Page:George Pitt-Rivers - The World Significance of the Russian Revolution (1920).pdf/58

 42 in Russia has been a three-cornered one. The initial phase saw the overthrow of the forces of national solidarity by the combined forces of Social-Revolutionary-bourgeois-commercialism (the middle) and the revolutionary-international-communistic-Jewish (the extreme) group.

Power quickly passed from the middle to the extreme. The middle, the Kerensky party, was the party of compromise, indecision, vacillation, greedy opportunism, inept utopianism and hopeless incompetence. The middle was aided by the extreme in the initial stage for the latter's own purpose, and cast aside as soon as it had served its purpose. In the same way the extreme was also aided by Germany, who hoped thereby to score against the Allies.

From the time of the overthrow of the middle by the Bolsheviks, the armed struggle has been between these two, that is to say, between the first revolution and the second revolution. Now at last the middle, the party of invertebrate incompatibles, has finally been submerged, in spite of the vacillating and bewildered assistance that the middle has received from England and the Allies.

From the very first we characteristically backed the "wrong horse," and the sooner we recognise that fact the better. Had we backed Korniloff in April, 1917, against the forces of anarchy and disruption, even if that assistance had been purely "moral" assistance, it might already have been too late; on the other hand, it might have turned the scales and preserved Russia for herself and also for us, her Allies. Instead we chose to throw the weight of our support, moral, financial, and eventually in armed forces, on the side of the feeblest traitor who ever ruined his country. And why should this revolutionary solicitor of the German firm of "Kunst and Alberst"