Page:Lars Henning Söderhjelm - The Red Insurrection in Finland in 1918 - tr. Annie Ingebord Fausbøll (1920).djvu/97

 magic formula "provocation"; if even this did not suffice, then the magic word "butchers" never failed of effect.

If, therefore, the Government wanted to prevent the "just endeavours" of the proletariat, would "deprive the Labouring class of the fruits of its struggle," nothing was easier than to remove this Government. Already twice the Government of Finland had been overthrown by revolution, in November, 1905, and in March, 1917. Each time the whole people had rejoiced. Nothing, it was supposed, could prevent it from being overthrown a third time, as it was said that it was "black" and "counter-revolutionary," and an enemy to liberty, now, as the two former times. One revolution or another, one master or another, the proletariat had once got into power, and this power was to be defended and asserted.

The insurrection was the unavoidable consequence of all that had happened. Therefore, with much the greater portion the question did not arise: Am I right in rising against the lawful authorities? No question arose at all—except among the corporations standing as it were immediately between the "proletariat" and the "citizens," among railway, post office, and custom-house officials, the staff of the tramways, cabdrivers, etc. Here a great division reigned, and here it was mainly dependent on how strongly the individual had been influenced by the agitation of the Labour Press, whether he was "Red" or "White." On the other hand, it must be noted that the number of working-men, who more and more clearly perceived the corruption of the rule of violence, was considerable. It was hardly the revolution itself, the overthrowing of the Government itself, which made them hesitate, but it was the sight it the advance of all the low elements within their own organisation; it was the many outrages which made them keep back a little. The position of these working-men