Page:The Spirit of Russia by T G Masaryk, volume 2.pdf/394

368

HE stress laid upon revolutionist tactics led the maximalist social revolutionaries to reexamine the traditional views of their party, and this reexamination resulted in an unrestricted approval of traditional ethics and in a rejection of the amoralist outlook of the Marxists. Mihailovskii and Lavrov gained the victory over Marx.

The rules followed by the expropriators show that a distinction was made between social revolutionary expropriations and ordinary theft, and between social revolutionary assassination and ordinary murder. The rule was that in the first place the funds of the state were to be requisitioned, and in the second place the treasure houses of the capitalists were to be attacked. The money thus secured was to be used solely for revolutionary party purposes (to defray the costs of party administration, to provide chemicals, and so on).

It is instructive to note the attitude of Russian public opinion towards expropriation. Even in extremely conservative circles the condemnation of political outrage was far less severe than the condemnation of ordinary theft or murder, and experience of the expropriations would seem to sanction the customary distinction between political and ordinary crime. [sic]In the rural districts, indeed, "idealised robbery" was supported by the peasantry, and those who practised it were esteemed heroes.

The ethical problems of the revolution and of terrorism have been very vividly discussed by a young maximalist named Grigorii Nestroev.

Nestroev began his revolutionary career when he was still a student, participating in the students' movement of the year 1899. He soon came into personal contact with Geršuni, Azev, and other well-known revolutionists. In 1902 he was arrested for the first time. After his release he played a practical part in the revolution, and had a notable share in some of the more important revolutionary enterprises. Having again been