Page:The Proletarian Revolution in Russia - Lenin, Trotsky and Chicherin - ed. Louis C. Fraina (1918).djvu/224

 And not only the petite bourgeoisie, but also the broad masses of the workers, said to themselves: "If our government, with such an outspoken pacifist as Wilson at the head, declares war, and if even Bryan supports the government in the war, it must be an unavoidable and righteous war." … It is now evident why the sanctimonious, Quaker-like pacifism of the bourgeois demagogues is in such high favor in financial and war industry circles.

Our Menshevist and Social-Revolutionist pacifism, in spite of apparent differences, is, in reality, playing the same part as American pacifism. The resolution on war passed by the majority of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers, Soldiers and Peasants, condemns the war not only from a pacifist standpoint, but also because of the imperialistic character of the war. The Congress declares the struggle for an early conclusion of the war to be "the most important task of revolutionary democracy." But all these premises are merely mobilized so that they may lead to the conclusion: "until such time as the war may be ended by the international forces of democracy, the Russian revolutionary democracy will be obliged in every possible way to co-operate in strengthening the fighting power of our army and rendering it efficient for both offensive and defensive action."

The revision of the old international treaties the Congress, like the Provisional Government, would make dependent on a voluntary agreement of allied diplomacy, which, in its very nature, neither desires nor is it able to relinquish the imperialistic aims of the war. The Congress, following its leaders, makes the "international forces of democracy" depend on the will of the social-patriots, who are bound by iron chains to their imperialistic governments. Voluntarily restricting themselves in the question of "an early end of the war" to this charmed circle, the majority of the Congress naturally arrives at a very definite conclusion in the domain of practical politics: ''an offensive on the military front. This "pacifism," which solidifies and disciplines the petit bourgeois'' democracy and induces it to support an offensive, ought manifestly to be on most friendly terms not only with the Russian imperialists, but also with those of the allied nations.

Milyukov says: "In the name of our fidelity to our allies and to the old (diplomatic) treaties, we must have an offensive."

Kerensky and Tseretelli say: "Although the old (diplomatic) treaties have not yet been revised, we must have an offensive."

The argument may differ; the policy is the same. Nor could