Maicli 
191:7 
Russia in Revolution 
By C. Hagberg Wright 
U 
AT last! Russia is in revomhon, and the Colossus 
/\ of thc^ Russian State has fallen ! One wants to 
/ \ shout Vive la Nalion ! -Most of us Englishmen 
- _/ A_werc surprised, ^\'e knew that all was not 
peaceful in Russia. We knew that new forees were at 
work there, that the J^ussian people had outgrown the 
structme of their State. Ever since the Japanese war, 
\\e hatl heard that Russia was reorganising herself. W'c 
looked, however, for gradual development. We hoped 
against hope that the established order would adapt 
itself to the new vital facts, would be slowly plastic to 
Russia's awakened soul. Events have contradicted 
our thoughts. Russia is indeed changing, but change 
has taken the sho.rt and rugged road of Revolution. 
Russia is alive, but the' old order is dead— at least, it is in 
ruins. 
\\ Jiat brought about the Revolution ? Was ' it a 
deliberately calculated affair, or an accident ? Frankly, 
we have hot . the means 6f saying. We may, how- 
ever, say with some certainty that it was not an acci- 
dental result of food-riots in Petrograd. At the most, 
these were the occasion, not the cause. The suspension 
of tlie Duma was a cardinal fact, and the Duma's decision 
to continue in session was the turning-point ; but the 
Duma did not make the revohition— it did not play the 
part which the English Parliament played in the reign 
" of Charles I. 
In Russia itself, the Revohition, although it caHie 
unexpectedly, had been foreseen. Crown and nation 
had drifted apart. In the nation, a new intelligence 
was vigilant and critical, new energies were seeking nev\- 
opportunities, new . thoughts were defming new hopes 
and reaching out towards new policies. The C)ld Order, 
so far from adapting itself to this ne\v life, hardened 
itself and impenitentlj? preferred the old ways. Looking 
ahead, men foresaw rupture, but they knew not when or 
how it would happen. The " days of March " in Petro- 
grad were the focus of apeoplc's di"Scontent. ^\'ere they 
an accidental ' focus ? Probably — the enigmatic figure 
of JI. Protopopoff makes one hesitate to say more. 
German Influence 
Against what was the Revolution directed ? Accounts 
in the English papers suggest that it was largely anti- 
German — a rising of the Russian people against alien 
forces which, in a himdred subterranean ways, perverted,' 
obstructed, hindered its victorious self-assertion in the 
war. On the other hand.'it has been said by credible 
f men that there is no German Party in Russia, but a very 
strong " every-man-for-himsclf " Party. A political 
system which is no longer, living, which no longer has a 
moral purpose, and no longer consciously expresses a 
))rinciple. is a shelter for many adventurers and finds its 
most apt instruments in men who — to use the seventeenth 
century term — are entirely " self-ended." It is not 
inconceivable that the plainly apparent bias towards 
Germany was brought about, not of sympathy', but by 
private interests which were not over-scrupulous. 
Whatever the origin and nature of the bias, it was 
there, and it undoubtedly obstructed the war. Moreover 
the existence of this spirit immediately affected the minds 
of leaders as well as soldiers in the Russian Army. For 
some" time^past the spokesmen of Russia's new life have 
felt themselves beset by adverse agencies which they 
could neither discern nor name. 
Has the Revolution succeeded ? Up to the present, 
• yes — remarkably. But will the success be permanent ? 
For the moment, Germanism is overthrown and Russia 
is in the saddle. But are the forces which made the 
Revolution really at one with each other ? Is Pro- 
gn^ssive Russia united ? That is the critical question, 
and Tinfortunately, tliere is room for doubt. . 
The nt'w Russian Government is a Liberal Govern- 
ment. Now, in Russia, Liberalism is a faithdf educated 
men, but it has not yet .striick its roots into tlie great 
mass of the Russian people. Popular Progressive forces 
in Russia have been shaped by thoughts and are im- 
passioned by aspirations which are well-nigh as hostile to 
Liberalism as to Autocracy. 
Social Democracy 
Social Democracy has a strong liold upon urban workmg- 
men — especially u]X)n those of Petrograd. Its Utopia has 
become their Fatherland and has drawn • out towards 
itself that emotional idealism which is a , destructive 
note of the Russian character. The Social Democrats 
are, if not the weak spot, the doubtful spot in the 
Revolution. In the first place, their thoughts are centred, 
not on a political revolution, but on a social revolution. 
They hold their sectarian faith with native enthusiasm. 
Impelled by both, they may \\ish to do too much, and 
their haste may bring about discord and lead to dis- 
ruption. A split in the Progressive forces would be a 
grave embarrassment for the new Government, would 
distract it from the war. and might easily become fatal. 
In the second place, tlu'ir creed engenders dreams- 
dreams of a pacific international Solidarity of the pro- 
letariat — and these dreams are inconsistent witli strong 
national self-assertion in war. Alread\^ the Russian 
Social Democrats in London are separating themselves 
from their fellow-countrymen here, and are preparing to 
cry aloud for the social revolution and immediate peace. 
One does not suppose that the Social Democrats will 
become masters of the revolution, or that they will be 
able to overthrow it by another revolution, but it is 
easy to see that they may give much trouble to a Govern- 
ment which already finds its position less secure. 
The real danger is this : reactionary forces may 
secretly join hands with socialist enthusiasm. Reaction 
will not take the field openly against the revolution, but 
it' is quite equal to using the social democrats as tools. 
It has had much experience in such matters, and no 
scruple would withhold it froni j:)laying the part of agcnt- 
provocateur. 1 It would be quite willing to bring about 
another smash by means of its bitterest enemies. The 
Social Democrats would not knowingly lend themselves 
to an}' such plan, but they would not be able to recognise 
-the hands that used them or to discern the policy ^hich 
moved those hands. I do not say that this will happen, 
but almost anything is possible in Russia, and placards 
on tl^; walls of Petrograd show that reaction is already ' 
at work. It cannot hope to accomplish anything by 
itself : therefore it must be trying to make others its 
tools. It dare not strike openly : therefore it must be 
working subterraneously. 
Two facts, widely different from each other, should 
be borne in mind : (i) The relaxation of military discipline 
by the Revolution will make it comparatively easy for 
emissaries of reaction or Social Democracy to disturb 
the minds of the soldiers ; (2) Russians are essentially 
an impulsive people. They fly from one extreme to 
another and cannot endure the middle way. Some- 
times this national characteristic moves men to splendid 
acts of self-sacrifice, but it can also induce a quick re- 
pentance. At the present moment this instability of 
temperament is a danger. 
I am not predicting trouble or failure ; I am merely 
giving warning. Noble words, written months ago by 
Russia's new Prime Minister come back to me : 
" The morning is breaking ; sunlight gleams on the 
bayonets of my gallant warriors ; the sun looks in at 
the window of their homes." 
Let us hope that those words are true to-day. Happily, 
in the writer of those words — Prince Lvov — new Russia 
has a man who is not unequal to great things. His 
patriotism cannot be doubted, and his administrative 
ability has been abundantly shown in many ^vays — 
recently and notably in the magnificent work for the 
Russian armies whicli the Union of Zemstvos organisi^d 
and carried out under his guidance. All men trust hhii 
and, if any man in Russia may be called " the Man of 
the Moment "-^Hie man for the ihoment — he is the man. 
His position at the head of the Government is the stroneest 
