Wage-earning. Bolshevism 457 



always in it something real, some quality that sharply distinguished 

 it from ancient slavery. In ancient slavery I can see no germ out of 

 which betterment of labour-conditions could conceivably arise. It 

 simply had to die, and modern attempts to revive it have had to 

 die also. 



In the foregoing pages I have recognized two lines of distinction. 

 One is that commonly admitted, the line that parts freeman from slave. 

 The other is that between free wage-earner and slave. In looking back 

 from modern circumstances to ancient, the latter is much the more 

 important. For, now that slavery in the proper sense has been abolished 

 by modern civilized peoples, the conditions of wage-earning stand out 

 as presenting the most momentous issues of the present age. To the 

 statesmen the questions raised are full of anxiety as to the probable 

 influence of present policies on future wellbeing. A student of Greco- 

 Roman civilization must ask himself whether modern labour-questions 

 and their attempted solutions may not indirectly furnish help in ap- 

 praising and judging the conditions of the past. Now it so happens 

 that in the case of agriculture recent events in Russia possess very 

 marked significance, and it is therefore hardly possible to leave them 

 unnoticed here. 



It seems to be established 1 beyond reasonable doubt that the genuine 

 and effective doctrine of Leninite Bolshevism, in its definition of the 

 * working class/ excludes the peasantry. They are not * proletarian.' 

 That is, the great majority of peasants have something. This each 

 wants to keep, and if possible to augment. In short, they are Indi- 

 vidualists. Now Bolshevism builds on dogmas of Marxian Socialism, 

 however much it may warp their application, however widely it may 

 depart from Marxian theory in its choice of methods. Therefore it 

 sees in the peasants only a class of petty bourgeoisie with the anti- 

 socialistic instincts of that hated class, and will spare no effort to exclude 

 them from political power. It disfranchises employers, even though 

 the work they do is productive and useful to society. We need go no 

 further : these principles of the Bolshevik creed, be it prophetic vision 

 or be it crazy fanaticism blind to the facts of human nature and devoid 

 of all practical sense of proportion, are enough for my present pur- 

 pose. It results from them that all wage-earning is wrong: no man 

 has the right to employ another man for his own purposes : that 

 the relation benefits both employer and employed, even if true, is a 



1 John Spargo, Bolshevism, the enemy of political and industrial Democracy. London, 

 J Murray 1919. I think I may accept the author's evidence on the points here referred to, 

 confirmed as it is by other observers. See his remarks pp 69, 156, 275, 278, in particular. 

 That the same sharp distinction between peasant and wage-earner is drawn by the Socialists 

 in other countries also, and is to them a stumblingblock, is clearly to be seen in King and 

 Okey's Italy today. See appendix. 



