rulers.' from Roman Caesars to Gennan
nd Russian Emperors, are engrossed 18 cares for the army, whom they
� alter and cajole, for they know that if the army is wi!h them, power also
is in their hands.
Theorganization and increase of troops, indispensable for the main­
tenance of power, has brought the element of dissolution into the social
conception of life. The aim and justification of authority consists in con­
trolling those who would wish to attain their own interests to thedetriment
of !he interests of society. But whether authority was acquired by com­
mand of new troops, by inheritance or election, !.he men possessing
authority by means of the anny did not differ in any way from other men,
and, !herefore. werejust as apt as other men not 10 subordinate their own
interests to those of the community; on the contrary, they were more in­
clined than all others LO subordinate public interests to their own, because
they possessed the possibility ofdoing so. Whatever measures have been
inventedforpreventing those in authority from subjecting public interests
to their own, or for entrusting power only to infallible beings, none have
so far succeeded in attaining either goal.
All the usual methods, such as Divinesanction, election. hereditary
succession, voting, congresses, parliaments and senates - all these meth­
ods have proved and still prove inadequate. Everybody knows that notone
of these measures has succeeded eimer in giving power to infallible men
or in suppressing its abuses. On the contrary, we aU know that men in
authority - betheyemperors, ministers, officials orpolicemen - arealways.
in consequence of their possession of power, more liable to vice, that is,
to the subjection ofpublic interests to their personal ones, than men who
do nOl possess authority; nor can it be otherwise.
The social conception of life was justified only so long as men vol­
untarily subordinated their interests to the interests ofthe community, but
as soon as there appeared men who refused voluntarily to do so, authority
- that is, violence -became necessary for their control, and there crept into
the socialconception onife. and the organization founded upon it, thatele­
ment of dissolution - power, which means violence of !he few over the
many.
In order that the authority of a few men over their fellows should
accomplish its aim of restraining those who sought !heir own interests to
the detriment of society, it was necessary that power should be vested in
the hands of infallible men, as is assumed by the Chinese, or as was
believed in the Middle Ages, and is still held by people who have faith in
the holiness of consecration. Only under this condition could the social
conception of life be justified.
But, as this is not the case, and as, on the contrary, men in authority,
just because of their possession of power, are always very far from
99
infallible or sainliy, the social organization, founded on power, cannot
possibly have any justification.
There may have been a time when, in consequence of the low level
of morality and the universal tendency of men lOwards mutual violence,
the existence ofan authority restraining this violence wasbeneficial- that
is to say, th at the violence of the State was less than the violence of
individuals toward one another; but no-one can help admitting that this
advantage in favour of the existence of the State versus its non-existence
could not last for ever. In proportion as human nature softened, and the
tendency of individuals towards violence decreased, authority grew more
and more corrupted by its freedom from restraint. and the necessity for its
existence became proportionately less and less.
This gradual change in the relations between the moral progress of
the masses and the corruption of Governments constitutes the entire
history of the last 2,000 years. In its simplest form this is the course of
history: Men lived in families. tribes and races, and fought, persecuted,
murdered and destroyed one another. Violence in greateror lesser degree
was practiced universally: man fought with man, family with family, tribe
with tribe, race with race, nation with nation. The larger and more
powerful communities swallowed up the weaker ones, and in proportion
as a community became larger and more powerful. the sum of its internal
violence decreased, and the prolongation of its existence seemed more
secure. Among members ofa tribe or family, united together in one com­
munity, contentions are appeased lO a certain extent; the tribe and the
family do not die, like the individual, butcontinue their existence; among
members of one State, subject to one power, strife is pacified to a still
greater extent, and the life of the State appears even more surely guaran­
teed.
The union ofmen into more and morccxtcndcd communities was not
brought about by the consciousness ofthe advantages they might offer, as
is described in the fable of thecalling of the Norsemen (NOTE N045); it
was the result, on the one hand, of natural growth, and of strife and
conquest on the other.
When conquest is accomplished, the authority of the conqueror puts
an endto interna1dissensions, and the social conception oflife isjustified.
But this justification is only temporary. Internal strife is suppressed only
in proportion to the increased weightofauthority laid upon the individuals
formerly hostileto each other. The violenceof internal strife, destroyedby
authority, springs to life again through authority. Power is in the hands of
men who, like all others, are always, or at least very often. ready to sub­
ordinate public welfare to their personal interests, with the sole difference
that they are free from the restraining force of resistance from the
oppressed. and are open to all the corrupting innuence of power. There­
fore.theevil ofviolence, passing into the hands of authority, must evergo
100
on increasing, and soon becomes worse than the evil it is supposed to
annihilate; while at the same time, among the members of the community,
the tendency towards violence is gradually lessened. and the violence of
power becomes less and less needed.
State violence, even if it docs annihilate internal violence, always, in
proportion to its suength and duration, introduces into men's lives new
and ever-increasing forms of violence. Although the violence of State
authority is less obvious than that of individuals towards each other, be­
cause it ismanifested not by strife but by submission, itnevertheless exists.
and almos.! always in a greater degree than before.
Nor can itbe otherwise, flrsliy, because the possession ofpawe: cor·
rupts men. and secondly, because the purpose and even the unconscious
instinct ofoppressors is always to reduce their victims to the extreme limit
ofexhaustion; becausethe weaker the oppressed, the less effort is needed
for his coercion.
Therefore, violence against the oppressed is driven to the utmost
limits it can attain without killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. If
the goose lays no more, like the American Indians, the Fijians and the
Negroes, then it is killed, in spite of the sincere protests of philantrophists
against such a course of action.
A perfect confmnalion of this statement is the present condition of
the working classes, who practically are nothing but conquered men.
In spite of all the pretended eHons of the upper classes to improve
their condition, the workmen of our time are subject to the unchangeable
iron law by which they can possess only barely enough to enable them to
labour for their masters (that is, their conquerors), and are ever forced by
hunger to unceasing toil.
Thus it has always been. In proportion to the growth of authority in
strength and duration, its benefits are lost anditsdisadvantages multiplied
for those who submitted to it
Thus it is and ever has been, regardless of the form of government
under which nations havc lived. The only difference is that; under a
despotic form ofgovernment. JXlwer is concentrated in the hands ofa small
number of oppressors and the manifestations ofviolence are more tyran­
nical; in constitutional monarchies and republics, like France and Amer­
ica, power is distributed among a large number of oppressors, and the
forms of its manifestation arc milder; but the substance of violence, in
which the disadvantages ofauthority are greater than its benefits - and the
process by which it reduces the oppressed to the utmost limit of exhaus­
tion which they can bear for the benefit of the oppressors - always remain
the same.
Such is and always has been the condition ofthe oppressed, but until
now theywere ignorant ofit, and ingenuously believed that Governments
existed for their benefit; that they would perish without the State; that the
101
idea ofpeople living without a Government is a sacrilegious thought that
must not even be put into words, since it would amount to the terrible
teaching of Anarchism, which, for some unknown reason, is coupled in
men's minds with every conceivable horror.
Men believed, as in something conclusively proved and not needing
any furtherconfirmation, that because hitherto all nations had developed
in the form of the Slate, this mode must for ever remain the indispensable
condition of human development.
Thus it has gone on for hundreds and thousands of years, and
Governments · thatis, men possessing power· have alwaysendeavourcd,
and continue doing so more than ever, to maintain nations in this delusion.
So it was at the time of the Roman Emperors, and so it is now. Although
the idea of the uselessness, and even of the mischief, of State violence is
penetrating more and more into men's consciousness, this order of things
might continue for ever, but for the necessity Governments are under to
increase their armies for the maintenance of their power.
People generally think thatarmies are increased for the defence ofthe
State against other nations; they forget that troops are needed by Govern­
ment principally to defend the latter from their own enslaved and op­
pressed subjects.
This was always necessary, and has continually grown more so in
proportion to the development of education, the increase of intercourse
between men of the same or different nationalities, and now the spread of
Communist, Socialist, Anarchist and labour movements have rendered
this necessity urgent Governments know this, and multiply their force of
disciplined uoops.[...J
Ifthe working man has no land, and does notpossess the most natural
right of every man to obtain from the soil the means of subsistence for
himselfand his family, it is not because he wishes this, but becauseccrtain
men - t he landowners -have usurped therightofgivingor withholding the
possibility of possession from the working classes. This unnatural order
of things is maintained by the army. If the enormous riches, accumulated
by the labour of working men, belong not to all, but to certain exclusive
individuals; if the power of gathering taxes from labour and using that
money for whatever they think fit is accorded to certain persons; if the
suikes of the working classes are suppressed, and the coalitions of
capitalists encouraged; if certain men are invested with the power of
framing laws which all men must obey, and of disposing of the life and
property of human beings; ifcertain individuals are entitled to choose the
methods of the civil and religious education of children - all this is so, not
because the people desire it, nor in consequence of any natural law, but
because Governments and the ruling classes wish it for their own n
i terests,
and maintain the system by physical violence and bodily oppression. If
anybody does notknow this, he will find it out at the first attempt to resist
102
or to change theexisting order of things. Therefore troops are required by
every Government and by the ruling classes for the maintenance of a
system which has not grown from the needs ofthe people. but which. on
I.he contrary, is often detrimental to them, and is advantageous only to
Governments and the ruling classes.
Troops are needed by every Government chieny to keep its subjects
in submission, and to usurp the products of their labour. But no Govern­
ment stands alone; beyond its fTontiers is another State which also uses
violence to despoil its subjects, and is ever ready to rob its neighbour of
the toil of its enslaved people. Therefore every Government requires an
army not only for internal work, but also for the defence of its plunder
against foreign marauders. Consequently all States arc forced 10 emulate
each other in the increase of their troops; and the expansion of armies
becomes contagious, as Montesquieu declared 150 years ago. Every in­
crease in theanny ofone State. directed against its own subjects, becomes
dangerous forits neighbour also, and excitesa similar increase in all other
States. Armies have attained their prescnt millions not only because of the
menace of neighbouring States, but principally because of the necessity
for suppressing all attempts at rebellion on the part ofoppressed subjects.
The increase of armies results simultaneously from two causes which
reciprocally call fonh one another: troops are required both for defence
against internal enemies and for safeguard against foreign aggressions.
One is the result of the other. The despotism of Governments grows in
proportion to their external success and the increase and strength of their
armies; the aggressiveness of Governments grows in proportion 10 the
increase of internal despotism.
ThusEuropean Governments try to surpass each other in the contin­
ua! increase of their armies, and have come to the unavoidable necessity
of universal military servtce, because that is the way of obtaining, at the
smallest expen se, the greatest numberof troops in time of war. Germany
was the first to hit upon this plan; and as soon as one State began. all the
others had to do the same. And as soon as this system was introduced, the
people were forced to take up arms in defence of the outrages committed
against themselves; and citizens became their own oppressors.
General military service was an inevitable logical necessity which
had to be reached; but it is also the last expression of the internal
contradiction of the social conception of life which arose as soon as vio­
lence was needed for its maintenance. In general military service this
contradictionbecame evident. Everyone is agreed that the significance of
the social conception of life consist in this, that the individual, having
realized the horror ofman's slrifeagainstman. and the transitoriness ofhis
Own existence, transfers the meaning of his life to the community of
human beings; whereas the result of general military conscription is that
men, after having sacrificed all that was required of them to be delivered
103
from indiv idual suife and from the transitoriness of their personal lives,
are,afterall theirprivations, again called upon to suffer allthedangersthey
had hoped to have escaped. Nor is that all: the State - that community in
the name ofwhich men had sacrifi ced their personal interests - is again
exposed to the same risk of annihilation, to which hitherto the individual
had been subjected.
Governments were expected to deliver men from the cruelty of
individual discord and give them the guarantee ofthe inviolable regularity
of State life. Instead ofwhich they subject men to the necessityofthe same
suife, only transferring it from personal strife to warfare with the inhabi­
tantsofotherlands, and there remains the same danger ofdestruction both
to State and individua1.
The establishment of general military service is like the activity of a
manwhowanlS to propuparouen house. Thewalls are crumbling heputs • dispersing crowds and crushing strikes, all the unjust di stributions of
rafters to them; the roof slopes inwards, he build up a framework; boards
give w ay between the rafters, he supports them with other beams. At last
it turns out that although the scaffolding keeps the house together, it
renders it quite uninhabitable.
It is the same with universal military service, which destroys all the
advantages of that social life which it is supposed to guarantee.
Thebenefitsof social life consist n i the security given toproperty and
labour, and in the mutual co-operation towards general welfare. Military
service destroys all this.
The taxes levied on the people for armaments and war absorb the
greater part of the products of that labour which the army is called upon
to protect. Taking away the whole male population from the ordinary oc­
cupations of their life destroys the very possibility oflabour. The menace
of war, ever ready to break: out from one moment to the next, renders vain
and profitless all improvements of social life.
When a man used to be told that, unless he submitted to State
authority, he would be in danger of aggressions from wicked men, from
internal and externaJ enemies. and would have to fight with them person­
ally at the risk of his Ii fe, and that therefore it was to his advantage to
submit to certain privations n i ordertobedelivered from these misfortunes
- when a man was told this he might once upon a time have believed it,
becausethe concessions he made tothe State were only t rifling sacrifices.
and offered him the hopeofa quiet life in an indestructible community for
whose sake he had given up certain advantages. But now that these
sacrifices have increased tenfold, while the promisedbenefits are lacking,
every man natural ly begins to think that his submission to the State is
perfectly useless.
Nor is this the only fatal significance of mililaC)' service in the sense
of its manifestation of the contradiction inherent in the social conception
of life. The chief manifestation of its inconsistency is the fact that every
104
citizen being obliged to enter military service, thereby becomes a sup­
porter of the State organization. and a partaker in whatever the State may
do, however unlawful he may think it. GovernmentsaffIrm that troops are
needed to external defence, but that i s not true. They are needed chiefly
for subjugation athomc, andeveryman entering military service involun­
tarily becomes a partaker in the Government's violence against its sub­
jects.
In order to realize that every man who becomes a soldier thereby
participates in all the acts of Governments which he does not and cannot
endorse, we only have to remember all that is done by Governments and
executed by anned f orce in the name of order and public welfare. All
dynastic and political contentions, all executions consequent upon these
disturbances. all suppressions of riots and recourse to military action in
landed property, the extortion of taxes and the restrictions on labour - all
is done if not directly by the troops, at least by the police supported by
trOOps. Every man who becomes a soldier becomes also a panaker in all
these proceedings , about which he is often doubtful, while in most cases
theyaredirectlycontrary to his conscience. Labourers donot wish to leave
the land they have ploughed for generations; crowds will not disperse as
Governments want them to; people do not wish to p ay the taxes required
of them or toobey laws they have not helped to make; they do not wish to
bedeprivedoftheic nationality,and I whoam fulfilling my military duties,
must come andpersecutethesepeople. I cannot help asking myself ifthese
procee dings in which I am forced to take part, are good or bad, and if I am
right in helping to carry them out.
For Governments, general military service is the uunost limit of
violence required forlhesupportofthe whole system; for subjects, it is the
uunost limit of possible subjection. It is the key-stone in the arch which
supports the walls, whose removal would demolish the whole building.
Thetime has come when the ever-increasing abuses ofGovernments
and theirmutuaJ feuds require from their subjects such material and moral
sacrifices, that every man must necessarily hesitate and ask himself: Can
I make these sacrifices? And for what am r to make them? They are
required in thename oftbe State.ln the name of the State I am required to
give up everything that is dear to man: fami l y, safety, a peaceful life and
personal self-respect. What is this State that deman ds such tremendous
sacrifices? And for what is it so very necessary? We arc told that 'the State
is indispensable. firstly. because without it we would have no refuge from
violence and the assaults of wicked men; secondly, we would still be
savages, witho ut any religious, scientific, educational, commerciaJ, or
other social institutions, and without means of communication; and
thirdly. we would run the risk ofbcing conquered by neighbouring States.
Without the State, we would be subject to violenceand t he aggressions of
105
wicked men in our own country.'
Butwherearethese wicked men from whoseattacks and violence we
are guarded by !he State and its armies? They may have existed three or
four centuries ago, when men prided themselves upon their military skill
and weapons, and thought it heroic tokill !heir fellows, but now there are
no such men; nobody even carries or uses weapons, and all profess !he
same rules ofphilanlhropy and mutual sympathy, and desire just what we
desire - the possibility of a calm and peaceful life. Thus there no longer
exists any panicular class of men of violence from whom the State might
have to defend us. If by men from whom !he State guards us are meant
simply criminals, !hen we all know that criminals are notpeculiarbeings,
like wild beasts among sheep, but that they are men just as we are, who
have just as little natural tendency towards crime as those against whom
they trespass. We know that !he number of such men can be diminished
neither by !hreats nor punishments but only by a change 0 f surroundings
and by moral influence. Thus the attempt 10 explain the necessity of State
violence by !he protection afforded against criminals, if it had any
foundation three or four centuries ago, has now none whatever. It would
be more accurate to say the contrary. namely, that the activity of the State,
with its cruel methods of punishment, so far behind the general level of
morality, its prisons, galleys, guillotines and gallows, is more conducive
to callousness and brutality than to softness and ben evolence, and
therefore ra!her increases than diminishes the number of evildoers.
'Without the State,' we are told, 'we would possess neither means of
communication norany scientific, educational, religious, or other institu­
tions. Without the State, men would never have been able to producesocial
organizati ons necessary to all.' But this argument also could have been
plausible only a few centuries ago.
If there ever was a time when the means of communication and of
exchange ofthought were so primitive. and men were so s
i olated that they
could nO[ discuss or come to an agreemcnlconcerning any general affairs
- commercial.ec onomic or educational - without the help ofthe State, that
isolation no longer exists. Owing to the wide-spread means of communi­
cation and of intellectual intercourse. men have become perfectly able to
dispense with Governments n
i the organization of so cieties, assemblies,
corporations. congresses and scientific, economic and political institu­
tions; in most cases the State hinders rather than helps the achievement of
these aims.
Since the end ofthelast century almost every progressive movement
of humanity has not been encouraged. but rather hampered by Govern­
ments. Such as the case with the abolition of slavery, torture and corporal
punishment. and t he establishment of freedom of assembly and of the
Press. At the present time Governments and Stale authority. far from being
an assistance, are a direct hindrance and impediment to the activity by
106
which men work out for themselves new forms of life. The solution of
political and religious questions of the problems of land and labour,
instead of being encouraged. is persistently frustrated by State authority.
'Without States and Governments, nations would be conquered by
their neighbours.'
It is hardly necessary to refute this last argument It contains its own
refutations.
We are told thatGovernments and their armies are needed to defend
us against foreign States who might wish to conquer us. But all States say
this of one another, and yet we know that all European countries profess
the same principles of liberty and f raternity. and therefore cannot need
defence against each other. Again, if we speak of defence against barbari­
ans, the one thousandth part of the troops under arms at the present time
wouldsuffice. Thus faclS actually contradict the usual statement. Stat eau­
thority. instead ofguarding us against the aggressions ofour neighbours.
actually creates the danger of such aggressions.
Thus every man led by compulsory military service to renect upon
the significance ofthe State. in whose name he is required to sacrifice his
peace, his safety and his life, must see clearly that atthe presenttime there
is no reasonable foundation for such sacrifices.
Theoretically no man can help seeing that the sacrificesdemandedby
the State have no plausible foundation, but even from a practical stand­
point, weighing all the painful circumstances in which he is placed by the
State, every man must see that the fulfilment of its requirements and sub­
mission to military service are in most cases less advantageous for him
than would be a refusal to obey them.
Ifmost men prefer submission to disobedience, it is not because they
have calmly weighed the benefits and evils of both, but because they are
drawn to obedience by the hypnotism to which they are continually
subjected. Obedience only requires men to submit to certain demands.
without using their reason or making any exertion of will; the refusal to
obey requires independent thought and effort, of which not all men are
capable. If we exclude the e!hical significance of submission and non­
submission, a nd take into consideration only theirrespettive advantages.
we shall find that non-submission is always more advantageous than sub­
mission.
Whoever I may be. whether I belong to the wealthy and oppressing
classes, or to the working and oppressed ones, in both cases the disadvan­
tagesofnon-submissionare less than those ofsubmission, and the benefits
of non-submission greater than those of submission.
IfI belong to the oppressing minority, the evils ofdisobedience to the
requirements of the State will be the following: I shall be tried as a man
who has refused submission to his Government. and at best I shall be ac­
quiued or be forced to discharge my term of military service atsome non-
107
military occupation - as is done in Russia with the Mennonites - in the can be decided irrevocably and unconditionally only by the conscience
worst event I shall be condemned to exile or imprisonmentfor two or three and religious consciousness of each individual, to whom the question of
years 0 am speaking of cases in Russia) or even for a longer term of the existence or non-existence of the Slate presents itself, together with
punishment; I may be even condemned La death. although that is most that of general military service.
unlikely. Such are the disadvantages ofnon-submission. Those ofsubmis­
sion will be the following: in the best case I shall not be sent to murder
people. nor shall I be exposed to any very great risk of being killed or
disabled. l shall have only been enrolled into military slavery. I shaH be
dressed up in the garb of a clown; I shall be ordered about by all my
superiors from the sergeant to the field-marshal, and at their pleasure fo
reed to all sorts ofmummeries and grotesque contortions; and after having
been kept in this condition from one to five years. I shall bereleased under
the obligation of holding myself in readiness at any minute n i the next ten
years to take up Ihe same occupation and obey Ihe same orders. In the worst
case I shall be subjected to all the aforesaid conditions of slavery. and,
besides that. 1 shall be sent to war, where I shall have to murder men of
foreign countries who have never done me any harm. I sha II run the risk
ofbcing killed or disabled, and of being sent to certain death, as was the
case at Sebastopol ( NOTE No 46) and in all wars. Most painful of all, I
may be sent against my own countrymen and be forced to murder my
brothers for dyna stic or governmental interests totally alien to me. Such
are the comparative evils.
Thccomparative benefits ofsubmission and non-submission are the
following: The man who submits to military service, after having swal­
lowedall the affronts andcommitted all the cruelties required ofhim, may,
if he is not killed, receive red and go ld and tinsel gewgaws to put on his
clown'sattire.and may even, ifhebevery fortunate. obtain command over
some hundred Ihousand men as brutalized as himself, be called field­
marshal and get a lot of money.
The advantages of the man who has refused military service are the
preservation ofhis human dignity, the respect ofall honest men, and, chief
of all, the absolute assurance that he s i doing God's work, and that
therefore he is indubitably useful to mankind.
There are the respective benefits and evils for a member of the
wealthy and oppressing classes. For a poor man of the working classes
they are the same, with a considerable addition of disadvantage. The
special disadvantage for a working man who has n Ol refused military
service consists in the fact that by his participation and seeming consent,
he suengthens and confirms the oppression under which he lives. But
neither general arguments concerning the necessity or efficiency of the
State which men are required to maintain by participation in miLilary
service,norpresenlation ofthe advantages ordisadvanlagesofsubmission
or non-submission for e ach separate individual. can decide the question
of the necessity of the existence or destruction of the Slate. That question

108 109
THE SLAVERY

OF OUR TIMES
 Without replying the weigher called to someone in a shed: 'Nikita,

THE SLAVERY OF come here.' From the door appeared a tall, lean workman in a tom coal
'When did you begin work?'
'When? Yesterday morning.'

OUR TIMES 'And where were you last night?'

'I was unloading, of course.'
'Did you work during the night?' asked 1.

(1900) 'Of course we worked. '

'And when did you begin work today?'
'We began in themoming - when else should we begin?' 'And when
will you finish worldng?'
'When they let us go; then we finish! '
The four otherworkmen of his gang came up to us. They aU wore tom
I coats and were without overcoats, though the temperature was about
thirtccn degrees Fahrenheit below zero.
Goods Porters Who Work Thirty-Seven Hours
�
I began to ask them about the conditions oflheir work, and evi ently
surprised them by taking an interest in such a simple and natural thmg as
An acquaintance of mine, who serves on the Moscow­
their thirty-six hour work.
Kursk Railway as a weigher, in the course of conversation
They were all villagers; for the most part fellow-countrymen of my
mentioned to me that the men who load the goods onto his scales
own from Tula. Some, however, were from Oryol, and some from
work for thirty-six hours on end.
Though I had full confidence in the speaker's Lruthfulness. I was
Ve�nesh. They lived in Moscow in lodgings; some of them with their
families, but mostofthem withoul T hose who have come herealone send
unable to believe him . I thought he was making a mistake. or exaggerating,
their earnings home to the village.
They board with contractors. Their food COSts them ten roubles a
or that I niisunderslOOd something.
But the weigher narrated the conditions under which this work is
month. They always eat meat, disregarding the fasts.
done soexactly thatthere was no room left fordoubL He told me that there
are two hundred and fifty such goods-porters at the Kursk Station in
Their work a1ways kccps them occupied more than thirty-six hours

Moscow. They wereaIl d ivided into gangs offivemen, and weTeOR piece­
�
running, because it takes more than half an hour to get to and rom their
�
lodgings; and besides, they are often kept at work beyon the Ume fixed.
Paying for their own food. they cam by such thuty-seven-hour
work. receiving from one rouble (say two shillings) to one rouble fifteen
kopecks for every lhousand poods (over sixteen tons) ofgoods received or
continuous work about twenty-five roubles a month.
despatched.
They come in the morning, work all day andall nightat unloading the
To my question, why they did such convict work, they replied:
'Where is one to go to?'
'But why work thirty-six hours on end? Cannot the work be arranged
trucks, and, when the night is ended, they again begin to reload, and then
work on for another day, so that in two days they get one night's sleep.
in shifts?'
Their work consists of unloading and moving bales of seven, eight,
'We do what we're told to.'
and up to ten poods (say eighteen, twenty, and up to nearly twenty-six
'Yes; but why do you agree to it?'
stone). Two men place the bales on the backs ofthe other thrcc, who carry .
We agree because we have to feed ourselves. "If you don't like It, be
them. By such work th ey earn less than a rouble a day. Thcy work
continually, without holidays.
off." lfyou're even an hour late, you have your ticket thrown at you, an�
given your marching orders; and there arc ten men ready to take theplace.
The account given by the weigher was so circumstantial lhar it was
The men were all young; only one was somewhat older, perhaps
impossible to doubt it; but, nevertheless. I decided to verify it with my own
eyes, and 1 went to the goods station.
about forty. All their faces were lean. and had exhausted, weary eyes, as
though the men were drunk. The lean workman to whom 1 first spo e �
Finding my acquaintance at the goods station, I told him I had come
tosee what hehad told me about. 'No-one I mention it tobelieves it', I said.
struck me especially by the stran ge weariness of his look. 1 asked hun
whether he had not been drinking today?

1 12 113
 'I don't drink,' he answered, in the decided way in which men who
really do not drink always reply to that question.
'And I do not smoke,' he added.
'00 the others drink?' I asked.
'Yes, it's brought here.'
'Thework is not light,and a drink alwaysaddstoone's strength.' said
lheolder workman.
This man had been drinking !.hat day, but it was not in !.he least
noticeable.
After some more lalk with the workmen, I went to waLCh the work.
Passing long rows of all sorts of goods, I came to some workmen
slowly pushing a loaded truck. l leamed afterwards that the men have to
shunt the trucks themselves, and to keep the platfonn clcarof snow, with­
out beingpaid for the w ork. ltis SO Slated in the 'Conditions ofPay.' There
workmen were just as lauered as those with whom I had been lalking.
When they had moved the truck to its place, I went up to them and asked
when they had begun work, and when they had dined.
1 was told that they slarLCd work at seven o'clock, and had only just
dined. The work had prevented their being let off sooner. 'And when do
you get away?'
'As it happens, sometimes not tiil ten o'clock.' replied the men, asif
boasting of their endurance. Seeing my interest in their position, they
surrounded me, and probably laking me for an inspector, several of them,
speaking at once, informed me ofwhal was evidently their chief subject
of complaint, namely that the apartment in which they could sometimes
warm themselvesandsnatchan hour's sleep between theday-workand the
night-work was crowded. All of them expressed great dissatisfaction at
this crowding.
'There may be one hundred men, and nowhere to lie down, even
under the shelves il is crowded,' said dissatisfied voices. 'Have a look at
it yourself. It is close by here.'
The room was certainly not largeenough. In the thirty-six footroom,
about forty men might find place to lie down on the shelves.
Some of the men entered the room with me, and they vied with each
other in complaining of the scantiness of the accommodation.
'Even under the shelves there is nowhere to lie down,' they said.
Thesemen, who in thirteen degrees of frost, withoutovercoats,carry
on their backs twenty-stone loads during thirty-six hours; who dine and
sup, not when they need food, bul when their overseer allows them to eat;
who live together in conditions far worse than drayhorses, it seemed
strange that these people only complained of insufficient accommodation
in the room where they warm themselves. But though this seemed strange
to me at first, yet, entering further into their position, I understood what a
feelingoftorture these men, who never gel enough sleepandwhoare half-
1 14
frozen, must e�pcrience when instead of resting and being warmed, they
have to sleep on the dirty floor under the shelves, and there, in stuffy and
vitiated air, become yet weaker and more broken down.
Only, perhaps, in that miserable hour of vain attempt to get rest and
sleep do they painfully realize all the horror of their life-destroying thiny­
six hour work, and that is why they are specially agitated by such an
apparently insi gnificantcircumstance as the overcrowding of their room.
Having watched several gangsat work, and having talked with some
more of the men, and heard the same story from them all, I drove home,
convinced that what my acquaintance had told me was true.
It was true, that for a bare subsistence, people, consideriog them­
.selves free men, thought it necessary to give themselves up to work such
as, in the days ofserfdom, notone siave-owner, however cruel, would have
sent his slaves to. Let alone slave-owners, not one cab proprietor would
send his horses to such work, for horses cost money, and it would be
wasteful, by e�cessive work, to shorten the life of an animal of value.
II
Society's Indifference While Men Perish
To oblige men to work for thirty-seven hours continu­
ously without sleep, besides being cruel, is also uneconom­
ical. And yet such uneconomical expenditure of human lives
continually goes on around us.
Opposite the house in which I live (NOTE No 47) is a silk-factory,
built with theiatesttechnical improvements. Aboutthree thousand women
and seven hundred men work and live there. As I sit in my room now, I hear
the unceasi ng din of the machinery, and know, forI have been there, what
that din means. Three thousand women stand, for twelve hours a day, at
the looms, amid a dearening roar; winding, unwinding, arranging the silk
threads to make silk stuffs. All the women, except those who have just
come from the village, have an unhealthy appearance. Mostofthem lead
a most intemperate and immoral life. Almost all, whether married or
unmarried, assoon as achild is born to them, send itoffeither to the village
or to the Foundlings' Hospital where eighty per cent of these children
perish. For fear of losing their places, the mothers resume work the ne�t
day, or on the third day, after their confinement
For twenty years, to my knowledge, tens of thousands of young,
healthy women, mothers, have ruined, andarenow ruining, their lives, and
the lives of their children, in order to produce velvets and silk stuffs.
I met a beggar yesterday,a young man on crutches, sturdily built, but
Crippled. He used to work as a navvy, with a wheelbarrow,butslippedand
115
 �
injured himself internally. He spent all he had on peasant women eale�
. soon as the question
possible. But how wonderfully blmd we �ome as
and often painfuUy,
and on doctors, and has now for eight years been homeless, beggmg his conccmsthosemilJionsofworkerswhopenshslowl'j, n
Llr convenience a d
bread and complaining that God docs not send him death. aU around us, at labours whose fruits we usc for e
How many such sacrifices of life there are, that we either know pleasure.
nothing of, or know of, but hardly notice conSidering them ine�table.
I know men working at the blast furnaces of the Tula Iron roundry,
who to have one Sunday free each fortnight, will work for twenty-four Ill
hours; that is, after working all day, they will go on working all night. I . clence
Justification OfThe Ex1stmg System By S '
have seen these men. They all drink vodka to keep up their energy; and,
"

obviously, like those goods-porters on the railway, they quickly expend people of our
not the interest, but the capital of their lives.
�
This wonderful blin ness which befa ) I s
t ta t when people
circle can only be explalfled by the fact tIt
And what of the waste of lives among those who are employed On of life which
behave badly they always invent a philoso
admittedly harmful work: in looking-glass, card, match, sugar, tobacco
represents their bad actions to be not bad <1
J'
C
� ons at ail, but
and glass factories; in mines, or as cesspool cleaners. their control. In
. m erely results of unalterable laws beyond .
There are English statistics showing that the average length of life n the theory that
former times such a view of life was found
among people of the Upper classes is fifty-five �ean:,
and the a�erage of I ·ch foreordained to
an inscrutable and unalterable will of God existed
life among working people in unhealthy occupations IS twenty-mne years. wttlto others an exalted
some men a humble position and hard work, and
Knowing this, and we cannot help knowing it, we, who take advan­
tage of labour that thus COSts human lives should, one would think �nless
posilion and the enjoyment of the good things of li( � � written, and an in-
On Ihisthemean enormous numbcrofbooks we
we are beasts, not be able to enjoy a moment's peace. But the fact IS that as worked up from
numerable quantity of sermons preached. The theme
Wated different sorts
every possible side. It was demonstrated that God ere
we well-to-do people, liberals and humanitarians, very sensitive to the
f
suf erings not only ofpeople but also of animals unceasingly make use of satisfied with their
such labour, and try to become more and more rich, that is, to take stiU
�
ofpeople: slaves and mast ers; and that bo should
vebetter for the slaves
position. It was furilier demonstraled that It would
greater advantage of such work. And we remain perfectly tranquil. t,e Ithough the slaves
For instance, having learned of the thirty-seven hour labour of the
in the next world; and afterwards il was shown th�t . � n wouldnotbebad
wereslaves,and oughtLOremain such. yetlheircondltJ
goods-porters and of their bad room, we at once send there an inspector t explanation, after
if the masters would be kind 10 them. Then the very 195 lr\l te
who receives a good salary,and we forbid people towork more than twelve wealth is en s d
the emancipation ofthe slaves (NOTE No 48)was tt
hours, leaving the w orkmen who arc thus deprived of one-third o their
earnings to feed themselves as best they can; and we compel the Railway
� by God to some people in order that they m y u
� �
P�d�
'l9 f it in good works;
others poor.
and SO there is no harm in some people hemg nch 11 t
Company 00 erect a large and convenient oom for th workmen. Then r (especially he
� � These explanations satisfied the rich and the �
with perfectly quiet consciences we contmue 00 receive �d desp lCh pal nations became
� rich) for a long time. BUI the day came when these
goods by that railway, and we ourselves continue 10 receive salanes, understand their
e':t,
dividends and rents from houses or land. Having learned that the women
unsatisfactory, especially to the poor, who bcgao
d just at the proper
All';nation came in the
POSition. Then fresh expla nalions were needed.
and girls at the silk faclOry, living far from their families. ruin their Own
time, they were produced (NOTE N049 ). Theseexp
lives and those of their children; and that well over half of the washer­ atit had discovered
fonn ofscience: political economy, which declared
women who iron our starched shirts, and of the type-setters who print the rJ1 distribution of the
the laws which regulate the division of labour and
booksand papers that whileawayour time, get tuberculosis. we only shrug
Products of labour among men. These laws, accordlng: , tJ1e(O that science, are:
our shoulders and say that we are very sorry things should be so, but that . roducts depend on
that the division of labour and the enjOyments of Its
,
we can do nothing 10 alter it; and we continue with tranquil conscience 10 supply and demand, on capilal, rent, wages oflabo
P values and profits;
buy silk. stuffs, to wear starched shirts, and to read our morning paper. We u'" om ic activities.
in general, on unaltemble laws governing man s cc
are much concerned about the hours of the shop assistants, and still more ' O iuen and lectures
;'
about the long hours ofour children at school; we slrictly forbid carters to
Soon, as many books and pamphlets w�rc
delivered on this theme as there had been treatiSes .""'"ritten and sermons
make their horses drag heavy loads. and we even organize the killing of ly, mountains of
Preached on the former theme; and still, unccasl. J1.g
canle in Slaughter-houses so that the animals may feel it as lillie as

1 16 1 17
pamphlets and books are being wriu en, and lectures are delivered as
cloudy and unintclligibleas the theological treatises and sermons; andlike
the theological treatises too, they fully achieve their appointed purpose,
which is to give such an explanation of the existing order of things as
justifies some people in tranquilly refraining from labour and in utilizing
the labour of others.
The fact is that. for the investigation of this pseudo-science, therewas
taken to show thegeneral orderofthings, notthe condition ofpeople in the
whole world, through all historic time, but only the condition ofpeople in
a smal l country. in mostexcepLionai circumstances, England at theend of
the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth centuries. This factdid
not in the least hinder the acceptance as valid of the results at which the
investigators arrived, any more than asimilar acceptance is now hindered
by the endless disputes and disagreements among those who study that sci·
ence are quite unable to agree as to the meaning of rent, surplus value,
profits, and so on. Only the one fundamental position of that science is
acknowledged by all, namely, that the relations among men are condi·
tioned, not by what people consider right or wrong, but by what is
advantageous for those who occupy an advantageous position.
It is admitted as an undoubted truth, that if in society many thieves
and robbers have sprung up, who takefrom the labourers the fruits of their
labour, this happens not because the thieves and robbers haveacted badly,
but because s uch are the n
i evitable economic laws, which can only be
altered slowly, by an evolutionary process indicated by science; and
therefore, according to the guidance of science, people belonging to the
ciassofrobbers, thieves orreceiversofstolengoods, may quietlycontinue
to utilize the things obtained by theft and robbery.
Though the majority ofpeople in our world do not know the details
of these tranquillizing scientific explanations, any more than they for­
merly knew thedetails of the theological explanations whichjustified their
position, yet they all know that an explanation exists; that scientific men,
wise men, have proved convincingly, and continue to prove, that the
existing order of things is what it ought to be, and that therefore we may
live quietly in this order of things without ourselves trying to alter it.
Only in this way can I explain the amazing blindness of good people
of our society, who sincerely desire the welfare of animals, but yet with
quiet consciences devour the lives of their brother-men.
118
IV
The Assertion or Economic Science That All Rural
Labourers Must Enter The Factory System
The theory that it is God's will that some people should own otllers,
satisfied peoplefora very long time. But that theory, byjustifying cruelty,
caused such cruehy as evoked resistance. and produced doubts as to the
truth of the theory.
Sonow, with the theory that an economic evolution,guided by inevi­
table law, is progressing, in consequence of which some people must
collectcapital, and others must labourall their Iives to increase that capital,
preparing themsel ves meanwhile for the promised communalization of
the means of production; this theory, causing some people to be yet more
cruel to others, also begins, especially among common people not stupe­
fied by science, to evoke certain doubts.
For instance, you see goods-porters destroying their lives by thirty­
seven-hour labour, or women in factories, or laundresses, or type-setters,
or all those millions of people who live in hard, unnatural conditions of
monotonous, stup efying, slavish toil, and you naturally ask: what has
brought thesepeople to such a state? and how are they to be delivered from
it? And science replies, that these people arc in this condition because the
railway belongs to this Company, Lhe silk factory to that gentleman, and
all the foundries, factories, printing shops and laundries, to capitalists; and
that this state ofthings will come right by work people fonning unions or
co-operative societies, organizing strikes, and taking part in Government,
and so more and more swaying the masters and the Government, till the
workers obtain first, shorter hours and increased wages, and finally, a1l the
meansofproduction into their hands; and then all will be well! Meanwhile
all is going on as it should go, and there is no need to alter anything.
This answer must seem to an unlearned man, and particularly to our
Russian folk, very surprising. In the first place, neither in relation to the
goods-porters nor the factory women, nor all the millions ofother labour­
ers suffering fr om heavy, unhealthy, stupefying labour, does the posses­
sion of the means of production by capitalists explain anything. The
agricultural means ofproduction of those men who are now working at the
railway have not been seized by capita lists: they have land,and horses, and
ploughs,and harrows, and all that is necessary to till the ground; also these
women working at the factory arc not only not forced to it by being
deprived of their implements of production, but, on the contrary, they have
(foc the most part against the wish of the eldcr members of their families)
ieftthehomes where Lheirwork was much wanted, and where they had im­
plements ofproduction.
Millions of workpeople in Russia, and in oLher countries ace in a
119
similar situation. So the cause of the miserable position of the workers
cannot be found in the seizure of lhe means of production by capilalists.
The cause must lie in the first place in lhat which drives lhem from the
villages. Secondly, lhe emancipation of the workers from this state of
things, even in lhat distant future in which science promises them liberty,
can be accomplished neither by shortening the hours of labour, nor by
increasing wages, nor by the promised communalization of the means of
production.
All that cannot improve their position. For the labourers' misery,
whether on lhe railway, in the silk-factory, and in every other factory or
workshop, consists not in the longer or shorter hours of work (peasants
sometimes work eighteen hours a day, and as much as thirty-six hours on
end, and consider their lives happy ones); nor docs it consist in the low rate
of wages, nor in the fact that the railway or the factory is not theirs; but it
consists in lhe fact that they are obliged to work in hannfui, unnatural
conditions. often dangerous and destructive to life, and to live a barrack
life in towns, a life full oftemptations and immorality, and to do compul­
sory labour at another's bidding.
Latterly the hours of labour have diminished, and the rate of wages
has increased; but this diminution of the hours of labour and this increase
in wages has not improved the position of the worker, if one takes into
account not their more luxurious habits - watches with chains, silk
kerchiefs, tobacco, vodka, beefand beer, but their welfare, their health and
morality, and above all, their freedom.
At the silk factory with which r am acquainted, twenty years ago the
work was chiefly done by men, who worked fourteen hours a day, earned
on an average fifteen roubles a month, and sent the money, for the most
part, to their families in the villages. Now, nearly all the work is done by
women.working eleven hours, some ofwhom earn as much as twenty-five
roubles a monlh (overfifteen roubles on an average), and for the most part,
do not send it home, but spend all they earn here, chiefly on dress,
drunkenness and vice. The diminution of the hours of work merely in­
creases the time they spend in taverns.
The same thing is happening, to a greater or lesser extent, at all the
factories and works. Everywhere, notwithstanding the diminution of the
hours of labour and the increase of wages, the health of the operatives is
worse than thato f country workers, the average duration oflife is shoner.
and morality is sacrificed, as cannot but occur when people are tom from
those conditions which most conduce to morality: family life and free,
healthy, varied and intelligible agricultural work.
It is very possibly true, as some economists assert, that with shorter
hours of labour. more pay and improved sanitary conditions in mills and
factories, the health and morality of the workers improve, in comparison
with the former co ndition of factory workcrs. h is also possible that
120
latterly. and in some places, the position of the factory hands s
i bener in
external conditions than the position ofthe country population. But this is
so (and in some places), because the Govemment and society, influenced
by the affirmations of science, do all that is possible to m
i prove . the
pOsition ofthe factory population at the ex�nsc ofthe coun � populauon.
Ifthe condition ofthe factory workers, 10 someplaces, ls, though only
in external aspects. better than that of country people. it only shows that
one can, by all kinds of restrictions. render life miserable in what should
be the be st external conditions; and that there is no position SO unnatural
and bad that men may not adapt themselves to it, if they remain in it for
some generations.
The misery of the position ofa factory hand, and in genera:; ofa to·...n
worker, does not consist in his long hours and small pay, but in fact that
he is deprived of the natural conditions of life in touch with nature. is
deprived of fr eedom, and is compelled to compulsory and monotonous
toil at another man's will.
And therefore the reply to the questions, why factory and town
workers are in miserable conditions, and how those may be improved,
cannotbe that this arises because capitalists have possessed themselves of
the meansofproduction,an d that the workers' condition will be improved
by diminishing their hours ofwork, increasing their wages and communal­
izing the means of production.
The reply to these questions must consist in indicating the causes
which havedeprived the workers ofnatural conditions oflife n
i touch with
nature, and which have driven them into factory bondage; and in n
i dicat­
ing means to free th e workers from the necessity of foregoing a free
country life, and from going into slavery at the factories.
And therefore the question why town workers are in a miserable
condition includes, first ofall, thequestion: whalreasons have driven them
from the villages, where they and their ancestors have lived and mightlive;
where, in Russia , people like them do still live? And what it is lhatdrove,
and continues to drive them, against their wi
l l, to the factories and works?
If there are workmen, as n
i England, Belgium or Germany, who for
some generations have lived by factory work, even they live so, not by
their own free will but because their fathers, grandfathers and great­
grandfathers were, in some w ay, compelled to exchange the agriCUltural
life which they loved. for life which seemed to them hard in towns and at
factories. First thecounlry people were deprived ofland by violence, says
Karl Marx, they were evicted and brought to vagabondage; and then, by
cruel laws, they were tortured with pincers, with red-hot irons. and were
whipped, to make them submit to the condition of being hired labourers.
Therefore the question, how to free the workers from their miserable
position, should, one would think, naturally lead to the question, how to
remove those causes which have already driven some, and arc nowlhreat-
121
ening to drive the rest of the peasants from the position which they
considered good, and are driving them lO a position which they consider
bad.
Economic science, although it indicates in passing the causes that
drove the peasants from the villages, does not concern itself with the
question how to remove these causes, but directs all its auention to the
improvement of the wo rkers' position in theexisting factories and works,
assuming as it were that the workers' position in these factories and
workshops is something unalterable, something which must alaI! costs be
maintained for those who are already in the factories, and must bereached
by those who have not left !he villages or abandoned agricultural work.
Moreover, economic science is so sure that all the peasants must
inevitably become factory operatives in towns, that, though all the sages
and the poets of the world have always placed !he ideal of human
happiness amid conditions of ag ricuhural work, though all the workers
whose habits are unperverted have always preferred, and still prefer, ag­
ricultural labourtoany o!her, though faclOry work is always unhealthy and
monotonous, while agriculture is most healthy and varied, though agricul­
tural work is free (NOTE No 50) and the peasant alternates toil and rest
at his own will, while factory work, even if the factory belongs to the
workmen, is always enforced, in dependence on the machines, though
factory work is derivative, while agricultural work is fundamental, with­
out it no factory could exist - yet economic science affirms that all the
country people are not only uninjured by the transition from the country
to the LOwn, but themselves desire it, strive towards it.
V ofproduction, as well as the land; and then they will be so well fed, so well
Why Learned Economists Affirm What Is False
However Obviously unjust may be the assenion of the
men of science that the welfare of humanity must consist in
the very thing that is profoundly repulsive to human feelings, in monoto­
nous, enforced factory labour, the men of science were inevitably led to
make this obviously unjust assertion,just as the theologians of old were
inevitably led to make the equally evidently unjust assertion that slaves
and their masters were crealures differing in kind, and that the inequality
of their position in this world would be compensated in the next.
The cause ofthis evidcntly unjust assertion is that those who have for­
mulated, and who are formulating, the law of science, belong to the well­
to-do classes, and are so acCUSlOmed to the conditions, advantageous for
themselves, in wh ich they live, that they do not admit the thought that
society could exist under other conditions. Thecondition of life to which
122
people of the well-to-do classes are accustomed, is that of an abundant
production of various articles necessary for their comfort and pleasure;
and these things are only obtained thanks to the existence of factories and
works organized as at present And therefore, when discussing the im­
provementofthe workers' position, men ofscience, belonging to the well­
to-do classes, always have in view only such improvements as will not do
away with this system of factory proouction, and the products of which
they avail themselves.
Even the most advanced economists, the Socialists, who demand the
complete control of the means of production for the workers, expect
production of the same or almost the same articles, as are produced now,
to continue in the present, or similar, factories, with the present division
oflaoour.
Thedifference, as they imagine it, will only be that, in the future, not
they alone, but all men, will make use of such conveniences as only they
now enjoy.They dimly picture 10 themselves that, with thecommunaliza­
tion ofthe means of production, they too, men of science, and the ruling
classes in general, will do some work, bmchieny as managers, designers,
scientists or artists. To the question, who will have to wear a mask: and
make white-lead'? who will be stokers, miners and cesspool cleaners'? they
are either silent, or foretell that all these things will be so improved that
even work at cesspools, and underground, will afford pleasantoccupation.
Thatis how they represent to themselves fulure economic conditions,both
in Utopias suchas thatofBellamy (NOTE No 51) and in scientific works.
According to !heir theories, the workers will all join unions and as­
sociations, and cultivate solidarity among themselves by unions, slrikes
andparticipation inParliamenl, till theyobtainpossession of all the means
dressed, and enjoy such amusements on holidays that they will prefer life
in town, amid brick buildings and smoking chimneys, to free village life
and plants and domestic animals; and monotonous, well.regulated ma­
chine work to varied, healthy and free agricultural labour.
Though this anticipation is as improbable as the anticipation of the
theologians about a heaven to be enjoyed hereafter by workmen in
compensation for their hard labour here, yel learncd and educated people
of our society believe thi s Slrange teaching, just as fonneriy wise and
learned people believed in a heaven for workmen in the next world. And
learned men and their disciples, people of the well-lo-do classes, believe
this because they mustbelieve it. Thisdilemma stands before them: either
they must see that all that they make use of in their lives, from railways to
lu cifer matches and cigaretleS, represents labour which costs the lives of
many of their brother-men, and that they, not Sharing in that toil but
making use ofit, are very dishonourable men; or they mustbelieve thatall
that takes place, takes place for the general advantage, in accord with un-
123
alterable laws of economic science. Therein lies the inner psychological
causecompeUing men of science. men wise and educalCd but notenlight­
ened. to affum positively and tenaciously such an obvious unlruth. as that
the labourers, for their own well-being. should leave a happy andhealthy
life in touch with nature, and go to ruin their bodies and souls in factories
and workshops.
VI
Bankruptcy Of The Socialist Ideal
But even allowing the assertion (evidently unfounded as it is, as
contrary to the facts of human namre), that it is better for people to live in
towns and todo compulsory machine work in factories, rather than live in
villages and work freely at handicrafts, thereremains in the very ideaitself,
to which the men of science tell us the economic evolution is leading, an
insoluble contradiction. The ideal is that the workers, having become
masters of all the means of production, are to obtain the comforts and
pleasurenow possessed by weJl-to-dopeople. They will allbe well clothed
and housed, and well nourished, and will walk on electrically-lighted
asphalt streets. and frequent concerts and theatres, and read papers and
books, and ride on aulo-cars. But that everybody may have certain things,
the production of those things must be apportioned. and consequently it
must be decided how long each workman is to work. How is that to be
decided?
Statistics may show, though very imperfectly. what pcoplerequirein
a society fettered by capital, by want But nostatistics can show how much
is wanted, and what articles are needed to satisfy the demand in a society
where the mean s ofproduction will belong to the society itself, and where
the people will be free.
The demands in such a society cannOt be defined, and they wiU al­
ways infinitely exceed the possibility of satisfying them. Everybody will
wish to have all that the richest now possess, and therefore it is quite
impossible todefine t he quantity ofgoods that such a society will require.
Furthennore. how are people to be induced to work atanicles which
some consider necessary and Others consider unnecessary or even hann­
ful?
lfit be found necessary for everybody to work, say, six hours a day,
in order 10 satisfy the requirements of society, who, in a free society, can
compel aman to work those six hours, ifhe knows that part of the time is
spent on pro dueing things he considers unnecessary or even hannful?
It is undeniable that under the present slate of things mOst varied
articles are produced with greal economy of exertion, thanks to machin-
124
�
cry ,and thanks especially to the division �flabourwhic has been brought
to an extreme nicety and carried to the highest perfection; and that these
articlesare profitable to the manuracturers. and that we find them conven­
ient and pleasant to use. But the fact that these articles arc well made. and
are produced wilh little expenditureof strength, that they areprofitable to
the capitalists and convenient for us, docs not prove that free men would,
without compulsion, continue to produce them. There is no doubt that
�
Krupp. with the prcscntdivision oflabour, makesadmirablecan ons very
.
quickly and artfuUy; N.M. very qUickly and artfully produces Silk mate­
rials; X. Y. and Z. produce toilet scents, powder to preserve the complex­
ion, or glazed packs of cards; and K. produces whisky of choice flavour,
and, no doubt, both for those who want these articles and for the owners
of cannons, scents and whisky, all this is very advantageous. Butcannons.
scents and whisky arc wanted by those who wish to obtain control of the
Chinese market, or who like to get drunk, or arc concerned about their
complexions; but there will be some who considerthe production of these
articles harmful. And there will always be people who consider that,
besides these articles, exhibitions, academics, beer and beef are unneces­
sary and even harmful. How arc these people to be made to participate in
the production of such articles?
.
Even if a means could be found to get all to agree to produce certam
articles(though there is no such means, and can be none,exceptcoercion).
who, in a free society, without capitalistic production, competition and its
law ofsupp Iy and demand, will decide which ankles are to have the pr f­ �
erence? Which are to be made first, and which after? Are we first to bUild
the Siberian railway and fortify Port Arthur, and then macadamize the
roads inourcounuy districts, or vice versa ? Which is tocome flrst: electric
lighting or irrigation of the fields? And then comes another question,
.
insoluble with free workmen: which men are todo which work? EVidently
all will prefer haymakingordrawing to stoking or cesspool cleaning. How.
in apportioning the work, arc people to be induced to agree?
No statistics can answer these questions. The solution can only be
theoretical: it may besaid that there will be people to whom power will be
given to regulate all these matters. Some people will decide these ques­
tions, and others wi II obey them.
Besides the questions of apportioning and directing production and
of selecting work, when the meansof production are communaJi�. ��
will be another and most important question as to the degrcc of d i VISion
of labour that can est ablishcd in a socialistically organized society. The
present division of labour is conditioned by the needs of the workers. A
workeronlyagrees to live all his Iife underground, or to make the one-hun­
dredth partof one article all his life, or move his hands up and down amid
theroarofmachineryall his life, because he willotherwi.3enot have means
to live. But it will only be by compulsion that a workman. owning the
125
........-- ------

meansofproductioo and ootsufrering want,can be induced toacceplsuch

stupefying and soul-destroying conditions of labour as those in which
people now work. Division of labour is undoubtedly ve� profitable �nd VII
natural topeople; but, ifpeople arc free.division oflabourIS only possible
up toa certain, very limited extent, which hasbeen far overstepped in our
Culture Or Freedom

society (NOTE No 52 ) .
Just what happened when serfdom existed is now being repeated.
If one peasant occupies himself chieny wilh boot-making, and his
Then, the majority of the serf-owners and of the people of the well-to-do
wife weaves, and another peasant ploughs,anda third is ablacksmith, and
clasSes, if they acknowledged the serfs' position to be not qui:e S3:tisfac-
they all, having acquired special dexterity in their own work. afterwards
tory. yet recommended 0 nly such alterations as would r.:>t depnve the
exchange what they have produced · such division of labour is advanta­
geous to all, and free people will naturally divide their work in this
owners of what was essential to their profit Now, people of the wc;:l1·to­
�ay. �
do c\asses, admitting that the position of the workers is not a1togeth sat­
isfactory, propose for its amendment only such measures :..:: ,,:"'111 not
Buladivision oflabourby which a man makes one-hundredth ofan arncle, .
or a stoker works in a temperature of one hundred and forty degrees
deprive the well-to-do classes of their advantages. As well-d I Sposed
Fahrenheit, or is choked with harmful gasses, such division of labour is
owners then spoke of 'paternal authority', and, like Gogo1 (NOTE N055)
disadvantageous, because though it furthers the production of insignifi­
advised owners to bekind to their serfs and to lakecareof them, but would
cant articles, it desuoys that which is most precious - the life of man.
Therefore such division of labour as now exists, can only continue where
�ot tolerate the ideaofemancipation (NOTE No 56), considering it harm­
ful and dangerous, just so, the majority of well-to-do people advise
there is compulsion, Dodbertus ( NOTE No 53) says that communal di­
employers to look after the well-being of their workpeoplc, but do nOl
vision of labour unites mankind. That is true, but it is only free division,
admit the thought of any such alteration of the economic structure of life
such as people VOluntarily adopt, that unites.
as would set thc labourers Quite free.
Andjustas advanced liberals then, while considering serfdom l?
Upeople decide to make a road, and one digs, another brings stones,
a third breaks them, that sort of division of work unites people.
�
an immutable arrangement, demanded that thc Government should hmlt
But if, independently of the wishes, and sometimes against the
thepowerofthe owners, and sympathized with the serfs' agitation, sa the
wishes. of the workers, a strategic railway is built, or an Eiffel tower, or
Iibera1s oftoday, whil e considering the cxisting order immutable, demand
thal Govemmenlshould limit the powers ofcapitalists and manufacturers.
stupidities such as fill the Paris exhibition; andone workman is compelled
to obtain iron, an other todig coal,a third to make castings, a fourth to cut
and they sympathize with unions and strikes and, in general, with the
down trces,anda fifth tosaw them up. without having the least ideaofwhat
workers' agitation. Just as the most advanced mcn then demanded the
the things they are making are wanted for then such division oflabournot
•

emancipation of the serfs, but drew up a Project which left the serfs
dependent on private landowners, or fettered them with tributes and land­
only does not unite men, but, on the contrary, it divides them.
And, therefore, with communalized implements of production, if
taxes so now the most advanced people demand the emancipation of the
people arc free, they will only adopt division oflabour in as far as the good
resultint from it will outweigh the evil itoccasions to the workers. And as
wor bnen from the power of the capitalists, and the communalization of
the means ofproduction, but yet would leave the workersdependenton the
each man natura lIy sees good in extending and diversifying his activities,
prescnt apportionment and division of labour, which. in their opinion,
such division of labour as now exists Will, evidently, be impossible in a
must remain unaltered. The teachings of economic science, which are
free society.
adopted (though without close examination of their details) by all those of
To suppose lhat with communalized means of production there will
the well-lo-do classes who consider themsel ves enIightcned and advanced
besuch an abundance ofthings as is now produced by compulsory division
(NOTE No 57) ,seem on a superficial examination to be liberal and even
oflabour, is like supposingthat after the emanCipation of the serfs,the do­
radical, containing as they doauacks on the wealthy classes fsociety; but,
mestic orchestras a nd theatres (NOTE No 54), the home-made carpets and �
essentially, that leaching is in the highest degree conservative, gross and
laces. and the elaborate gardens which depended on serf-labour would
continue to function as before. So the supposition that when the Socialist
�
cruel. One way or another the men of science. and in theirtrain allt e �ell­
to-do ciasscs, wish at all costs to maintain the present system of distribu­
ideal is realized, everyone will be free, and will at the same time have at
tion and division of labour, which makes possible the production of that
his disposal everything, oralmosl everything, that is now made use of by
great quantity of goods which they use. The existing economic order is
the well-to-do classes, involves an obvious self-contradiction.

126 127
called cullure by the men of science and, following them. by all the well­ vm
to-do classes; andin this culture, in its railways, telegraphs. telephones,
Slavery Exists Among Us
photographs, Rontgen rays. clinical hospita1s. exhibitions, and chiefly, in
all the appliances of comfort they see something so sacrosanct that they
will not allow even a thought of alterations which might destroy it all, or
I�
m nea nun arriving from a country quitedifferer.nt fromour own,
"":Ith no Id� of0lI' history or of our laws, and suppose th�at, after showing
.
but endanger a small part ofthese acquisitions. Everything may, according
him the vanous aspects ofour life, we were to ask him wi hat was the chief
to the leaching of that science, be changed, except what it calls culture. It
difference he n «iced in the lives of people of our \fiVorld. The chief
becomes more and moreevident that this culture can only exist while the
difference which such a man would notice n
i the way PfCOple live is that
workers are compelled to work, yet men of science are so sure that this
some people - a small number - who have clean white haJJlds, and are well
culture is the greatest ofblessings, that they boldly proclaim the contrary
nourished and clethed and lodged, do very little and vefry light work, or
of what the purists once said:[/O./justitia, perea/ mundus ( NOTE No 58).
even do not wort at all but only amuse themselves, spOCnding on these
They now say: fiat cultura, perea/justitia (NOTENo 59 ). They not only
amusements the results of millions of days devoted by" other people to
say it, but act on it. Everything may be changed, in practice and in theory,
severe labour; blll other people, always dirty, poorly clCOthed and lodged
except CUlture, except all that is going on in workshops and factories. and
and fed, with dirty, horny hands, toil unceasingly from ,..noming to night,
especially what is being sold in the shops.
But 1 think that enlightened people, professing the Christian law of
and sometimes allnight long. working for those whodo ntlot work, but who
continually amuse themselves.
brotherhood and love to one's neighbour, should say just the contrary.
Ifbetween tl:e slaves and slave-owners oftoday it is . difficult to draw
Electric lights and telephones and exhibitions are excellent, and so
are all the pleasure-gardens with concerts and perfonnances, and all the
as sharp a dividing line as that which separated the former " slaves from their

cigars and match-boxes, braces and motor-cars, but may they all go to masters, and if among the slaves of LOday there are sonme who are only
temporarily sl aves and then become slave-owners, or �me who, at one
perdition, and not the y alone but the railways, and all the factory-made
chintz-stuffs and cloths in the world, ifto produce them it is necessary that
and the same time, are slaves and slave-owners, this ble�nding of the two
classes at their ptints of contact does not upset the fact tJ:hat the people of
our time are divi<kd into slaves and slave-owners as defiJlnitely as, in spite
ninety-nine percent ofthe people should remain in slavery. and perish by
thousands in factories needed for the production of these articles. If in
of the twilight, ea:h twenty-four hours is divided into ctlay and night.
If the slav�wner ofour time has no slave John w,'hom he can send
order that London or Petersburg may be lit by electricity, or in order to

to the cesspool toclear out his excrements, he has fiv stihillings of which
construct exhibition buildings. or in order that there may be beautiful
paints. or in order to weave beautiful cloths quickly and abundantly. it is �
necessary that even a very few lives should be destroyed, or ruined. or hundreds ofJohru are in such need that the slave-ownerQofour times may
choose anyone Oil of hundreds of Johns and be a bene:;factor to him by
shortened - and statistics show us how many arcdestroyed- letLondonand
giving him thepnferenceand allowing him. rather than aanother,to climb
Petersburg rather be lit by gas or oil; let there rather be no exhibition, no
down into the ct$pool (NOTE No 60).
The slaves d our times are not only all those facto[ll)' and workshop
paints or materials. Only let there be no slavery and no destruction of
human lives resulting from it. Themotto fortruly enlightened people isnot
hands, who mUSl seJI themselves completely into the powNerofthe factory
fiat cuitUTa, perealjuslitia, butfial justistia, pereat cuitUTa
and foundry oWlers in order to exist; but nearly all the agricultural
labourers are sla\es, w orking as they do unceasingly tao grow another's
Butculture, useful culture, will not bedestroyed. It will certainly not
be necessary for people to revert to tillage of the land with sticks. or to
lighting-up with torches. It is not for nothing that mankind, in its slavery, com onanother'sfield, and gathering it inLO another's buJll; or tilling their

has ac hieved such great progress in technical mailers. Ir only it is own field.sonly morder topay tobankers the intereston ddebts they cannot

understood that we must not sacrifice the lives ofour brother-men for our getrid of. Slavesliso areall the innumerable footmen, c()(!K)ks, housemaids,

own pleasure, it will be possible to apply technical improvements without
destroying men's lives; and to arrange life so as to profit by all those
methods giving us control of nature, that have been devised, and that can
be applied without keeping our brother-men in slavery.
porters, coachmm, bathmen, waiters, and so on, who 1Jja1l their life long
perform duties Jl'l)st unnatural to a human being, and .....
"hich they them­
selves dislike.
Slavery exi& in full vigour, but we do not perce:eive it; just as in
Europe, at theen� of the eighteenth century. the slavety'f of serfdom was
not perceived.

128 129
 People ofthat day thought that the position of men obliged to tililbe Ewropc taxes
that kept the peepl e in bondage began tobe abolishe d only
.
to agncu Itural
•

had lost their land. were disaccu stomed

land for their lords, and to obey them. was a natural. inevitable. economic hen the people
VI k and, having acquired town tastes, were quite
dependent on the
condition of life, and they did not call it slavery.
;;� i iSts. Only then were the taxes on om abolished .in Englan
� �. And
It is the same among us: people of our day consider the position of
they are now ng, in German y and mother countn es. to abohsh the
labourers to be a natural. inevitable, economic condition, and they do not beginni
es that faB on the workers, and to shift them on to
therich, only because
call it slavery.
And as, at the end of the eighteenth century, the people of Europe : majority of the people are already in the hands of �
the capital ts. One

began little by little to understand that what had seemed a natural and in· form ofslavery is not abol ished until another has already rep� It. There
and if not one then another (and someum es several
evitable form ofeconomic life,namely,the position OfpalS3llLS who were areseveral such forms,
in slavery , by placing it in such a position �at one
completely in the p ower of their lords. was wrong. unjust and immoraJ, together) keeps a people
all part of the people has full power over the labour and the f
li e of a
and demanded alteration; so now people today are beginning to under·
stand that the position of hired workmen, and of the working classes in :: ger number. In this enslave ment lies the chief cau � of the mi � rable
mg the peJSlbOn of
general, which formerly seemed quite right and quite normal, is not what condition of the people. Therefore the means of improv
Firstly, in admittin g that among us slavery
it should be, and demands alteration. theworkers must consist in this:
metaph orical sense, but i
n the simplest and
emts not in some figurative,
The qUe&tion of the slavery ofour times isjust in the same phase now
in which thequestion ofserfdom stood in Europe (NOTE No 6 1 ) towards e's
plain t sense; slavery which keeps some � ople. � e majority. in e �
the end of the eighteenth century, and in which the question of serfdom power of others, !.he minorit y; secondl y, havmg admitte d
. .
�
thiS. In fi dmg

among us, an d of slavery in America, stood in the second quaner of the

and thlnily,
!.he causes of the enslavement of some people by others;
having found these causes, in desuoy ing them.
nineteenth century.
Theslavery oftheworkers in our times is only beginning to be admit·
led by advanced people in our society; the majority as yet are convinced
that among us no slavery exists. IX
A thing thathelps people today to misunderstand theirposition in this What Is Slavery?
matter is the fact that we have, in Russia and in America, only recently
that
abolished slavery. But in reality the abolition of serfdom and of slavery In whatdoes the slavery ofour time consist? Whatare the forces
make somepeople the slaves ofothers? Ifwe ask all
was only the abo Iition of an obsolete form of slavery that had become the workers in Russ �
s and In
. .
unnecessary, and the substitution for it ofa firmer form ofslavery, andone and in Europe and in America · wherever !.hey are. m the factone
thatholdsagreaternumberofpeople in bondage. Theabolition ofserfdom i towns and villages · what
various situat ions in which they work for hire, n
and of slavery was like the Tartars of the Crimea did with their prisoners. living, they will all
has made them choose the position in which they are
They invented the plan of slitting the soles of the prisoners' feet and they had no land on
reply that they have been brought to it; either because.
sprinkling chopped-up bristles into the wounds. Having performed that Will be the reply of all
which they could and wished to live and work (that
operation,they released them from their weights and chains. Theabolition ns). or that taxes,
the Russian workmen and of very many of the Europea
of serfdom in Russia and of slavery in America, though it abolished the only pay by
direct and indirect, were demanded of them. which they could
former method of slavery. not only did nOt abolish what was essential in selling their labour. or that they remain at faclO work �
ensn� by the
it, but was only accomplished when the bristles had formed sores on the can gratify only
more luxurious habits they have adopted, and which they
soles, and one could be quite sure that without chains or weights the by seUing their labour and their liberty. .
to
prisoners would not run away, but would have to work. The Northerners The two first conditions, the Jack of land and the taxes, drive man
ied needs.
in America boldly demanded the abolition of the former slavery because. compulsory labour, while the third, his increased and unsatisf
among them, the new monetary slavery had already shown its power to decoy him to it and keep him at it.
We can imagine that the land be freed from the clrums of
. .
shackle the people. The Southerners did not yetperceive the plain signs of pnvate
the new slavery. and therefore did not consent to abolish the old form. proprietors, by Henry George's plan (NOTE No 62), and tha
�
therefore,
Among us in Russia, serfdom was only abolished when all the land With. We can
the firstcause driving people into slavery may be done away
had been appropriated. When land was granted to the peasants, it was n oftax.es ,
also, besides t he Single·Tax plan, imagine the direct abolitio
burdened with payments which took the place of the land slavery. In

130 131
done now in some countries; but under the presenteconomic organi7.ation,
one cannot even imagine a position of things under which more and more
luxurious, and often hannful, habits of life would not be adopted among
the rich, and that these habits should not. little by little, pass to those or the
lower classes who are in contactwith the rich, as inevitably as water sinks
into dry ground, and that these habits should not become so necessary to
the workers that in order to be able to satisfy them, they will be ready to
sell their freedom.
So this third condition, though it is a voluntary oneofwhich it would
seem that a man might resist the temptation, and though science does not
acknowledge it to be a cause of the miserable condition ofthe workers, is
the fumest an d most irremovable cause of slavery.
Workmen living near rich people are always infected· with new
requirements, and only obtain means to satisfy these requirements in so far
as they devote their most intense labour to this satisfaction. So workmen
in England and Ameriea, receiving sometimes ten times as much as is
necessary for subsistence, continue to be just such slaves as they were
before.
Three causes, as the workmen themselves explain, produce the
slavery in which they live; and the history of their enslavement and the
facts of their position confirm the correctness of this explanation.
All the workcrs are brought to their present state, and are kept in it,
by these three causes. Acting on people from different sides, they are such
that none canescapefrom their enslavement The peasant who has no land,
or who has n ot enough, will always be obliged to go into perpetual or
temporary slavery to the landowner, in order to have the possibility of
feeding himself from the land. Should he, in one way or another, obtain
land enough to be able to feed himself from it by his own labour, such
taxes, director indirect, aredemanded of him, that in order to pay them he
has again to go into slavery.
Uta escape from slavery on the land, he ceases to cultivate land,and,
livingon someone else's land, begins tooccupy himself with a handicraft.
and to exchange his produce for the things he needs, then,on the one hand,
taxes, and , on the othcr hand, the competition of capitalists, producing
simi
l ar articles to those he makes, but with bcUer implements of produc­
tion, compel him to go into temporary or perpetual slavery to a capitalist
Ifhe was working for a capitalist. he might set up free relations with him,
and not be obliged to sell his libcny, yet the new requirements which he
assimilates deprive him of any such possibility. So, onc way or another,
the labourer is always in slavery to those who control lhe taxes, the land
and the articles necessary to satisfy his rcquirements.
132
X
Laws Concerning Taxes, Land And Property
The German Socialists have termed the combination of conditions
which put the workers in subjection to the capitalists, the iron law of
wages, implyingbytheword 'iron' that this law is immutable. Butin these
conditions there is nothing immutabl� these conditions merely result
from human lawsconcerning taxes,land and,aboveall,concerning things
which satisfy our requirements, that is, chiefly concerning propeny. Laws
areframed. and repealed, by human beings. So it is not some sociological
'iron' law, but ordinary man-made law, that produces slavery. In the case
n
i hand. the slavery of our times is vcry clearly and definitely produced,
not by some 'iron' elemental law, but by human enacunents: about land,
about taxes and about propeny. There is one set of laws by which any
quantity ofland may belong to private people, and may pass from one to
another by inheritance, or by will. or may be sold; there is another set of
laws by which everyone must pay thc taxcsdemanded of him unquestion­
ingly; and there is a third set of laws to the effect that any quantity of
articles, by whatever means acquircd, may become the absolute property
of the people who hold them. And in consequence of these laws, slavery
exists.
We are so accustomed to all these laws, that they seem to usjust as
necessary and natura1 to human lifc, as thelaws maintaining serfdom and
slavery seemed in former times. No doubts about their necessity and
justice seem possible, a nd we notice nothing wrong in them. But just as
a time came when people, having seen the ruinous consequences of serf­
dom,questioned thejustice and necessity of the laws which maintained it,
so now, when the pernicious consequences ofthe presentcconomic order
have become evident. one involuntarily questions the justice and inevita­
bility of the legislation about land. taxes and propeny, which produces
these results.
People formerly asked: Is it right that some peopleshould belong to
others, and that the former should have nothing of their own, but should
give all the produce of their labour to their owners? So now we must ask
ourselves: Is it ri ghtthat people must not usc land accounted the propeny
of other people? Is it right that people should hand over to others in the
form oftaxes, whatever part of their labourisdemandedofthem?Is itright
thatpeople may not make use of anides considered to be the propeny of
other people?
Is it right that people should not have the use of lalld when it is
colISidered to belollg to a/hers who are 1I0t cultivating it?
133
 It is said that this legislation is instituted because landed property is
an essential condition if agriculture is to flourish, and if there were no
private property passing by inheritance, people would drive one another
from land the y occupy, and n(H)ne would work or improve the land on
which he is senled. Is this true? The answer is to be found in hislOry, and
in the fact of today. History shows thatpropecty in landdidnolarise from
any wish to make the cultivator's tenure more secure, butresulted from the
seizureofcommunal lands by conquerors, and its distribution 10 those who
served the conquerors. So property in land was not established with the
object of stimulating the peasants. Present-<iay facts show the fallacy of
the assertion that landed property enables those who work the land to be
sure that they will not be deprived ofthe land they cultivate. In reality just
the contrary has happened. and is happening, everywhere. The right of
landed property, by whichthegreatproprietors have profited most,and are
profiting, has produced the result that the immense majority of the peas_
ants are now in the position of people who cultivate other people's land,
from which they may be driven at the whim of men who do not cultivate
iL The existing right oflanded property certainlydoesnotdefend the rights
of the peasant toenjoy the fruits of the labour he puts into the land, but. on
lhecontrary, ilis a way of depriving the peasants of the land on which they
work, and handing it over to those who have not worked it; and therefore
it is certainly not a means for the improvement of agriculture, but, on the
contrary, a means of deteriorating it.
AboUi taus it is said thatpeople ought topay them Ixcause they are
inslitUied with the general, even though silent consent oJaff; andare used
Jor public needs, to the advantage ojall. /s this true?
The answer to this question is given in history and in prescnt-<iay
facts. HislOry shows that taxes never wereinstituted by common consent,
but. on the contrary, always only in consequence of the fact that some
people, having oblained power over other people by conquest or by olller
means, imposed tribute. not for public needs, but for themselves. And the
same thing is still going on. Taxes are taken by those who have the power
10 take them. Ifnowadays some portion of these tributes, called taxes and
duties, is used for public purposes, it is for the most part forpublic purposes
that are hannful rather than useful to most people.
For instance, in Russia one-third of the peasants' whole income is
taken in taxes, but only one-fiftieth of the State revenue is spent on their
greatest need, the education of the people; and even that amount is spent
on a kind ofedu cation which. by stupefying thepeople. hanns them more
than it benefits them. The other fony-nine fiftieths are spent on unneces­
sary things, harmful to the people, such as equipping the anny� building
134
strategic railways. forts and prisons, or supporting the priesthood or the
court. and on salaries for lhose people who make it possible 10 take this
money from the people.
Thesame thing goes on not only in Persia. Turkey and India, butalso
in all the Christian and constiwtional States and democratic Republics:
money is takenfrom the majority of the people, quilt: independentJyofthe
consentornon-c onsentofthe payers, and theamountcollected is not what
isreaUy needful, butas much as can begal(weknow how Parliamentsare
made up, and how liuJe they respect the will of the people), and it is used
not for the common advantage. but for things the governing classes
consider necessary for themselves: on wars in Cuba or the Pmlippines, on
taking and keeping the riches of the Transvaa], and so forth. So the
explanation that people must pay taxes because they are instituted with
general consenland are used for the common good, is asuntrueas theother
explanation, that privalt: property in land is established to encourage ag­
riculture.
/s it true lhal people should not use anicles needful to satisfy their
requirements, ifthose articles are the property ojother people?
It is asserted that the right of property in acquired articles is estab­
lished in order to make the worker sure that no-one will take from rum the
produce of his laOOur. Is it true?
It is only necessary to glance at what is done in our world, where
i l strictness. in order to be
property rights are defended with especa
convincedhow completely the facts of!ife run counter to this explanation.
In our society, in consequence of the right of property in acquired
articles, the very thing happens which that right is intended to prevent:
namely, all articles which have been, and continually are being, produced
by working people. are possessed by, and as they are produced are
continually taken by, those who have not produced them.
So llIe assertion that the right of property secures for the workers the
possibility of enjoying the products of their labour is evidently yet more
untrue lhan the assertion concerning property in land, and it is based on the
same soph istry. First, the fruit of their toil is unjustly and violently taken
from the workers, and then the law steps in, and these very articles are
declared to be the absolute property of those who have stolen them.
Property, for instance a factory, acquired by a series of frauds and by
taking advantage of the workmen, is considered a result of labour. and is
held sacred; but the Jives of those workmen who perish at work in that
factory. and the it labour, are not considered to be the property of the
factory owner. ifhe, taking advantage of the necessities of tI�'! wo;'"ers. has
bound them down inamannerconsidered legal. Hund;edsofthousandsof
135
bushels of com, collected from the peasants by usury and by a series of
extortions, are considered to be the property of the merchant, while the
growing com raised by the peasants is considered to be the property of
someone else, who has inherited the land from a grandfather or great·
grandfather who took it from the people. It s
i said that the law defends
equally the property of the mill owner, of lhe capitalist, of the landowner,
and ofthe factory orcountry labourer. Theequality of the capitalist and of
the worker is like the equality of two fighters, one of whom has his arms
tied whilst the other has weapons, but to both of whom certain rules are
applied with strict impartiality while they fight. So all the explanations of
thejusticeand necessity ofthe three sets oflaws which produce slavery are
as untrue as were the explanations fonnerly given of the justice and
necessity of serfdom. All those three sets of laws are nothing but the
establishmentof that new form ofslavery which hasreplaced theoldfonn.
People formerly established laws enabling some people to buy and sell
other people, and to own them, and to make them work, and slavery
existed. Now people have established laws that men may not use land that
is considered to belong to someone else, must pay the taxes demanded of
them, and mustnot use articles considered to be theproperty ofothers· and
we have the slavery of our times.
XI
Laws - The Cause Of Slavery
The slavery ofour times results from three sets of laws: those about
land, taxes and property. And therefore all the attempts ofthose who wish
to improve the position of the workers are inevitably, though uncon­
sciously, directed aga inst those three legislations.
One set of people would repeal taxes weighing on the working
classes, and transfer them on to the rich; others propose to abolish the right
of private property in land, and auempts are being made to put this in
practice both in New Z ealand and in one of the American States: the
limitation of landlords' rights in Ireland is a move in the same direction;
a third set, the Socialists, propose to communalize the means of produc­
tion, to tax incomes and inherilaflces, and to limit the rights of capitalist
employers. It would therefore seem as though the legislative enactments
which cause slavery were being repealed, and that we may therefore
expect slavery to be abolished in this way. But we need only look more
closely at the conditions under which the aboliticn of these legislative
enactments is accomplished or proposed, to be convinced that not only the
practical but even the theoretical projects for the improvement of the
workers' position, are merely replacing one legislat:w p,...u
...,j cillg slavery
136
by another establishing a newer fonn of slavery. Thus, for instance, those
who abolish taxes and duties on the poor, first abolishing direct dues, and
then transferring the burden of taxation from the poor to the rich,
necessarily have to retain, and do retain, the law creating private property
of land, of the means of production, and of other articles on to which the
whole burden oftaxes is shifted. The retention ofthe Jaw concerning land
and property keeps the workers in slavery to the landowners and the
capitalists, even though the workers arc freed from taxes. Those who, like
Henry Georgeand his supporters, would abolish the laws creating private
property of land, propose new laws imposing an obligatory rent on the
land. And this obligatory land rent will necessarily create a new form of
slavery; because a man compelled to pay rent or single·tax may at any
failure ofthecrops or other misrortune, have to borrow money from a man
who has someto lend,and he will again lapseintoslavery. Those who, like
the Socialists, want to abolish the legislation of property in land and in
means of production, not only retain the legislation of taxes, but must,
moreover, inevitably introduce laws of compulsory labour . that is, they
must re-establish slavery in its primitive form.
So, this way or thal, all the practical and theoretical repeals ofcertain
laws maintaining slavery in one form, have always replaced it by new
legislation creating slavery in another and fresh fonn.
What happens is something like what a jailer might do who shifted
a prisoner'schains from his neckto thearms,and from thearms to the legs,
or tookthem offand substituted bolts and bars. All the improvements that
have hitherto taken place in the position of the workers have been of this
kind.
The laws giving a master the right to compel his slaves to do
compulsory work were replaced by laws allowing the masters to own all
the land. The laws allowing all the land to become the private property of
the masters may be replace d by taxation laws, the control of the taxes
being in the hands of the masters. The taxation laws may be replaced by
others defending the right of private property in articles of use and in the
means ofproduction. The laws maintaining property in land and in articles
of use and means of production, may, as is now proposed, be replaced by
the enacunent of compulsory labour.
So it is evident that the abolition of one fonn of legalization produc­
ing the slavery ofour time, whether taxes, or land ownership, or property
in articles of use, or in the means of production, will not destroy slavery
but will only repeal one of its forms, which will immediately be replaced
by a new one, as was the case with the abolition of chattel slavery and of
serfdom, and with the repeals of taxes. Even the abolition of all three
groups of laws together will not abolish slavery, but evoke a new and
previously unknown fonn of it, which is now already beginning to show
itself and to shackle the freedom or labour by legis;ation concerning the
137
hours of work, the age and state of health of the workers, as well as by
demanding obligatory attendance at schools, by deductions for old-age
insurance or accidents, by all the measures of faclOry inspection, etc. All
this is nothing but transitional legislation preparing a new and as yet
umried fonn of slavery.
So it becomes evident that the essence of slavery lies not in those
three roots oflegislation on which it now rests, and not even in this or that
legislative enacunent, but in the fact that legislation exists - that there are
people who have power to decree laws profitable for themselves, and as
long as people have that power, there will be slavery.
Fonnerly. it was profitable forpeople to have chattel slaves; and they
made laws about chanel slavery. AfterWards it became profitable to own
land, to take taxes, and to keep things one had acquired; and they made
laws correspondingl y. Now it is profitable for people to maintain the
existing direction and division of labour; and they are devising such laws
as will compel people to work under the present apportionment and
division of labour. Thus the fundamental cause of slavery is legislation:
the fact that there are people who have the power to make laws. What is
legislation? and what gives people !.he power to make laws?
XII
The Essence Of Legislation Is Organized Violence
What is legislation? And what enables people to make laws? There
exists a whole science,even moreancient, mendacious and confused than
political economy, the servants of which in the course of centuries have
wrincn millions ofbooks (for the most part contradicting one another) to
answer t hese questions. The aim of this science. as ofpolitical economy.
is not to explain what now exists and what ought to be, butrather toprove
that what now exists, is what ought to be. So it happens that in this science
of jurisprudence, we find very many dissertations about rights, about
object and subject, about the idea ofa State, and other such matters, which
are unintelligible both to the students and lO lhe teachers of this science;
but we get no clear reply to the question: What is legislation?
According to science, legislation is the expression of the will of the
whole people; but as those who break the laws, or who wish to break them
and only refrain from doing so through fear ofbeing punished, are always
more numerous th at those who wish to carry out the code. it isevident that
legislation can certainly not be considered as the expression ofthe will of
the whole people.
For instance. there are laws about not dareaging telegraph posts;
about showing respect to certain people; about esch man perfonning
138
military service, or serving as a juryman; about not taking certain goods
beyond a certain frontier. 0 r about not using land considered to be the
property of someone else; about not making money tokens; not using
articles which areconsidered to be the property ofothers, and about many
matters.
All these laws and many others are extremely complex, and may have
been passedfrom most diverse motives, but notoneof them expresses the
will of the whole people. There is but one characteristic common to all
these laws. namely, th at ifany man does not fulfil them. those who have
made these laws will send anned men, and the armed men will beat.
deprive of freedom, or even kill, the man who does not obey the law.
If a man does not wish to give. as taxes, such part of the produce of
his labouras is demanded ofhim, anned men will come and take from him
whatis demanded, and ifhe resists he will be beaten, deprived offreedom,
and sometimes even killed. The same will happen to a man who begins
tomake useofland considered tobe theproperty ofanother. The same will
happen to a man who makes use of things he wants to satisfy his
requirements or to facilitate his work. If these things are considered to be
theproperty of someone else, armed men will come and will deprive him
ofwhat he has taken, and, ifhe resists, they will beat him, deprive him of
liberty. or even kill him. The same thing will happen to anyone who will
notshow respect to those whom it s i decreed that we are to respect,and to
him who will not obey the demand that he should go as a soldier, or who
makes money tokens.
Forevery non-fulfLIment of the established laws there is punishment:
the offender is subjected, by those who make the laws, to blows, impris­
onment or even loss of life.
Many constitutions have been devised, beginning with the English
and theAmerican, and ending with the Japanese and the Turkish, accord­
ing to which people are to believe that aU laws established in theircountry
are established at th eir desire. But everyone knows that not only in
despotic countries, butalso in thecountries nominally most free -England.
America, France and others - the laws are made not by the will of all. but
by the will ofthose who have power, and therefore always and everywhere
are such as are profitable to those who have power; be they many, or few,
or only oneman. Everywhere and aIways the laws areenforcedby the only
means that has compelled, and still compels, some people toobey the wiU
ofothers, by blows, bydeprivation oflibcrty and by murder. There can be
no other way.
It cannot be otherwise. For laws are demands to obey certain rules,
and to compel some people to obey certain rules can only be done by
blows, by deprivation of liberty and by murder. If there are laws. there
must be the force that can compel people to obey them. There is only one
force that can compel people to obey rules (to conform to the will of
139
olhers), and lhat is violence; not the simple violence which people use on
one anolher in moments of passion, but the organized violence used by
people who have power, in order to compel others to obey lhe laws that
lhey, lhe powerful, have made, n
i other words. to do lheir will.
The essence oflegislature does not lie n
i subject or object, in rights.
orin the ideaofthedominion oflhe collective will ofthe people, or in olher
such indefiniteandconfusedconditions, but Iies in thefactthatpeople who
wi eld organized violence have power to compel olhers to obey them and
do as they like.
So the exact and irrefutable definition of legislation, intelligible to
aU, is that: Laws are rules, made by people who govern by means of
organized violence, for non-compliance with which lhe rwn-complier is
subjected to blows, to loss ofliberry, or even to being murdered.
This definition furnishes the reply to the question: What is it that
renders it possible for people to make laws? The same thing makes it
possible to establish laws, as enforces obedience to !.hem, namely. organ­
ized violence.
XIII
What Are Governments? Is It Possible To Exist
Without Governments?
Thecause of Ihe miserable condition of the workers is slavery. The
cause of slavery is legislation. Legislation rests on organized violence.
It follows that an improvement in the condition of the people is
possible only through the abolition of organized violence.
'Butorganized violence is Government, and how can we live wilhout
Governments? WithoutGovernments there will bechaos,anarchy; all the
achievements of civilization will perish and people will revert to their
primitive barbarism.'
Itis usuaJ, not only for those to whom the existing order is profitable,
but even for those to whom it is evidently unprofitable, but who are so ac­
customed to it that they cannot imagine life wilhout governmental vio­
lence, to say we must not dare to touch the existing order of things. The
destruction of Government will, they say, produce the greatest misfor­
tunes, riot. theft and murder, tili finaJly the worst men will again seize
power and enslave all the good people. The fact is that all lhese things,
rioiS, thefts and murders, followed by the rule of the wicked and the
enslavement of the good, is what has happened, and is happening, so the
anlil;ipation that the disturbance of the existing order will produce riots
and disorder doesnot prove the present order to be good.
'Only touch the present orderand the greatestevils will follow.' Only
140
touch one brick ofthe thousand bricks piled imoa narrow column, several
yards high, and all the bricks will wmbledown and smash! But the fact that
any brick extracted or any push administered, will destroy such a column
and smash the bricks, certainly does not prove it to be wise to keep the
bricks in such an unnatural and inconvenicm posiLion. On theconuary, it
shows thatbricks should not be piled in such a column, but that they should
be arranged so that they may lie firmly, and so that they can be made use
of without destroying the whole strucwre. It is the same with the present
State organizations. The State organization is extremely artificial and
unstable, and the fact that the leastpush may destroy it, not only does not
prove that il is necessary, but on the contrary shows that, if once upon a
time it was necessary. it is now absolutely unnecessary, and is therefore
harmful and dangerous.
It is hannful and dangerous because the effect of this organization on
aU the evil that exists in society is not to lessen and correct, but rather to
strengthen and conrum, that evil. It is strengthened and confumed, by
being eithe r justified and put in attractive forms, or concealed.
All that well-being of the people which we see in so-caJled well­
governed States, ruled by violence, is but an appearance. a fiction.
Everything that would disturb the externaJ appearance of well-being, all
the hungry people, the sick , the revoltingly vicious, are all hidden away
where they cannot be seen. But the fact that we do notscc them, does not
show that they do not exist; on Ihecontrary, !.he more they are hidden, the
more there will be of them, and lhe more cruel towards thcmwill those be
who are the cause of their condition. It is true that every interruption, and
yet more every stoppage, ofthe organired violence of Government action
disturbs this external appearance of well-being in our life, but such
disturbance does not produce the disorder, but rather displays what was
hidden and makes possible its amendment.
Until say almost the end of the nineteenth cemury, people thought
and believed that they could not live withoutGovernments. But life flows
onward, and the conditions of life. and people's views, change. Notwith­
standing the efforts 0 f Governments to keep people in !.hat childish
condition in which an injured man fee1sas ifit were better for him to have
someone to complain to, people, especially the labouring people, both in
Europe and in Russia, are more and morc emerging from childhood and
beginning to understand the true conditions of their life.
'You tell us that but for you we shall be conquered by neighbouring
nations: by the Chinese or the Japanese', men of the people now say, 'but
we read the papers and know that no-one is threatening to attack us, and
thzt it is only you . who govern us, who for some reason unintelligible to
us exasperate each other, and then, under pretence of defending your
people, ruin us with taxes for the maintenance of the neet, for annaments
or for strategic railways. which are only required to gratify your ambition
141
endvanity; and men you arrange wars with one another, as you havenow
done against me peaceful Chinese. You say that you defend landed
property for our advantage, but your defence has mis effect: mat all the
land either has passed or is passing into the control of rich banking
companies which do not labour, while we, the immense majority of the
people, are being deprived of land and left in the power of those who do
not labour. You, with your laws of landed propcrty,do not defend landed
property, but take it from those who work it. You say you secure for each
man me produce of his labour, but you do just the reverse: all those who
produce articles of value are thanks to your pseudo-protection, placed in
,
such a position that they not only never receive me value oftheirlaboor,
but are all their lives long in complete subjection to, and in the power of,
non-workers.'
Thus do people, at the end ofthe century, begin to understand and to
speak, and this awakening from the lethargy in which Governments have
kept them, is continuing and rapidly growing. Wimin the last five or six
years, public opinio n among the common folk, not only in the towns but
also in the villages, and not only in Europe but also among us in Russia,
has altered amazingly.
It is said that without Governments we should not have those
enlightening, educational and public institutions, that are needful for all.
But why should we suppose this? Why think thatnon-officialpeople
could not arrange their life forthemselves, as well as Government people
can arrange it not for themselves but for others?
We see, on the contrary, that in the most diverse mauerspeople in our
times arrange their own lives incomparably better than those who govern
them arrange things for them. Without the least help from Government,
and often in spite 0 f the interference ofGovernment, people organize all
sorts of social undertakings - workmen's unions, co-operative societies,
railway companies, artels ( NOTE No 63) and syndicates. If collections
forpublic works are needed, why shouldwe suppose that freepeoplecould
not, without violence, voluntarily collectthe necessary means, and carry
out anything mat is now carried out by means of taxes, if only the
undertakings in question are really useful for everybody? Why suppose
that there cannot be tribunals wilhout violence? Trial, by people trusted
by thedisputants, hasaiways existed and will exist,and needs no violence.
Wearesodepravedby long-continued slavery, that wecan hardly imagine
adminisuation without violence. Yet, that is not entirely true: Russian
communes migrating to distant regions, where our Government leaves
them alone, arrange their own taxation, administration, tribunals and
police, and always prosper until governmental violence interferes with
their administration. In lhe same way there is no reason to suppose that
people could not. by common agreement, decide how the l&nd is to be
apportioned for use.
142
I have known people-Cossacksoflhe Urals - who have lived without
acknowledging private propeny in land. There was such well-being and
order in theircommune as does not exist in society where landed property
is defended by violenc e. I know too of communes that live without
acknowledging therightofindividuals toprivatepropeny. Within my ree·
oIlection the whole Russian peasamry did not accept the idea of landed
property (NOTE No 64 ). The defence of landed propeny by governmen­
tal violence notonlydoes not abolish the struggle for landed property, but,
on the contrary, intensifies that struggle, and in many cases causes it.
Were itnotforthe defenceoflanded propeny and its ccnsequentrise
in price,peoplewould notbecrowded intosuch narrow spaces,butwould
scauerover the free land of which there is still so much in theworkl. But,
as it is,co ntinual struggle goes on for landed property; a struggle with lhe
weapons Government furnishes by means of its laws of landed property.
In this struggle it is notthose who work on the land, but always lhose who
take part in governmental violence, who have the advantage.
It is the same with reference to things produced by labour. Things
really produced by a mans's own labour, and that he needs, are always
protectedby custom, by publicopinion, by feelingsofjustice andreciproc­
ity, and they do not n eed to be protected by violence.
Tens ofthousands ofacres offorest landbelonging to one proprietor,
while thousands of people close by have no fuel, need protection by
violence. So, too, do factories and works where several generations of
workmen have been defrau ded and arestill being defrauded. Yetmore do
hundreds of thousands of bushels of grain, belonging to one owner, who
has held them back to sell at triple the price n
i time offamine. But no man,
howeverdepraved,excepta rich manoraGovernmentofficiai, wouldtake
from a countryman living by his own labour the harvest he has raised, or
the cow he has bred, and from which he gets milk for his children, or lhe
sokhas (NOTE No 65), the scythes and spades he has made and uses. If
even a man were found who did lake from another articles the latter had
made and required, such a man would rouse against himself such indigna­
tion from everyone living in similar circumstances, mal he would hardly
find his action profitable for himself. A man so immoral as to do it under
such circumstances, would be sure to do it under the strictest system of
property defenceby violence. It is generally said, 'Only au.emptto abolish
the rights ofproperty in land, and in theproduceoflabour,and no-one will
take the trouble to work, lacking assurance thal he will be able to retain
what he has produced.' We should say just L�e opposite: the defence by
violence of lhe rights of property immorally obtained, which is now
customary, if it has not quite destroyed. has considerably weakened
people's natural consciousness ofjustice ir. the matter of using articles. It
has weakened lhe natural and innate right of p�rty, without which hu­
manity couldnotexist, and which has always existed and stille:dstsamong
143
aU men.
There is. thererorc. no reason to anticipate thatpeople will not be able
to arrangethcir lives withoutorganized violence. orcourse, itmay besaid
that horses and bulls must be guided by the violence or rational beings.
men; but why must men be guided, not by some higher beings, but by
peoplesuch as themselves? Why oughtpeopletobe subjectto the vio lence
ofjust those men whoare in power at a given time? What proves that these
people are wiser than those on whom they inflict violence?
The fact that they allow themselves to use violence towards human
beings, indicates that they are not more, but less wise than those who
submit to them. The examinations in China for the office of Mandarin do
not, we know. ensure that the wisest and best people should be placed in
power. And this is just as little ensured by inheritance, or the' whole
machinery of promotions in rank, or the elections n
i constitutional
countries. On the contrary, power is always seized by those who are less
conscientious and less moral.
It is said, 'How can people live without Government, without
violence?' But it should rather be asked, 'How can rational people live,
aclcnowledging the vital bond of their social lire to be violence, and not
reasonable agreement?'
One or the other: either people are rational beings or they are
irrational beings. If they are irrational beings, then they are all irrational,
and then everything among them is decided by violence, and there is no
reason why certain people should, and others should not, have a righl to
use violence. In that case, governmental violence has nojustification. But
ifmen are rational beings, then their relations should be based on reason,
and not on the violence of those who happen to have seized power. In that
case, again, governmental violence has no justification.
XIV
How Can Governments Be Abolished?
Slavery results from laws, laws arc made by Governments, and
therefore, people can only be freed from slavery by the abolition of
Governments, But how can Governments be abolished?
All attempts to gel rid of Governments by violence have, hitheno,
always and everywhere resulted only in this: that in place of the deposed
Governments, new ones established themselves, often more cruel than
those they replaced.
Besides !hese past attempts to abolish Governments by violence,
according to the Socialist theory, the coming abolition of the rule of the
capitalists, the communali7..ation of the means of pr.;duction and the new
144
economic order of socie ty is also to be instituted by a fresh organization
of violence, and will have to be maintained by the same means. So attempts
to abolish violenceby violence, neither have in the past, nor, evidently, can
in the future, emancipate people from violence, nor, consequently, from
slavery.
It cannot be otherwise.
Apart from outbursts of revenge or anger, violence is
used only in order 10 compel some people against their own will to do the
will of others. But being compelled todo what otherpeople wish, against
your own will, is slavery. There fore as long as any violence, designed to
compel some people to do the will of others, exists. there will be slavery.
All the attempts to abolish slavery by violence areke
il extinguishing
nre with ftre. stopping water with water, or nlling up one hole by digging
another.
Therefore the means of escape from slavery, if such means exist,
must be found not in setting up fresh violence, but in abolishing whatever
renders governmental violence possible. The possibility of governmental
violence, like every 0 ther violence perpeuated by a small number of
people upon a larger number, has always depended, and still depends.
simply on the fact that the small number are armed, while !he larger
number are unarmed, or that the small number are beuer armed than the
larger number.
That has been the case in all theconquesLS: in this way the Greeks, the
Romans, the Knights (NOTE No 66) and Pizarros conquered nations,and
it is thus that people are now conquered in Africa and Asia In this same
way. in times of peace, all GovcmmenLS hold their subjects in subjection.
As of old so now, people rule over other people only because some
are armed and others are not.
In older times, the warriors, with their chiefs, fell upon the defence·
less inhabitanLS, subdued them and robbed them; and all divided the spoils
in proportion to theirparticipation. courage and cruelty; and each warrior
saw clearly t hat the violence he perpetrated was profitable to him. Now,
armed men taken chiefly from the working classes attack defenceless
people: men on strike, rioters or the inhabitants of other countries, and
subdue them, and rob them ofthe fruits of their labour, not for themselves,
the assailants, but for the people who do not even take part in the
subjugation.
The difference between the conquerors and the GovernmenLS is only
that the conquerors themselves with the soldiers attacked the unarmed
inhabitanLS, and, in cases of insubordination, carried out their threats to
torture and to kill; w hile the GovemmenLS, in cases ofinsubordination, do
not themselves torture or execute the unarmed inhabitants. but oblige
others to do it, who have been deceived and speciruly brutalized for the
purpose, and who are chosen rrom among the very people on whom the
145
Government inflicts violence. Thus violence was formerly inflicted by
personal effon. by the courage, cruelty and agility of the conquerors
themselves, but now violence is inflicted by means of fraud.
The small number who rule, on obtaining power from their predeces­
sors insta1led by conquest,say to the majority. 'There are a 1000fyou, but
you arestupidand uneducated, and cannOleither govern yourselves or or­
ganize your pubic l affairs, and therefore we will assume L'lOse tasks
ourselves; we will protect you from foreign foes, and establish and uphold
internal order among you; we will set up courts of justice, arrange and
maintain public institutions foryou: schools, roads and the postal service;
and, in general, we will take care of your well-being; and in return for all
this, you only have to fulfil certain slight demands which we make; and,
among other things, you must give into our complete control a small part
of your incomes, and you must yourselves enter the armies which are
needed for your own safety and government.'
Most people agree to this, not because they have weighed up the
advantages and disadvantages of these conditions, they never have a
chance to do that, butbecause from their very birth they have found them­
selves in conditions such as these.
If doubts suggest themselves to some as to whether all this is
necessary, each thinks only about himself, and fears to suffer ifhe refuses
to accept these conditions; each one hopes to take advantage of them for
his own profit, and c·veryone agrees, thinking that by paying a small part
of his means to the Government, and by consentingto military service, he
cannot do himself very much harm.
But as soon as the Governments have the money and the soldiers,
instead of fulfilling their promises to defend their subjects from foreign
enemies, and to arrange things for their benefits, they do all they can to
provoke the neighbou ring nations and to produce war. They not only do
not promote the internal well-being of their people, but they ruin and
corrupt them.
In the Arabian Nightsthere is a Story of a traveller who, being cast
upon an desert island, found a little old man with withered legs siUing on
the ground by the side ofa stream. The old man asked the traveller to take
him on his shoulders and carry him over the stream. The traveller
consented, but no sooner was the old man settled on the traveller's
shoulders than hetwined his legs round thetraveller's neck, and would not
getoffagain. Havingcontrol ofthe traveller, the old man drove him about
as he liked, plucked fruit from the trees, and ate himself, not giving any to
his bearer. and abused him in every way.
That is exactly what happens with the people who give soldiers and
money to the Governments. With the money the Governments buy guns,
and hire or train subservient, brutali7.cd, military commanders, who, by
means ofan artful system ofstupefaction, perfected in the course ofages,
146
and called discipline. tum those who have been taken as soldiers into a
disciplined army. Discipline consists in this, thatpeople who are subjected
to this training, and remain under it for some time, are completely deprived
of all that is valuable in human life, and of man's chief attribute, rational
freedom. They become submissive, machine-like instruments of murder
in the hands of their organized. hierarchical stratocracy. It is in this
disciplined army that the essence of the fraud dwells, which gives to
modemGovemmentsdominionover the peoples. When theGovemments
havein theirpowerthis instrumentofviolenceand murder, lhat possesses
no will of its own, the whole people are in their hands, and they do not let
them go again, and not only prey upon them, but also abuse them, instill­
ing into the people, by means of a pseudo-religious and patriotic educa­
tion, loyalty to, and even adoration of, themselves, the very men who
torment the whole people by keeping them in slavery.
Itis not for nothing thatall thekings, emperorsandpresidentsesteem
discipline so highly, are so afraid of any breach of discipline, and attach
the highest importance to reviews, manoeuvres, parades, ceremonial
marches and other such nonsense. They know that it all maintains
discipline, and that not only their power but their very existence depends
on discipline.
Disciplined armies are the means by which they, without using their
own hands, accomplish the greatest atrocities, the possibilityofperpetrat­
ing which gives them power over the people.
Theonly meanstherefore to destroyGovernmentsis not by force,but
by theexposureofthis fraud. It isnecessarypeopleshould understand two
things. Firstly, that in Christendom there is no need to protect the people.
one from ano ther; that the enmity of the peoples, one to another, is
produced by the Governments themselves; and that armies are only
needed for the advantage of the small number who rule; for the people it
is not only unnecessary but is in the highest degree harmful. serving as an
inSlIUment to enslave them. Secondly, that the discipline which is so
highly esteemed by all the Governments is the greatest crime that man can
commit, and is a clear indication ofthe criminality of the aims ofGovern­
ments. Discipline is the suppression ofreason and of freedom n i man, and
can have no aim other thanpreparation for the performance ofcrimes such
as no man can commit while in a nonnal condition. It is not even needed
forwar when the war isdefensiveand national, as the Boers have recently
shown. It is wanted. and wanted only, for the purpose indicated by
Wilhelm II: for the perpetration of the greatest crimes - fratricide and
parricide.
The terrible old man who sat on the traveller's shoulders behaved as
the Governments do. He mocked him and insulted him, knowing that as
long as he sat on the traveller's neck the latter was in his power.
It is just this fraud, by means of which a small number of unworthy
147
people, called the Govemmcn.l, have power over the people, and notonly
. and until he has understood what a Church is, he
impoverish them, butdowhatls the most harmful ofall acuons,perverting
whole generations from childhood upwards; it is just this terrible fraUd
which should beexposed in order that the abolition ofGovemmentandor
the slavery that results from it may become possible.
The Gennan writer, Eugen Schmiu, in the newspaper Olllle StQlU
which he published in Budapest, wrote an article that was profoundly �
and bold, not only in expression but in thought. In it he showed that
Governments, justifying their existence on the ground that they ensure a
certain kind ofsafety to their subjects. are like the CaIabrian robber-chief
who collected a regular laX from all who wished to travel in safety along
the highways. Schmitt was committed for trial for that article, but was
acquitted by the jury.
We are so hypnotized by the Government that such a comparison
seems to us an exaggeration, a paradox or a joke; but in reality it is not a
paradox or a joke. The only inaccuracy in the comparison is that the
activity of all the Govern ments is many times more inhuman, and, above
all. more hannful, that the activity of the Calabrian robber. He generally
plundered the rich; they generally plunder the poor and protect those rich
men who assist in their crimes. The robber doing his work risked his life,
while the Governments risk nothing, but base their whole activity on lies
and deception. The robber did not compel anyone to join his band; the
Governments generally enrol their soldiers by force. All who paid the laX
to the robber had equal security from danger; but in the State, the more
anyone takes pan in the organized fraud. the more he receives not merely
of protection but a1so reward. Most of all, the emperors. kings and
presidents are protected (with their perpetual bodyguards), and they can
spend the largest share of the money collected from the tax-paying sub­
jects. Next in the scale of participation n
i governmental crimes come the
commandClS-in-chief, theministers, the heads ofpolice. governorsand so
on, down to the policemen, who are least protected, and who receive the
smallest salaries of all. Those who do not take any pan in the crimes of
Government, who refuse to serve, to pay taxes ortogo to law, arcsubjected
10 violence, as among the robbers. The robber does not intentionally
corrupt people; but the Governments. to accomplish their ends, corrupt
whole generations from childhood 10 manhood with false religious and
palriotic instruction. Above all, nOleven the most cruelrobber. no Stenka
Razin (NOTE No 67), no Canouchc (NOTE No 68), can becompared for
cruelty, pitilessness, and ingenuity in tonuring, I will not say with the
villain kings notorious for their cruelty, John the Terrible, Louis XI, the
Elizabeths, etc., but even with the present constitutional and liberal
Governments, with their solitary cells, disciplinary battalions. suppres­
sions of revoilS and their massacres in war.
Towards Governments. as towards Churches. it is impossible to feel
148
Iherwise than with veneration or aversion. Until a man has undersLood
o hat a Government is,
ion for those institutions. As long as he is guided
W
annot but feel a venerat
� y them , his vanity makes it necessary for him 10 think that what guides
is something primal, great and holy; butassoon as he understands that
primal and holy, but that it is a fraud
him
what guides him is not something
carried out by unworthy people, who, under the pretenceof guiding him,
make use of him for their own personal ends, he cannot but at once feel
aversion towards these people; and the more imponant the partof his life
that has been guided, the more aversion will he feel.
Peoplecannotbut feel this when they have undersLood wnalGovern­
ments are. People must feel that their participation in the criminal activity
'
of Governments, whether by giving part of their work in the form of
money. orby directparticipation in military service, is not, as is generally
supposed, an indiffe rent action but besides being harmful to oneself and
one's brothers, is a participation in the crimes unceasingly committed by
all Governments, and a preparation for new crimes which Governments,
by maintaining disciplined armies, are always planning.
The age of veneration for Governments, despite all the hypnotic
influence they enjoy to maintain their position, is, more and more, pass­
ing away. And it is time for people to undersumd that Governments not
only are notnecessary, butare harmful and highly immoral institutions. in
which an honest, self-respecting man cannot and must not take part, and
the advantages of which he cannot and should not enjoy.
And as soon as people clearly understand that. they will naturally
cease to take pan in such deeds, Le., cease to give the Governments
soldiers and money. And as soon as a majority ofpeople ceases to do this,
the fraud which enslav es people will be abolished.
Only in this way can people be freed from slavery.
XV
What Should Each Man Do?
'But all these are general considerations, and. whether
they are correct or not, they are inapplicable to life,' wilJ be the remark
made by people accustomed to their position, and who do not consider it
possible or desirable to change iL
'Tell us what to do, and how to organizc society?' is what people of
the well-to-do classes usually say.
They are so accustomed to their role of slave-owners that when there
is truk of improving the workers' condition. they at once begin. like our
serf-owners before the emancipation, to devise all sarIS of plans for their
149
slaves, butitnevecoccurs to them that they have no right todispose ofother
people; and that, if they really wish to do good to people, the only thing
they can and should do is to cease to do the evil they are now doing. That
evil is very defmite and clear. It is notmerely that they employ compulsory
slave-labour,anddonot wish to ceasefrom employing it, butthatthey also
take part in establishing and maintaining this compulsion oflabour. That
is what they should cease to do.
The working people are also perverted by their compulsory slavery
thatit seems tomostofthem that if their position isa bad one, it is the fault
of the masters, who pay them too liuie, and who own the means of
production. Itdoesnotenler their headsthattheirposition depends entirely
on themselves, and that, if only they wish to improve their own and their
brothers' position, and not merely each to do the best he can for himself,
themain thing for them to do is themselves toceasc todoevil. And the evil
they do is that, desiring to improve their material position by the very
means which have brought them into bondage, the workers, for the sake
of satisfying the habits they have adopted, sacrifice their human dignity
and freedom, and accept humiliating and immoral employment, or pr0-
duce unnecessary and harmful articles, and, above a1l, they maintain Gov­
emments, taking part in them by paying taxes, and by direct service, and
thus enslave themselves.
Inorderthat thestate of things may be improved, both the well-to-do
classes and the workers must understand that improvements cannot be
effected by safeguarding one's own interests. Service involves sacrifice,
and therefore, if peo pie really wish to improve the position of their
brother-men, and notmerely their own. they must bereadynot only to alter
the way oflife to which they are accustomed, and to lose thoseadvanlages
which they have held, but they must be prepared for an intense sbUggle,
not against Governments, but against themselves and their families. and
must be ready to suffer persecution for non-fulfilment of the demands of
Govemmenl
Therefore, the answer to the question: What must we de? is very
simple, and not merely theoretical, but always in the highest degree
applicableand practicable for eachman, though it is not what is expected
from those who, like pcople ofthe well-to-do classes, are fuUy convinced
that they are appointed to correct, not themselves, they are already good,
butotherpcople; and from those who, like the workmen, are sure that, not
they but only the capitalists, are to blame that theirposition is so bad, and
think that things can only be put right by taking from the capitalists the
things they use, and arranging it so that all may make use of those
conveniences of life which are now used only by the rich. The answer is
very definite, applicable and practicable, forit demands the activity ofthaI
one person, over whom each of us has real. rightful and unquestionable
power, namely, oneself; and it consists in this, that ifa man, whether slave
150
or slave-owner, really wishes to better not his position alone, but the
position of people in general, he must himself not do those wrong things
which enslave him and his brothers. In order not to do the evil which
produces misery for himselfand for his brothers, he should firstly neil/ler
willingly. nor JUlder compulsion, rake any part in Goverl1ml!nt activity,
and should therefore be neither a soldier, nor a Field-Marshal, nor a
Minister-of-State, nor a tax-collector, nor a witness, nor a."I alderman, nor
ajuryman, nor a governor, nor aMember ofParliament, nor, infact, hold
any office connected with violence. That is one thing.
Secondly, such a man should not volJUltarily pay taxes to Govern­
ments, either direcllyor indirectly; nor should he accep: money collected
by taxes. either as salary, or as pension. or as a reward, nor slwuld h e
make use of Government instilulions supported by taxes collected by
violencefrom the people That is the second thing.
.
Thirdly, such a man should not appeal 10 Government violencefor
the protection ofhispossessions in land or in other things, nor to defend
him andhis nearones.. but shouldonlypossess landandallproducts ofhis
own or otherpeople's toil, in sofar as others do not claim Ihemfrom him.
'But such an activity is impossible: to refuse all participation in Govern­
mentaffairs, means to refuse to live' - is whatpeople will say A man who
. •
refuses military service will be imprisoned; a man whodoes not pay taxes
will be p unished, and the tax will be collected from his property; a man
who, having no other means of livelihood, refuses Government service
will perish of hunger with his family; the same will befall a man who re­
jects Government protection for his property and his person; not to make
use of things that are taxed, or of Government institutions, is quite
impossible, as the most necessary articles are often laxed; and just in the
same way it is impossible to do without Government institutions, such as
the post and the roads.'
It is quite true that it is difficult for a man of our time to stand aside
from all participation in Government violence. But the fact that not
everyone can so arrange his life as not to participate, in some degree, in
Government viol ence, docs not at all show that it is not possible to free
oneself from it more and more. Not every man will have the strength to
refuse conscription, though there are, and will be, such men, but each man
can abstain from voluntarily entering the army, the JXllicc force, or the
judicial or revenue service, and can give the preference to a worse paid
private service rather than to a better paid public service.
Not every man will have the strength to renounce his landed estates,
though therearepeople who do that, but every mancan, understanding the
wrongfulness of such property, diminish its extent. Not every man can
renounce theposscssi on of capital, though there are some who do, or the
use ofarticlesdefendedby violence, but each man can, by diminishing his
own requirements. be less and less in need ofarticles which provoke other
151
people to envy. Not every official can renounce his Government salary,
!.hough !.here are men who prefer hunger to dishonest Government em­
ployment, but everyone can prefer a smaller salary to a larger one, for the
sake of having duties less bound up with violence. Not every one can
refuse to make use of Government schools ( NOTE No 69) !.hough there
aresome who do, but everyone can give !.he preference to private schools,
(NOTE No 70) and each can make less and less use of articles !.hat are
taxed, and of Government institutions.
BelWeen the existing order, based on brute force, and the ideal of a
society based on reasonable agreement confirmedby custom, there are an
inftnite number of steps, which mankind is ascending. and the approach
to the ideal is only accomplished to the extent to which people free
themselves from participation in violence, from taking advantage ofit, and
from being accustomed to it.
We do not know, and cannot guess, and still less can we like the
pseudo-scientific men foretell, in what way this gradual weakening of
Governmentsand emancipation of the people will come about; nor do we
know what new forms man's lif e will take as the gradual emancipation
progresses, but we do know certainly that the life of people who, having
understood the crimina1ity and harmfulness of the activity of Govern­
ments, strive not to make use of them or to take pan in them, will be quite
different, and more in accord with the law of tife and with our own
consciences, than the present life, in which people white themselves
participating in Government violence, and takingadvantage ofit, make a
pretenceofstruggling againstit, and try todestroy theoldviolenceby new
violence.
The chief thing is that the present arrangement of life is bad; about
that. all are agreed. The cause of the bad conditions and of the existing
slavery lies in the violence used by Governments. There is only one way
to abolish Governme nt violence; it is that people should abstain from
participating in violence. Therefore, whether it bedifficultor not to abstain
from participating in Government violence, and whether the good results
of such abstinence will, or will not, be soon apparent, are superfluous
questions: because to liberate people from slavery, there is only that one
way, and no other!
To what extent, and when, voluntary agreement confU1l1ed by cus­
tom will replace violence in each society and in the whole world, will
depend on thestrength and clearness ofpeople's consciousness, and on the
number ofindividuals who make this consciousness their own. Each of us
is a separate person, and each can be a participatant in the general
movement ofhumanity by his greateror lesser clearness of recognition of
the aim before us, or he can be an opponent of progress. Each will have to
make his choice; either to oppose the will ofGod, building upon the sands
the unstable house of his brief and illusive life, or to join in the eternal
152
deathless movement of true life in accord with God's will.
But perhaps I am mistaken, and the right conclusions to draw from
human history are not these, and the human race is not moving towards
emancipation from slavery; perhaps it can be proved that violence is a
necessary factor of progres s, and that the State with its violence is a
necessary form oflife, and that itwill be worse for people ifGovemments
areabolished, and ifthedefence ofour persons and property is abolished.
Let us grant it to be so, and say that all the foregoing reasoning is
wrong; butbesides the general considerations about the life ofhumanity,
each man has also to face the question ofhis own life, and. notwithstanding
any considera tions about the general laws of life, a man cannot do what
he admits to be, not merely harmful, but wrong.
'Very possibly the reasonings showing the State to be a necessary
form ofthe developmentofthe individual, and Government violence to be
necessary for the goodof society, can all bededuced from history, and are
aUcorrect.· eachhonestand sincere man ofour time will reply. 'butmurder
is an evil. That I know more certainly than any reasonings; by demanding
that I should enter the army, or pay for hiring and equipping soldiers. or
for buying cannons and building battleships, you wish to make me an
accomplice in murder, and that I cannot and not will be. Neitherdo I wish
to, nor can I, make use of money you have collected from hungry people
with threats of murder; nor do I wish to make use of land or capital
defended by you, because I know that your defence of it rests on murder.
I could do these things when I did not understand all their criminal­
ity, bUlonce I have seen it, l cannotavoid seeing it. and can no longer take
pan in these things.
I know that we are all so bound up by violence that it is difficult to
avoid it altogether, but I will, nevertheless, do all I can, notto take part in
it: I will not be an accomplice to it. and will try not to make use of what
is obtained and defended by murder.
I have but one life, and why should I, in this brief life of mine. act
contrary to the voice of conscience and become an accomplice in your
abominable deeds? I cannot. and I will nOl
Whatwillcome ofthis, I do notknow. Only, I think no harm can result
from acting as my conscience demands.'
So, in our time, should each honest and sincere man reply to all the
arguments about the necessity of Governments and of violence. and to
every demand or invitation to take part in them.
The conclusion to which general reasoning should bring us, is thus
confU1l1ed to each individual, by that suprcme and unimpeachable judge,
the voice of conscience.
153
XVI each individual man ofour time. Ifa man ofour day has once understood
An Afterword that every defenc e ofproperty or person by violence is obtained only by
threatening to murder or by murdering, he can no longer, with a quiet

'But this is again the same old sennon: on the one hand, urging the conscience, make use of that which is obtained by murder or by threat of

destruction of the present order of things without putting anything in its murder. and still less can he take part in the murder, or in threatening to

place. and, on the other hand, exhorting to non-action,' is what many will murder. So, what is wanted to free people from their misery is also needed

say an reading what I have wrillen. 'Government action is bad, so is the for the satisfaction of the moral consciousness of every individual. For

action of the landowner and ofthe businessman; equally badis the activity each individual. therefore. there can be no doubt that both for the general

of the Socialist and ofthe revolutionary Anarchist; that is to say. all real,
good. and to fulfil the law of his life, he must neither take part in violence.

practical activities are bad, and only some son of moral, spiritual, nor justify it, nor make use of it.

indefinite activity. which brings everything to utter chaos and inaction, is

good.' Thus, I know, many serious and sincere people will think and
speak!
What seems to people mostdisturbing in the idea ofnon-violence, is
that property will not be protected, and that each man will, therefore, be
able to take from another man what he needs or merely likes, and go
unpunished. To people accUSLOmcd to the defence of property and person
by violence, it seems that without such defence there will be perpetual
disorder, a constant struggle of everyone against everyone else.
I will not repeat what I have said elsewhere to show that the defence
of property by violence does not lessen, but increases. this disorder. But
allowing that in the absence of defence disorder may occur, what are
people to do who hav e understood the cause of thecalamities from which
they are suffering?
Ifwe have understood that we are ill from drunkenness, we must not
continue to drink hoping to mend matters by drinking moderately, or
taking medicines that shortsighted doctors give us.
It is the same with our social sickness. If we have understood that we
are ill because somepeople use violence on others, we cannot improve the
position of society either by continuing to support the Government
violence that exists, or by introducing a fresh kind of revolutionary or
Socialistviolence. That might have been done as long as the fundamentaJ
cause ofpeople's misery was not clearly seen. Butas soon as it has become
indubitably clear thatother people suffer from the violence done by some
to others, it becomes impossible to improve the position by continuing the
oldviolence, orby introducinga new kind. As thesick man suffering from
alcoholism has only one way to be cured · by refraining from intoxicants
which arethecauseof this illness, so there is only one way to free men from
the evil arrangement of society, and that is to refrain from violence, the
cause of the suffering, from preaching violence, and from in any way
justifying violence.
Not only is this the only way to deliver people from their ills. but we
must also adopt it, because it coincides with !.he moral consciousness of

154 155
O n Social ism,

S t n t e a nd Ch ri st i a n

ON SOCIALISM,
STATE AND
CHRISTIAN
(1900)
Loo/cing Backwards i s excellent (NOTE No 71). One lhing i s bad,
namely, the Socialist, Marxian idea that ifonedoes wrong for a very long
time, good will ensue of its ow n accord. 'Capital is accumulated in the
hands ofa few; it will end by being held by one. All trades-unions will be
also united into one. There are capital and labour - divided. Authority or
revolution will unite them, and all will be well.' The chief po int is that
nolliing in our civilization will diminish, nothing recede; there will be the
same mansions. the same gasuonomic dinners. sweets, wines, carriages,
horses - only everything will be accessible to all.
Jtis incomprehensiblethat theydonotsee this to beimpossible. Take
forinstance the luxuries ofthe house oryasoayaPolyana, and divide them
among the peasams. It can't be done. They would be of no use to them.
Luxury mu stbe given up. NOthing will do SO long as violence. capital and
invention are directed towards that which is unnecessary (NOTE No 72).
And in order to get at what is necessary for the masses, everything must
be tested.
But the chief thing is that we must be ready to renounce all the
improvements of our civilization, rather than allow those cruel inequali.
ties which constitute our scourge. If I really love my brother, then I shall
not hesitate to deprive myself of a drawing-room, in order to shelter him
when he is homeless. As it is, we say that we wish to sheJter our brother,
but only on condition that our drawing-room remain free for receptions.
We must dccide whom we will serve - God or mamm on. To serve both is
impossible. Ifwe are to serve God, we must be prepared to give up luxury
and civilization; being ready to introduce them again tomorrow, but only
for the common and equal use of all.
The most profitable social arrangement (economically and other­
wise) is one in which each thinks of the good of all. and devotes himself
unreservedly to the service of that welfare. If all were so disposed, each
158
would derive the greatest possible amount of good.
The most unprofitable grouping of people (economically and other­
wise) is that in which each works for himself only, depends and provides
forhimselfonly. If this were universally the case, ifthere were notat least
family gro ups in which people work for one another. I do not think men
could live.
However, people have not this yearning for the welfare of others; on
the contrary.each is striving for his own welfare. to the detrimentofothers.
But this state of affairs is so unprofitable that men speedily grow weak in
th e struggle. And now, by the very nature ofthings, it occursthatone man
overpowers others and makes them serve him. And the result is a more
profitable labour of men instead of the unprofitable individual one.
But in such associations of men there appear inequality a.'ld oppres­
sion. And therefore people are making attempts at equalization (such as
the attempts at co-operatives, communes) and at the liberation of men
(such as political rights). Equalization always leads todisadvantage ofthe
work done. In order to equali7,c the remuneration. the best workman is
brought down to the level of the worse; things in use are divided in such
a manner that no-one may have more, or better, than a nother, as in the
distribution of land; and this is why the divisions of land are being made
smaller and smaller, a practice disadvantageous to all. Liberation from
oppression by political rights is leading to even grcaterexcitementand ilI­
will. Thus at tempts at equalization and deliverance from oppression are
made, though without success; while the unification, the subjugation of
ever greaterand greater numbers of men by one is always increasing. The
greater the centralization of labour, the more prof itable it is, but also the
more striking and revolting is the inequality.
What, then. is to be done? Individual labour is unprofitable; central­
ized labour is more profitable, but the inequality and oppression are
terrible.
Socialists wish to remove inequality and oppression by assigning 311
capital to the nation, to humanity, so that the centralized unit will become
humanity itself. But, in the first place, not only humanity, but even nations
do not as yet admit the nec essit)' for this, and until they do. this system
cannotbeadopted by all humanity; sccondly,among men striving each for
his own welfare, it would be impossible to find men sufficiently disinter­
ested to manage the capital ofhumanity without taking advantage of their
power - men who would not again introduce into the world inequality and
oppression.
And so humanity stands unavoidably face to face with this dilemma:
eitherthe forward movement attained by the centralization of labour must
be renounced - there must even be retrogression rather than an infringe­
ment of equality or allowance of oppre ssion - or else it should be boldly
admitted that inequality and oppression must exist, that 'when wood is
159
chopped, splinterS will ny,' that there must be victims, and that Struggle
is the law of humanity. And this view is, in fact, adopted and suPporte d
by certain people. But, side by side with it, there resounds ever louder and
loudez theprotests of the dispossessed, the moans ofthe oppressed and the
voices ofthe indignant raised in thenameofthe ideal ofChrist, oflruth and
good; an ideal which is acknowledged by our society only officially.
But any child can see that the greatest advantage would result to alI
ifeveryone were ID interest himselfin the common cause, and therefore to
beprovided forasamemberofthe whole. As, however, this is nottheprac_
tice, as itis impossibl e toenter intothe soul ofeveryoneandcontrol it, and
as ID persuade everybodY is also impossible, orwould take infinitely long,
there remains but one other course: to assist the centralization of labour,
resulting from the subjugation ofthe many by the few, and atthe same time
to conceal from the dispossessed their inequality with the fortunate, to
wardofftheir attacks,and to help and afford charity to the oppressed. And
i creases more and mo
this is being done; but lhe concentration ofcapital n
re, and the inequality and oppression grow ever more cruel. And side by
side with this, enlightenment becomes more general, and the inequality
and thecruelty of oppression more evidentboth to oppressed and oppres­
sors.
Furthermovementin this direction is becoming impossibl� so those
who think little, who do not look to the logical conclusion, propose
imaginary remedies, consisting in the education of men in the conscious­
ness of the necessity of co-operation for t he sake of greater advantage.
This is absurd. IT the aim be great advantage, then everyone will get this
advantage for himself in the capitalistic organizations. And therefore
nothing except talk results from these attempts.
The organization most profitable for all will be auained not while
everyone's aim is profit, material welfare, but only when the aim of all is
that welfare which is independent of earthly well-being - when everyone
will say from his heart, 'Blessed are the poor, blessed are those that weep,
those who are persecuted.' Only when everyone secks, not material but
sriritual welfare, which always coincides with sacrifice. is verifiedby sac­
i.Zi.;e - only then will result the greatest welfare of all.
Take this simple illustration: people live IDgether; if they tidy up
regularly,clean upafl.er lhemselves.everyone has todo very little in order
to preserve the general cleanliness. But everyone is accustomed to have
things tidied andcleaned upaft er him; what, then, has he to do who wishes
to keep the place clean? He must work for all, must be immersed in dirt.
And ifhe will not do this, will work only forhimsclf, he will notaltain his
aim. Ofcourse it would beeasier to order all the others; but there is no-one
who can so order. There remains but one course - oneself ID work for
others.
And, indeed, in a world where allare living for themselves, to begin
160
to live for others a little is impossible; one must give oneself up entirely.
And it is just this that the conscience, enlightened by Christ, demands.
Why is it that the kingdom ofGod upon earth can be realized neither
by means of the existing governmental violence, nor by a revolution and
State Socialism, nor yet by those means preached by Christian Socialists:
propagandaand the gradually increas ingconsciousness ofmen that it will
be advantagCQus?
So long as Man's aim is the welfare of the personal life, no-one can
stop himselfin this strife for his welfare at the point where he gets his just
share -and at such demands from men which call for the welJ-being ofall.
No-one can do this, firstly , because it is impossible to find the point of
perfect justice in theses requests - men will always exaggerate their
demands; and secondly. because, even if it were possible to find the
measure of thejustdemands, man cannot put forward the demandfort hat
which is onlyjust, for he will never get it, but infinitely less. The demands
ofthose around him being regulated, not by justice, but by personal profit,
it is evident that as a matter offact the possession of material welfare wilJ
be attained by e very separate individual rather through competition and
struggle (as indeed is at present the case) than by just demands.
In order to attain justice, while people are striving after personal
welfare. it wouldbe necessary to be havepeople able ID define the measure
of worldly goods which should in justice fall to the share of each; and also
people with power to prevent men profiting by more than their just share.
There are, and always have been, men who have undertaken both these
duties; theyare our rulers. But up to the present time neither in monarchies
nor in republics have therebeen found men who, in defining the measure
of goods and distributing them amongst men, have not transgressed this
measure for themselves and their assistants, and thus spoilt the work they
W(!Te called 10, and undertook to do. So that this mean s is already recog­
nized by all to be unsatisfactory. And now some people say that it is
necessary ID abolish these Governments and to establish Governments of
another kind, chieny for the purpose of supervising economic affairs -
L'leseGovemments, ackno wledging that all capital andland are common
property, will administer the labour ofmen and distribute earthly welfare,
according to their labour, or, as some say. according to their needs.
All attempts at this kind oforganization, hitherto made, havebeen un­
successful. Buteven without such experiments, one can confident!y assert
that, with men strivingafterpersonalwelfare, such an organizationcannot
be realized, because those men - very many ofthem - who will supervise
economic affairs, will be men with strivings after personal welfare, and
will have to deal with similar men, and therefore in organizing and
maintaining the new economic order, they will inevitably promote their
own personal advantage as much as the fonner administrators. and will
161
thus destroy the meaning of the very work they are called 10 do.
Some will say, 'Choose men who arewise and pure.' But nonebut the
wise and pure can choose the wise and pure. And if all men were wiseand
pure, there would be no need of any organization, consequently the
impossibility of that which the revolutiona ry Socialists prof�s is felt by
all,even by themselves; and that is why itisoutofdateandhas no success.
And here we come 10 the third teaching - thatofChrislian Socialism,
which proposes propaganda aiming at influencing lIle consciousness of
men. But lIle success of this teaching is evidently possible only when a11
men will have the same clear conscious ness of the advantages of
community of labour, and when this consciousness will have simultane­
ously developed in aiL Butas it is evident that neither the one nor the other
can take place, the economic organization founded, not on competition
and suuggl e, but on community of interest cannot be realized.
Therefore there cannot be a beuerorganization than the present one,
so long as the aim of man is personal welfare.
The error of those who preach Christian Socialism consists in this,
that they draw from the Gospels only that practical conclusion of general
welfare which is not the aim pointed out by the Gospels, but only the
verification of the correctness of the means. The Gospels teach the way of
life, and by advancing along this path, it happens thal material welfare is
reached. It is indeed attained, but it is not the aim. If the aim of the gospel
teaching were limited to the attainment of material welfare, th en this
material welfare would not be allained.
The aim is higher and more distant. The aim of mis teaching is not
dependent on material welfare; it is the salvation of the soul, i.e. of that
divineelement which has been enclosed in man. This salvation is attained
by renouncing personal life and therefore, also, material well-being, and
by striving after the welfare of one's neighbours - by love. And it is only
by this endeavour thatmen will, incidentally,altain the greatest welfareof
a11 • the kingdom of God upon earth.
By striving after personal welfare, neither personal nor general
welfare is attained. By striving after self-forgetfulness, both personal and
general welfare are attained.
Thcoretically, three organizations ofhuman society arepossible. The
first is this: people - the best people, God's people - will give such a law
to men as will ensure the greatest happiness 10 mankind, and the authorities
will enforce the fulfilment of this law. This has been tried, but hasresulted
in the authorities. those whoadministcred the law, abusing theirpower and
infringing the law, and this is done not only by the administrators but also
by their assistants. who are many. Then appeared a second scheme,
'Laisser /aire, laisser passer' , the idea being mat there is no need of
authorities, but that by all men striving each for his own welfare, justice
will berealized. Butthisdoes notsuccced fortworeasons. Firstly, because
162
authority isnotabolished,andpoople think it cannot beabolished because
oppression would still continue, for the Government would refuse 10 use
its authority to arrest the robber, whereas the robber would not desist .
While there are authorities, the condition of men fighting for welfare is
unequal,not only because some are stronger than others, but also because
men make useofauthority to help them in the struggle. Secondly. because
in the incessant struggle of aI I, each for his own welfare, the slighrest
advantage of one gives him a multiplied advantage, and i.."lequality must
inevitably resulL There still remains a third theory, thatmen will comeLO
understand that it is profitable to live for the welfareofothe CS, and thata11
will strive afler this. And it is just this that the Christian faith furnishes. In
the first place, there can be no external obstacles to the realizaLion of this
theory; whether or not lIlere exist Government, capital a'ld the whole
presen t order of things, the object would be attained in the event of such
a development of men's conception of life. Secondly, one need expect no
special term for the commencemenlof the realization. forevery single in­
dividual who has attained this life conce ption, and gives himselfup to the
welfare ofothers, is already contributing to that welfare. And thirdly, this
has been going on ever since we have known anything about the life of
men.
Socialists say, 'It is not necessary for us who enjoy the blessing of
culture and civilization 10 be deprived of these blessings, and to descend
to the level of the rough crowd, but the men who are now deprived of
material welfare must be raised 10 our level, and given a share in the
blessings ofculture and civilization. The means for accomplishing this is
science. Science teaches us 10 conquer nature; it is able infmilely to
increase the productivity of nature; it may by electricity avail itself of the
power of the Niagara Falls, of rivers, of winds. The sun will work. And
there will be plenty ofeverything for everybody. At present only a sma11
fraction of mankind, the one in power, profits by the blessings of civiliza­
tion, whereas the rest is dep rived of them. Increase the welfare, and then
it will suffice for all. But the fact is that those in power have long been
c:}asuming notwhat they need, butwhat they do not need; all they can gel
Therefore, however much benefits may increase, those who a re at the top
will appropriate thcm for themselves.
One cannot consume more than a certain quar.tity of necessities, but
to luxury there is no limit. Thousands of bushels of bread may be used for
horses and dogs; millions of acres of land turned into parks, and so on, as
is now the case. So, no incr ease of productivity and wealth will augment
one jot the welfare of the lower classes, so long as the upper classes have
the power and the desire 10 spend the surplus wealth on luxury. On the
contrary, the increase in productivity, the greater mastery of the forces of
nature, only gives greater power to the upper classes, to those in authority
163
 - power to keep this authority over the lower working classes.
And every attempt on the part of the lower classes to make the rich
share with them, • revolutions, strikes - cause strife, and the strife · a
useless wasteofweahh. 'Beuer let no-one have it, in cannot,' say the con­
tending parties.
The conquest of nature and the increased production of material
wealth in order that it may overnow the world, SO that every one may have
his share, is as unwise a proceeding as would be to increase thequanuty
ofwood thrown into a stove, in order to increase the warmth ofa house in
which the stoves have no dampers. However much you may build up the
fire, the cold air becoming heated will rise, and fresh cold air will at once
take its place; and therefore no equal distribution of warmth in the hou se
will be attained. This will continue as long as there is access for the cold
air and an outlet for the hot.
Of the three remedies which have so far been invented, it is difficult
to say which is the most foolish, so foolish are they all.
The flfSt remedy, that of the revolutionist, consists in theabolition of
the upper classes, by whom all the wealth is consumed. This is the same
as if aman were tobreak the chimney through which the heat is disappear­
ing, supposing that when there i s nochimney the heat will not pass away.
But the heat will pass out through the hole left by the chimney, as it did
through the chimney itself, if the current be the same. In the same way,
wealth will all go 10 the men in authority, as long as authority e xists.
Anotherremedy, at present being put into practice by Wilhelm II, is,
without changing the existing order, to take from the upper classes, who
possess the wealth and power, a small portion of this wealth and throw it
inlO the bottomless abyss ofpover ty; as ifone were to arrange on the top
ofthe chimney. through which the heat is passing. fans, and to fan the heat,
tryingtodriveitdown to thecold layers. Anoccupation obviously difficult
and useless, because, while the heat ascends from below. h owever much
one may drive it down (and one cannot drive down much), it will at once
again rise up, and all the exertion will be wasted.
The third,and Iast,remedy isatpresent preached especially in Amer­
ica. It consists in replacing the competitive and individualistic basis oflife
by a communistic principle, by a principle of associations, co-operatives.
This remedy,as stated inDawn and theNationafi,st , consists in preaching
co-operation by word and deed, in inculcating and explaining to men that
competition, individualism and strife a re destroying much strength and
consequently wealth, and that far greater advantage is derived from theca.
operative principle. i.e. every one working for the common good. and
receiving afterwards his share ofthe common wealth - that this will prove
more advanrageous for everybody. All this is exceilenl, but the worst of it
is that, to begin with, no-one knows what each man's share will be when
all is divided equally; and above all, whatever his share may be, it will
164
�.
appearinsufficient for their welfare tomen livingas theydoatprescnl 'All
will be well off, and you will enjoy the same as the others.' - 'But I don't
want to live like all the rest, I want to live betler. I have always lived bet­
terthanothers andam used to it.' - ' Andas forme. J have long lived worse
than all, and now want to live just as others have lived.' This remedy is the
worst of all, because it supposes that during the existing upward current,
Le. the motive of striving after the best, it is possible to persuade the
particles 0 r air not 10 rise in proportion to the heal.
1beone means is IOreveal to men theirtruewelfare,and toshow !hem
that wealth not only is not a blessing but even diverts men from welfare,
by hiding from them their true welfare. There is only one means, and that
is 10 stop up the hole of worldly desire. This alone would give equally dis­
tributedheal And this isexactly the oppositeofwhat the Socialistssayand
do - trying to augment production, and therefore the general rna ss of
wealth.
Gronlund (NOTE No 73) is arguing with Spencer (NOTE No 74) and
all those who deny the need ofGovemmentor see its destination only in
the sccwity of the individual. Gronlund considers that the foundation of
mora1ity lies in associ ation. As a model, or rather as an embryo, of a real
socialistic Government, he brings forward trades-unions, which, by coerc­
ing the individual, by inducing him to sacrifice his personal interests,
subordinate him to the service of the common cause.
This, I think, is not true. He says that the Government organizes
labour. That would be well; but he forgets that Governments are always
coercing and exploiting labour under the pretext of defence. How much
more would it then exploit labour under the pretext of organizing it? It
would indeed be well ifGovernment were lOorganizelabour, but todo that
it must be disinterested, saintly. But where are they, these saints?
It is true that individualism, as they call it, meaning by this the ideal
ofindividual welfare foreach separate man, is a mostpemicious principle;
but the principle of the welfare of many people together is equally
pernicious. Only its perniciousn ess is not at once evident.
The attainment of that co-operation - social communism - in placeof
individualism, will not result from organization. We shall never guess
what will be the organization of the future: we will discover it only by
everyone following the unperverted imp ulseofhean, conscience, reason,
faith; the law of liCe, call it what you will.
Bees andants live socially, not because they know what organization
is most advantageous for them, and follow it - they have no idea of
expediency. hannony, the wisdom ofthe hive or anthill. as they appear to
us - but because they give themselves u p to what we call the instinct
inherent in them, they submit, not philosophizing cunningly, but straight­
forwardly to their law oflife (NOTE No 75). I �an imagine that ifbccs, in
165
addition 10 their inslinct, as we call it, in addition 10 the consc iousness of
their law, were able 10 invent the bestorganization ofLheir social life, they
would invent such a life that they would perish.
In this tendency of the law of life, there is something less and
something more than reasoning. And it alone leads to that way of truth.
which is the right one for man and for humanity.

166
SOURCES ON SOCIALISM, STATE AND CHRISTIAN (1900)
Translated by Vladimir Tchertkoff from Tolstoy ' s manu­
THE END OF THE AGE (1905) script diary, published in Some Social Remedies
(first twO chapters on the Russo-Japanese war omitted)
Translated by Vladimir Tcherlkoff, from Essays from Tufa, Sheppard
Press, London 1948.

AN APPEAL TO SOCIAL REFORMERS (1903)

Translated by Vladimir Tchertkoff. from Essaysfrom Tula, which
omiued Chapter n. no doubt due to post-war legislation on sedition.
Chapter11 wasuken from theshonerversion oftheessaypuhlished under
the title ofAddress to 'he Working Class inLeo Tols/oy - his life andwork,
Jack Robinson, Freedom Anarchist Pamphlets No. 6, Freedom Press,
London u ndated (circa 1971), reprinted from Reynolds News, August
1903.

ON ANARCHY (1900)
Translated by Vladimir Tchertkoff from Tolstoy ' s manu­
script diary. published in Some Social Remedies Free Age Press, Christ­
church, Hants. undated.

THOU SHALT NOT KILL (1900)

(two paragraphs on Wilhelm and Nicholas omitted)
Translated by Aylmer Maude, from Essays and Letters , Henry
FrowdelHumphrey Milford,London 1904, reprinted in Writings on Civil
Disobedience and Non-violence, New Society Publ ishers, Philadephia
1987.

PATRIOTISM AND GOVERNMENT (1900)

(ten paragraphs on the Boer War, contemporary rulers
and the Franco-Prussian war omitled) Translated by Aylmer
Maude, from Essays and Letters reprinted in The Kingdom a/God and
Peace Essays World's Classics series, Oxford University Press, 19 80.

THE KJNGDOM OF GOD IS WITHIN YOU (1893)

The Circle of Violence - extract from Chapter 8
The Significance of Military Service - Chapter 7 (one paragraph on
contemporary rulers omitted) Translated by Vladimir Tchertkoff, from
Laler Wor.u o/TolslOY, Free Age Press, Christchurch, Hants, 1900.

THE SLAVERY OF OUR TIMES (1900)

Translated by Aylmer Maude, from £ssaysjrom Tula

168 169
FURTHER READING ON TOLSTOY
Tolstoy's political essays
Unfortunately, most of Tolstoy's political essays are now
out of prinl However, the books listed on the sources page and
those given below can usually be found through a book search
by a good secondhand bookshop. Other sources for Tolstoy's
essays are listed in Le..o Tolstoy, an annotated bibliography ofEngUsh­
language sources to 1978 D. R. and M. A. Egan, Scarecrow Press Inc,
Metuchen NJ and London 1979.
The RussianRevofutioll. Free Age Press, Christchurch. Hants 1907
(British Library shelfmark 8094f 47).
Social Evils and their Remedies. Methuen. London 1911.
Recollections and Essays, World's Cia<;sics series, Oxford Univer­
sity Press, fltSl published 1937.
What must we then do? World's Classics series, Oxford University
Press, 1950.
The Kingdom afGod and Peace Essays , World's Classics series,
Ollford University Press, 1980.
Tolstoy's political essays in print
The Inevitable Revolution, transl. Ronald Sampson, Housmans,
London 1981.
The Kingdom of God is Within You, trans!. Constance GARNEIT,
University of Nebraska Press, 1984.
The lowofviolence and the law oflove Unicorn Press, London 1959;
Concord Grove Press, USA 1986
Writings on Civil Disobedience and Non-violence, New Society
Publishers, Philadephia 1987.
170
I cannot be silenl- selected non-fiction" ed. W. Gareth Jones, Bristol
Classical Press, 1989.
Commentaries on Tolstoy as a political thinker
The artist turnedprophet: Leo Tolstoy after 1880. W. B. Edgerton,
in American Contributions to the Sixth International Conference of SIav­
iSiS (PragUl! 7-13 August 1968). Vol 2: Literary Contributions, Mouton,
The Hague, 1968, pgs 61-85.
TolslOY, the discovery of peaceJ, Ronald Sampson, Heinemann,
London 1973.
New Essays on Tolstoy, ed. Malcolm Jones, Cambridge University
Press, 1978.
Tolstoy and Gandhi: Men of Peace. Martin Green, Basic Books,
Harper and Row, New York 1983.
Tolstoyon the Causes ofWor, Ronald Sampson. Peace Pledge Union,
London 1987.
Tolstoy on education
Tolstoy as schoolmaster, E. T. Crosby, London 1904.
Tolstoy on Education, trans!. L. Wiener, introd. R. D. Archambault,
University of Chicago Press, London 1972.
us ideespedagogiques de Tolstoi DominiqueMaroger, Collection
Siavica, Editions L'Age d'Homme, Lausanne 1974.
Primeroflibertarian educationJoeJ Spring, FreeLife Editions, New
York 1975.
Tolstoy on Education - Educational Writings 1861-2, ed Pinch and
Annstrong, Athlone Press, London 1982.
Anarchistische Padagogik . Lernen und Freiheit in der
Bildungslwnzeption L. N. Tolstojs, Ulrich Klemm, Winddruckverlag,
Siegtalstr. 20, 0-5900 Siegen-Eiserfeld, W. Germany, 1984.
171
,...

121 Bookshop, 121 Railton Rd, London SE24.

Studien ZUT Padagogik TolslD)s Minerva Pubhkation, K. G. Saur
Verlag, Pf. 711009, 8000 Munchen 71, 1988. AK Press, 3 Balmoral Place, Stirling, Scotland.

Works on anarcho-pacirasm by other authors For information on international actlYltles by radical

antimilitarists, CORlact the War Resisters' International,
Tk Gentle Anarchists - a study of the leaders of the SQrvodaya S5 Dawes St, London SEI7.
movernt!nl for IWn-violefll revolution in India G. Ostergaard and M.
Currell, Oxford University Press, 1971. For details of libertarian education today. conract LibEd, The Cot­
tage, The Green. Leite, Lullerworth. Lcicestershire.
Democratic Values. Vinoba Shave (the clearest exponent of anar­
chism in post- Gandhian India), Sarva Seva Sangh Prakashan, Varanasi Federation of Anarcho-pacifists, c/o Derrick A . Pike, 1
1977. Crom Gandhi Book Centre. 299 Tardeo Rd, Nana Chowk, Bombay Market Place, Glastonbury. Somerset.
400007.

The Kingdom a/God and lhe Slale , J . Maninsons. author's edition,

Lakemha, NSW. Australia, 1979 (ISBN 0 9599374 6 3).

Society without the Stale - the anarchist basisfor pacifism. Ronald

Sampson. PPV, 1986.

Resisting the Nation Slale - the pacifist and anarchist tradition,

Geoffrey Ostergaard, Peace Pledge Union, London 1982.

Uprootil1g War, Brian Martin, Freedom Press, London 1984.

NOI1-violel1t revolution in lllliia Geoffrey Ostergaard, Gandhi Peace

Foundation, New Delhi 1985, dislribuLCd by Housmans (see below).

Anarcho-paci[lSm: Questions and Answers, Derrick A. Pike, au­

thor's edition, I Market Place, Glastonbury, Somerset, 1987.

The Conquest ofViolence, BandeLigt, Routledge, London 1937,re­

pli�lished PluLO Press, London 1989.

Other works on anarchism and on pacifism respectively are too

numr.rous to name here; catalogues can be obtained from:

Housmans Bookshop, 5 Caledonian Road, London N I.

Freedom Bookshop, 84b Whitcchapcl High 51, London E l .

172 173
 sceLes anarchistes dans Ja revolution russe. Anatole Gorelik, Tete de
feuilles, Paris 1973. and 20th Century and Peace, magazine of the Soviet
NOTES
Committee for the Defence of Peace, No 1/89 pgs 30-33.

6) For a modem academic approach tothis question. see Community,

All un attributed notes are the editor's; those marked

AnarchyandLiberry, MichaelTaylor, Cambridge University Press. 1982.

(Translator) were written by Vladimir Tchertkoff or Aylmer
Maude.

7) Anarchism, George Woodcock, fIrst published Penguin 1963, pg

208, in which Woodcock devotes a chapter to Tolstoy.
1) For details of Tolstoy's visit to Europe in 1860-61,
see Tolstoy in London, Victor Lucas. Evans Brothers, London 1979" �d 8) An unpublished essay on Leo Tolstoy by Peter Kropotkin. D.
Auswahlbibliographie ZUT Rezeptiofl tier Padagogi/C uo TolstoJs I� Novak, Canadian Slavonic Papers, 1958 vol. 3. pgs 7-26.
DeUlschltmd von 1890bis 1986 Ulrich KJemm in Studien zurPadagoglk
Tolsrojs Minerva Publikalion, K. G. Saue Verlag, Pr, 711009, 8000
9) Letla' from TolslDY to Tchertkoff of June 19 (O.S.). 1897 in vol.
Munchen 71, 1988.
88 pgs 30-32 of the Jubilee Edition of Tolstoy's works. The correspon­
dence between Tolstoy and TchertkoCf is collected inL. N. Tolstoi j V. G.
2) From On the significance ofpublic education (1862) in Jubilee
TchertkoJfpo ikhperepiske. M V MuralDv, Moscow 1934.
Edition of TolslOy's works, Moscow 1928-1958. vol. 8 pg 405 (editor's
translation from the French published in Memoires sur rna vie. P-J
Proudhon. La Decouverte, Paris 1983). For Proudhon's account of the
10) Anarchism, David Miller, Oem 1984. pg 119, which includes a
useful discussion on anarchism and violence. Also see The Anarchist
meeting. see his letter to GustaveChaudey of April 7, 1861 in Corres�n­
Prince, G. Woodcock and I. Avakumovic, Schocken Books. New York,
dancetkP-lProudhon ,A. LacroixetCie,Paris 1874-5. vol. lO,repnmed
in Cahiers du momk russe et sovietique, Paris 1971. vol. 12 pg 183 and
1971, pgs 246-9. An excellent account of the anarchist lelTorism or the
18905 with many contemporary photographs can be found in Roderick
partially quoted in HenriTroyat'sTolstoy, W. H. Allen.London 1968. The
Kedward sThe Anarchists, Library or the 20th Century, Macdonald.
London 1971. A contemporary anarchist criticism of terrorist tactics can
'

meeting was also the subject ofa dissertation by Jean Bancal. professor at

be found in Anarchism and Violence. L. S. Bevington. Liberty Press.

theSorbonne, entitledLa rencontre de deux cultures: Proudhon et Tols toi,
Academie de Besancon records, vol. 181, years 1974-5, pgs 6-14.
Chiswick.London 1896.

3) On Tolstoy's educational activities, sec funher reading section.

4) An account oftheTsarist secret police's imerest in Tolstoy can be

11) Kropotkin's Revolutionary Pamphlets, ed. Roger N. Baldwin,
Dover Publications, New York 1970, pgs 283 - 300.
found in The Extraordinary Adventures ofSecret Agent Shipov in Pursuit
of Count Leo Tolstoy in the Year 1862, Bulat Okudzhava. Abelard­
Schuman, London 1973.
•

12) Berkman toGoldman ofJune 25, 1928; Goldman to Berkmanof

June 29 and July 3. 1928.Quoted by Richard Drinnon in Anarchy, no 114
(vol 10, n088), August 1970. Berkman was at this time finishing his ABC
5) On Vladimir Tchertkoff. see TchertkoJf and the Tolstoyans at
Tuel-.lon, Claudia Clark n
i Britain-USSR, September 1984. no 68, pps6-
ofAnarchism, which conl.ains two chapters on anarchism and violence.

13) Histoire de l' anarchie, Max Nettlau, Henri Veyrier, Paris 1986,
lOandThe Purleigh Colony: Tolstoyan togetherness in the late 1890s. M.
1.te K. Holman inNewEssayson Toistoy,ed. Malcolm Jones,Cambridge
pg 232 (editor's translation).
University Press. 1918, pgs 194-222. For the correspondence between
Tchertkoffand Tolstoy. see note 9. Tchertkorrchronicled Tolstoy's death
14) With an introduction by Gandhi inRecollectionsandEssays.Leo
Tolstoy. World's Classicsseries.Oxford University Press. first published
in The last days oJTolstoy, Heinemann, London 1922. For accounts of the
persecution ofTolstoyans after the Russian Revolution and under Swin,
1937, which also contains some ofthe letters between Tolstoy and Gandhi.

174 175
The complete collection can be found in Tolstoi et Gandhi, Marc Se­
menoff. Pensee gandhienne, Denoel, Paris 1958. Also see Tolstoy and
Gandhi: Meno/Peace, Martin Green, Basic Books, Harperand Row, New
York 1983, and Gandhi - his life and message/or the worldLouis Fischer,
Me.ntor/New American Library, 1954, pgs39-41. Gandhi'ssecor.dashram
in South Africa, after the Phoenix Colony, was named the Tolstoy Fann.
Out oftwenty books thatGandhi recommended to his readers in his Indian
HOfM Rule. six were by Tolstoy, n
i cluding utter to a Hindu, The Slavery
olOw Times and The Kingdom olGod is Within You
15) The Varangians were Swedish Vikings, whoseleaderRurik was
invited by the Slavonic tribes of Russia to rule over them '1
i. 862.
16) Tolstoy is thinking panicularly of the Doukhobors, cruelly
persecuted for their refusal to obey the State, particularly in relation to
military service. Helped by Tolstoy, over seven thousand Doukhobors
emigrated from the Caucasus to Canada in 1898.
Kropoddn also took up their cause.
17) Tolstoy had evidendy not heard of the Diggers, a dissident
religious group during Cromwell's Commonwealth who also interpreted
Christianity from a humanist and anarchist angle. In his book The New
Law 0/Righteousness, the Diggers' leader, Gerrard Winstanley. ca1led
upon the poor to occupy and farm the common land, and auempted to put
this into practice by occupying St George's Hill near Walton-on-Thames
in 1649, a move that was quickly repressed by Cromwell's army.
18) See H. G. Wells' dream of a World State in Men like Gods and
The Shape o/Things to Come
19) Again, it would be possible to misunderstand Tolstoy'S inten­
tions and see this passage as a sign of a complete lack of concern for civil
libenies. Tolstoy however wrote many leners to the Tsar and other
officials about the persecution of conscientious objectors and against the
dea4h penalty for those condemned for revolutionary acts. His intention
here, and in many of his other essays, is to show that the constitutional or
refor:nistapproach - hoping to pressure the State into conceding political
liberties · is doomed to failure, as the State will not give up its power
voluntarily. and in particular will not allow public control of its strongest
ann, the secret police. Tolstoy argues in the final chapter of this essay that
there is only one fundamental freedom - the fTeedom to live without
Government coercion, it is the State, and not private individuals, which
most violates the freedom and security of the citizen. Our recent past has
176
confl!lTJed that the vast majority of violations of human ri ghts and civil
liberties throughout the world are committed by official (but usually
deniable or unaccountable) State bodies, from the death squads of Latin
America to the security and intelligenceagencies of the powerful Western
nations. As these bodies are the ultimate summit ofthe State pyramid, and
certainly control and manipulate the elected governments, it is futile to
expect parliamentary pressure to succeed in curbing the violations of
human rights and civil liberties - such violations being in the very nature
of the State.
20) It was in visiting such communities in Cenuai Asia that Kro­
potlcin developed his theories later published in Mutual Afd(1902), in
which Kropotkin referred to Tolstoy'S conception of village comm uni­
ties. Such primitive anarchist societies still exist: in April 1990, oil
prospectors exploring China's remote Taklcmakan desert in Xinjiang
province discovered a tribe which had remained s
i olated from the outside
world for over 350 years. The tribe, numbering over 200 people, lived
withoutgovemmem. money orprivate property: seepress rcports ofApril
26th. 1990.
21) When asked what he thought of Western civilization, Gandhi
replied: 'I think it would be a very good idea'.
22) A town 100 miles south of Moscow. centre of the region that
included Yasnaya Polyana, where Tolstoy spent most of his life.
23) Tolstoy's mention of 'the secret police, the system of
spies, bribery ofthe Press, railways, telegraphs, telephones, photography'
is a prophetic anticipation of our world of State disinformation and
destabilization, surveillance cameras, bugs and telephone taps; since his
time, the State has also added the awesome power of the computer to its
arsenal of repression.
•
24) SeeAlex Comfort's study on the psychology ofpower,Authority
and Delinquency, Zwan, London 1988.
25) Tolstoy's understanding ofother anarchist thinkers was clarified
by Paul Eltzbacher's Anarchism published in 1900. Tolstoy wrote to
Eltzbacher,saying: Yourbook pleased me immensely. It is very objective
•
and lucid. and - as far as I am able tojudge - it analyses the source texts in
an excellent manner'.
26) However, see Tolstoy's comments on Kropotkin's attitude to
violence in the letter to Vladimir Tchectkoff quoted in the IntroductiO!l.
177

27) 'The lackofbeliefin the Law ofGodis the cause ofthe apparently
curiousphenomenon thatall the theoretica1anarchists- from Bakuninand
Proudhon to Reclus, Max Stimer and Kropot1cin - who prove with
undisputable correctness and justice the unreasonableness and harmfUl­
ness of power, as soon as they begin to speak
of the possibility of
establishing a society without that human law which they reject, fall at
once into indefiniteness, verbosity, rhetoric, and quite unfounded and
fantastic hypotheses. Thisarises from the factthatnoneofihese theoretical
anarchists accept that l.aw ofGod common to all men, which is natural for
all to obey; and without the obedience of men to one and the same law -
human or divine - human society cannot exist. Deliverance from human
law is only possible on condition that one acknowledge a divine law
common to all men' - Leo Tolstoy, from The meaning o/ the Russian
Revolution (l907).
28) The essay referred to is Thoreau's On the Duty o/Civil Disobe­
djence (1849). Tolstoy gives only one of Thoreau's reasons for refusal of
taxes - another impulse for Thoreau's action was the Ameri can-Mexican
wlU".
29) Tsar Alexander II, assassinated by 'The People's Will' in 1881.
30) Elisabeth ('Sissi'), stabbed to death by the anarchist Luigi
Luccheni in 1898.
31) Humbert (Umberto) I of Italy, assassinated by the anarchist
Gaetano Bresci in 1900.
32) President Sadi-Camot of France, stabbed to death by the anar­
chist Santo Caserio in 1894.
33) President McKinley of lIle USA was to be assassinated
by the anarchist Leon Czolgosz the following year, 1901.
Tolstoy omits to mention two earlier outrages against politi­
cal leaders: the bombing of the French Parliament by !he anarchist
Aue'JSle Vaillant in 1893, and the assassination of the Spanish Prime
Mini5ter Antonio Canovas by lhe anarchist Michele Angiolillo in 1897.
34) The Mordva and Tchouvash [fibes are of Finnish origin, and
inhabit chieny the governments of the Middle Volga (Translator).
35) Like many modem anarchists and pacifists, Tolstoy was a
convinced vegetarian and wrote the essay The Fjrst Step to aJvocate
178
giving up meal An aged relative, when visiting Tolstoy, made itclear that
she desired to have meat forhersupper. Tolstoy said that if her conscience
would allow il, she could eat meat, but that he would have no partin il On
coming down to the dinner-table. she found a live chicken and an axe tied
to her chair.
36) e.g. theseizureoftheFalklands by Britain in 1833. Theemphasis
placedby Tolstoy on the Press and their creation ofenemy images wasof
striking relevance during the Falklands War.
31) Pol/ice Verso (thumbs down) was the sign given in the Roman
amphitheatres by the spectators who wished a defeated gladiator to be
slain (Translator).
38) This passage, written before lIle advent of the aeroplane, shows
that the arms race did not begin with the atomic bomb - indeed. being a
consequence of the existence of Governments, the arms race can be said
to have started with the birth of lIle State concepl The invention of the
atomic bomb changed only the destructive potential of the anns race, not
its nature, as the continuing relevance of this passage shows.
39) The Hague Conference of 1899, set up by Tsar Nicolas II; the
BoerWar of 1899 - 1902.
40) This is confmned in modem times by the notable failure of
i nuclear arsenals;
disarmament talks to make any significant reduction n
despite media hype, the negotiations haveagreed to destroy only 3% ofthe
superpowers' 5tOckpileof shon·range missiles - all other nuclear, chemi­
cal and conventional weapons being excluded.
41) The word 'government' is frequently used in an indefinite sense
as almostequivalent to managementor direction; but in the sense in which
the word is used in the present article. the characteristic feature of a
Government is that it claims a moral right to innict physical penalties, and
by its decree to make murder a good action (Translator).
42) The Circassians, when surrounded, used to tie themselves to­
gether leg to leg, so that none may escape but all die fighting. Instances of
this occurred when their country was being annexed by Russia (Transla­
tor).
43) The same image was used by Wilhelm Reich in his exceUent
Listen, Little Man. Penguin, London 1982.
179
 44) In Britain, people lend to forget that military service still exists
in every other European country, East and West, and that the right to
conscientious objection is not even recognized by a few States. The case
-;,f Britain has proved that Tolstoy was over-optimistic in imagining that
Il'..! abolition of military service would weaken the State - if anything, it
aE...ws the State to use the anny for more overtly political intervention _
yt;: �\:s essay remains of the greatest relevance to aU those who, at the age
_ 57) It should be borne in mind that educated Russians, though
of �,:ghteen, must still suffer degradation and often imprisonment fOr
refusing to do military service.
45) See note 15.
46) As a young officcr, Tolstoy witnessed the siege of Se1:astopol
during the Crimean War of 1854-5.
47) This evidently refers to his house in Moscow, where Tolstoy
spends the winter months (Translator).
48) The serfs in Russia and the slaves in the United States were
emancipated at the same time - 1861-64 (Translator).
49) The fITSt volume of Karl Man:'s Kapjtal appeared in 1867
(Translator).
50) In Russia, as in many other countries, the greater part of the
agricultural work is still done by peasants working theirown land on their
own account (Translator).
5 1 ) Edward Bellamy (1850·98), American writer and social rcfonner
who advanced communistic theories in his Utopia Looldng Backwards -
2000 1887 (1 888) and its sequel Equality (1897).
- replacing all others) as a means of abolishing private land ownership.
52) In her anarchist Utopia, The Dispossessed (Granada, London
1975), UrsulaLeGuin identifies the division oflaoourasa factor that could
lead to the rebirth ofAuthority in an anarchist society.
53) (1805-75), a leader of Gennan scientific socialism (Translator).
54) Before the emancipation of the serfs in Russia, some proprietors
had private theatres of their own and troupes of musicians and actors
composed of theirown serfs. On many eSlates the serfs produced a variety
of handmade luxuries, as well as necessities, for the proprietors (Transla­
tor).
180
55) N. V. Gogol (1809-52), an admirable writer and a most worthy
man (Translator).
56) Tolstoy himself set an example by VOluntarily emancipating all
his serfs (Translator).
JXlliticallY much less free, are intellectually far more free than the corre­
sponding section of the English population. Views on economics and on
religion, which are held here only by very 'advanced' people, have been
popular among Russian university students for a generation past. In
particular, the doctrines of Karl Marx, and ofGerman sciel!.tific socialism
in general, have had a much wider acceptance there than he� (T:anslator).
58) Let justice be done, though the world perish (Translator).
59) Let culture be preserved, though justice perish (Translator).
60) Moscow has a very defective system of drainage, and a large
number of people are engaged, every night, in pumping and bailing the
contents ofcesspools into huge barrels,and in cartingitaway from thecity
(Translator).
61) The distinction between Europe and Russia (quite natural and
customary to a Russian writer) has been left as it stands in the original
(Translator).
62) Henry George (1839-97), American social reformer and author
ofProgress andPoverty (1879), in which he proposed the nationalization
of land and its taxation according to agricultural value (this Single Tax
Tolstoy discussed George's theories in many of his essays. A more
modem proponent of George's ideas was Aldous Huxley.
63) The artel, in its most usual form, is an association of workmen or
employees, for each of whom the ar/efs collectively responsible (Trans­
lator).
64) Serfdom was legalized about 1597 by Boris Godunof, who
forbade the peasants to leave the land on which they were settled. The
peasants' theory of the matter was thatTHEY belonged to the proprietors,
but the LAND belonged to them. 'We arc yours, but the land :s ":.:;rs' was
acommon saying amongst them until theiremancipalion under Alexander
II, when many of them fell defrauded by the arrangement whicn gave
181
 44) In Britain, people lend to forget that military service still exists
in every other European country, East and West, and that the right to
conscientious objection is not even recognized by a few States. The case
-;.t Britain has proved that Tolstoy was over-optimistic in imagining that
lC� abolition of military service would weaken the State - if anything, it
aE:.ws the State to use the army for moreovenly political intervention ­
yt:::tu essay remains ofthe greatestrelevance to aU those who, at the age
of 'cghreen, must still suffer degradation and often imprisonment for
refusing to do military service.
45) See note 15.
46) As a young officer, Tolstoy witnessed the siege of Se.:astopol
during the Crimean War of 1854-5.
47) This evidently refers to his house in Moscow, where Tolstoy
spends the winter months (Translator).
48) The serfs in Russia and the slaves in the United States were
emancipated at the same time - 1861-64 (Translator).
49) The flfSt volume of Karl Marx's Kapi/al appeared in 1867
(Translator).
50) In Russia, as in many other countries, the greater part of the
agricultural work is still done by peasants working their own land on their
own account (Translator).
51) Edward Bellamy (1850-98), American writer and social reformer
who advance<l communistic theories in his Utopia Looking Backwards -
2000 1887 (1888) and its sequel Equality (1897).
- replacing aU o!hers) as a means of abolishing private land ownership.
52) In her anarchist Utopia, The Dispossessed (Granada, London
1975), Ursula LeGuin identifies thedivision onabaur asa factor thatcould
lead to the rebirth of Authority in an anarchist society.
53) (1805-75), a leader of German scientific socialism (Translator).
54) Before the emancipation of the serfs in Russia, some proprictors
had private theatres of !heir own and troupes of musicians and actors
composed of their own serfs. On many estates the serfs produced a variety
of handmade luxuries, as well as necessities, for the proprieLOfS (Transla­
tor).
180
55) N. V. Gogol (1809-52), an admirable writer and a most worthy
man (Translator).
56) Tolstoy himself set an example by voluntarily emancipating all
his serfs (Translator).
57) It should be borne in mind that educated Russians, though
politically much less free, are inlCUectually far more free than the corre­
sponding section of the English population. Views on economics and on
religion, which are held here only by very 'advanced' people, have been
popular among Russian university students for a generation past. In
particular, !he doctrines ofKarl Marx, and ofGerman scientific socialism
in general,havehad a much wideracceptance there than here (T:anslator).
58) Let justice be done, though !he world perish (Translator).
59) Let culture be preserved, though juslice perish (Translator).
60) Moscow has a very defective system of drainage, and a large
number of people are engaged, every night, in pumping and bailing the
contents ofcesspools into huge barrels, and in carting itaway from the city
(Translator).
61) The distinction between Europe and Russia (quite natural and
customary to a Russian writer) has been left as it stands in the original
(Translator).
62) Henry George (1839-97), American social reformer and author
ofProgress antiPoverty (1879), in which he proposed !he nationalization
of land and its laXation according to agricuhural value (this Single Tax
Tolstoy discussed George' s !hearies in many of his essays. A more
modem proponent of George's ideas was Aldous Huxley.
63) Thear/el, in its most usual fonn, is an association of workmen or
employees, for each of whom the artels COllectively responsible (Trans­
lator).
64) Serfdom was legalized about 1597 by Boris Godunof, who
forbade the peasants to leave the land on which they were settled. The
peasants' thcoryof!he mallcr was that THEY belonged to the proprietors,
but the LAND belonged to them. 'We arc yours, but the land :s z.!rs' was
acommonsaying amongsl!hem until theiremaocipation under Alexander
II, when many of them felt defrauded by the arrangement wilich gave
181
much land to the proprietors {Translator).

65) The solcha is a light plough, such as the Russian peasants make
and use (Translator).

66) This refers to the KnighlS Templar, who fought in the Crusades.

67) The Cossack leader of a formidable insurrection in the seven­

teenth century, executed in Moscow in 1671 (Translator).

68) The chief of a Paris band of robbers in the early years of the
eighteenth century (Translator).

69) With reference to schools, the circumstances are different in

Russia from what they are in England. Free England has compulsory
education; Russia has not. But n
i Russia, the Government hinders the
establishment ofprivate schools, and reduces even the universities to the
position of Government institutions, watched by spies (Translator).

70) i.e. schools run by educational reformers, free schools, which in

Tolstoy's time (and, overwhelmingly, still today) have to function as
private schools.

7 1 ) See footnote 5 1 .

72) This has become increasingly relevant since the rise of the
advertising industry, the consumer society and the birth ofthe concept of
planned obsolescence: see Vance Packard's The Waste Malrers, Pelican,
London 1964, and The Hidden Persuaders, Pelican, London 1982.

73) LaurenceGronlund (1846-99), American writer and lecturer on

socialism, and author of T� Cooperative Commonwealth in its outlines
(1884).

74) HerbertSpencer(1820 · 1903),English philosopher and friend of

Darwin, who coined the phrase 'surviva1 of the fittest' and wrote Man
versus the State (1884).

75) Tolstoy often refers to the example of social organization given

by bees and anls; Kropolkin was a1so to lake up the theme in his Mutual
Aid(J902).

182
•