Page:The Czechoslovak Review, vol3, 1919.djvu/445

 and Hungary. Every nation passing through a heavy crisis must help itself, and Russia is now living through a serious and heavy crisis. This crisis is not due merely to bolshevism, but to century-long development. Lenine’s bolshevism is the result of the Romanoff czarism. Against Russian bolshevism a military barrier of the smaller neighboring states will not help Europe; bolshevism can only be overcome morally, by social reforms and political education. I heartily desire for Russia quick recovery, I want Russia to be powerful, but democratic. We can help Russia best, if we help ourselves. A truly Czech and Slav policy will be a help to Russia and the Slav world.

Social reforms, such as are demanded by a well-thought out and scientifically sound program of socialization, presuppose industry of all, everywhere, in everything. Industry means a feeling of duty we owe to the regular daily work; war and its romanticism, as well as the revolutionary romanticism, stand in the way of the return to normal life; let us hope that we shall soon overcome this nervousness.

I am of the opinion that bolshevism will not maintain itself long. But its fall should not be an argument for reactionary policies. I know that politics has hitherto vacillated between extremes; we must have for our own state a reasoned program of reform and we shall follow it, whether in Russia bolshevism falls or holds on. Should bolshevism last relatively longer, that ought to open the eyes of conservative statesmen.

The problem is so serious that I will leave no doubt of my own position. I declare expressly that I am not opposed to socialization. War and its result, the social revolution, will not permit anywhere untroubled continuation of the pre-war social order. We have gone far in the direction of nationalization, but that very fact can teach us that nationalization is not always socialization.

It will be necessary to study and analyze the problem of socialization more carefully than hitherto; I am sorry to see that so many adherents and enemies alike do not go any deeper than his slogan. Above all, it will not do to make too great promises to the workers. It is doubtful, whether the workers in the first stages of socialization will be better off than under the capitalistic regime; quite possibly they will be worse off. Socialization demands sacrifice not merely from the capitalists, but also from the workers, and its possibility and desirability cannot be determined by its passing influence on us.

In the period of transition which would probably last long the condition would be one of mixed benefit, both in agriculture and in industry; socialization cannot be carried out suddenly and in all fields, but gradually one branch of industry after another.

For that we need a well formulated program, and we need it also so that those who carry the risks would know on what to count. And another presupposition: the program of socialization would have to be agreed upon internationally; and that is of great significance for the tempo of the advance.

Sound socialization program must not forget socialization of education. Not much is said of this kind of socialization, but without it there can be no economic socialization. Attempts made so far to popularize science, as it is called, are only a small part of the task which confronts a truly democratic ministry of education. By so cialization of education society will have assured to it creative individualism, strong personalities—strong in knowledge, strong in sacrifice. In short let me emphasize o~ce more that social reforms demand almost Mathematical calculations; it will be necessary to watch the consequences of single experiments in socialization and compare them with the previous condition. It will not do to draw various deductions from abstract mottoes, but we must be governed by our own experience, by knowledge of our own domestic conditions.

The desirable social reforms and the upbuild ing of our democratic state demand large financial sacrifices. The first cabinet laid before the National Assembly a budget with a considerable deficit, and this deficit will be even bigger. I cannot analyze here all the causes which brought about this deficiency. It is the result of the terrible, destructive war, of exclusive war production and of Austrian bureaucratic state socialism. A deficiency in the budget exists in other countries as well, defeated and victorious alike. But our state has a comparatively wealthy body of citizens, and our lands are richly endowed by nature. Therefore the government can demand a great deal from the citizens. We shall need new and profitable taxes.

I concede that state administration must be simplified in the democratic spirit and that sound economy must prevail in all departments of the government. Let me just mention here that the rection of a state bank is in my opinion urgently needed in the interest of state finances.

In order to accomplish all this fully, we must endeavor to get rid of the old language and nationality disputes which endangered Austria-Hungary and finally contributed so much to its downfall. At the Paris conference the principle of nationality was very largely carried out, but even the new states have national minorities.

The development of modern nationality took place side y side with the development of internationalism. As Dostoievsky well (pointed out, man has not only love for his own nation, but also desire for communion with other nations and for universal union. That is also the sense of the humanitarian program of our national awakencrs. Our revolutionary propaganda