To the above characteristics, says Alvin F. Sanborn, must be added

these sterling qualities: a rare love of animals, surpassing

sweetness in all the ordinary relations of life, exceptional sobriety

of demeanor, frugality and regularity, austerity, even, of living,

and courage beyond compare.[2]

"There is a truism that the man in the street seems always to forget,

when he is abusing the Anarchists, or whatever party happens to be

his BETE NOIRE for the moment, as the cause of some outrage just

perpetrated. This indisputable fact is that homicidal outrages have,

from time immemorial, been the reply of goaded and desperate classes,

and goaded and desperate individuals, to wrongs from their fellowmen,

which they felt to be intolerable. Such acts are the violent recoil

from violence, whether aggressive or repressive; they are the last

desperate struggle of outraged and exasperated human nature for

breathing space and life. And their cause lies not in any special

conviction, but in the depths of that human nature itself. The whole

course of history, political and social, is strewn with evidence of

this fact. To go no further, take the three most notorious examples

of political parties goaded into violence during the last fifty

years: the Mazzinians in Italy, the Fenians in Ireland, and the

Terrorists in Russia. Were these people Anarchists? No. Did they

all three even hold the same political opinions? No. The Mazzinians

were Republicans, the Fenians political separatists, the Russians

Social Democrats or Constitutionalists. But all were driven by

desperate circumstances into this terrible form of revolt. And when

we turn from parties to individuals who have acted in like manner, we

stand appalled by the number of human beings goaded and driven by

sheer desperation into conduct obviously violently opposed to their

social instincts.

"Now that Anarchism has become a living force in society, such deeds

have been sometimes committed by Anarchists, as well as by others.

For no new faith, even the most essentially peaceable and humane the

mind of man has yet accepted, but at its first coming has brought

upon earth not peace, but a sword; not because of anything violent or

anti-social in the doctrine itself; simply because of the ferment any

new and creative idea excites in men's minds, whether they accept or

reject it. And a conception of Anarchism, which, on one hand,

threatens every vested interest, and, on the other, holds out a

vision of a free and noble life to be won by a struggle against

existing wrongs, is certain to rouse the fiercest opposition, and

bring the whole repressive force of ancient evil into violent contact

with the tumultuous outburst of a new hope.

"Under miserable conditions of life, any vision of the possibility of

better things makes the present misery more intolerable, and spurs

those who suffer to the most energetic struggles to improve their

lot, and if these struggles only immediately result in sharper

misery, the outcome is sheer desperation. In our present society,

for instance, an exploited wage worker, who catches a glimpse of what

work and life might and ought to be, finds the toilsome routine and

the squalor of his existence almost intolerable; and even when he has

the resolution and courage to continue steadily working his best, and

waiting until new ideas have so permeated society as to pave the way

for better times, the mere fact that he has such ideas and tries to

spread them, brings him into difficulties with his employers. How

many thousands of Socialists, and above all Anarchists, have lost

work and even the chance of work, solely on the ground of their

opinions. It is only the specially gifted craftsman, who, if he be a

zealous propagandist, can hope to retain permanent employment. And

what happens to a man with his brain working actively with a ferment

of new ideas, with a vision before his eyes of a new hope dawning for

toiling and agonizing men, with the knowledge that his suffering and

that of his fellows in misery is not caused by the cruelty of fate,

but by the injustice of other human beings,--what happens to such a

man when he sees those dear to him starving, when he himself is

starved? Some natures in such a plight, and those by no means the

least social or the least sensitive, will become violent, and will

even feel that their violence is social and not anti-social, that in

striking when and how they can, they are striking, not for

themselves, but for human nature, outraged and despoiled in their

persons and in those of their fellow sufferers. And are we, who

ourselves are not in this horrible predicament, to stand by and

coldly condemn these piteous victims of the Furies and Fates? Are we

to decry as miscreants these human beings who act with heroic

self-devotion, sacrificing their lives in protest, where less social

and less energetic natures would lie down and grovel in abject

submission to injustice and wrong? Are we to join the ignorant and

brutal outcry which stigmatizes such men as monsters of wickedness,

gratuitously running amuck in a harmonious and innocently peaceful

society? No! We hate murder with a hatred that may seem absurdly

exaggerated to apologists for Matabele massacres, to callous

acquiescers in hangings and bombardments, but we decline in such

cases of homicide, or attempted homicide, as those of which we are

treating, to be guilty of the cruel injustice of flinging the whole

responsibility of the deed upon the immediate perpetrator. The guilt

of these homicides lies upon every man and woman who, intentionally

or by cold indifference, helps to keep up social conditions that

drive human beings to despair. The man who flings his whole life

into the attempt, at the cost of his own life, to protest against the

wrongs of his fellow men, is a saint compared to the active and

passive upholders of cruelty and injustice, even if his protest

destroy other lives besides his own. Let him who is without sin in

society cast the first stone at such an one."[3]

That every act of political violence should nowadays be attributed to

Anarchists is not at all surprising. Yet it is a fact known to

almost everyone familiar with the Anarchist movement that a great

number of acts, for which Anarchists had to suffer, either originated

with the capitalist press or were instigated, if not directly

perpetrated, by the police.

For a number of years acts of violence had been committed in Spain,

for which the Anarchists were held responsible, hounded like wild

beasts, and thrown into prison. Later it was disclosed that the

perpetrators of these acts were not Anarchists, but members of the

police department. The scandal became so widespread that the

conservative Spanish papers demanded the apprehension and punishment

of the gang-leader, Juan Rull, who was subsequently condemned to

death and executed. The sensational evidence, brought to light

during the trial, forced Police Inspector Momento to exonerate

completely the Anarchists from any connection with the acts committed

during a long period. This resulted in the dismissal of a number of

police officials, among them Inspector Tressols, who, in revenge,

disclosed the fact that behind the gang of police bomb throwers were

others of far higher position, who provided them with funds and

protected them.

This is one of the many striking examples of how Anarchist

conspiracies are manufactured.

That the American police can perjure themselves with the same ease,

that they are just as merciless, just as brutal and cunning as their

European colleagues, has been proven on more than one occasion. We

need only recall the tragedy of the eleventh of November, 1887, known

as the Haymarket Riot.

No one who is at all familiar with the case can possibly doubt that

the Anarchists, judicially murdered in Chicago, died as victims of a

lying, bloodthirsty press and of a cruel police conspiracy. Has not

Judge Gary himself said: "Not because you have caused the Haymarket

bomb, but because you are Anarchists, you are on trial."

The impartial and thorough analysis by Governor Altgeld of that

blotch on the American escutcheon verified the brutal frankness of

Judge Gary. It was this that induced Altgeld to pardon the three

Anarchists, thereby earning the lasting esteem of every liberty

loving man and woman in the world.

When we approach the tragedy of September sixth, 1901, we are

confronted by one of the most striking examples of how little social

theories are responsible for an act of political violence. "Leon

Czolgosz, an Anarchist, incited to commit the act by Emma Goldman."

To be sure, has she not incited violence even before her birth, and

will she not continue to do so beyond death? Everything is possible

with the Anarchists.

Today, even, nine years after the tragedy, after it was proven a

hundred times that Emma Goldman had nothing to do with the event,

that no evidence whatsoever exists to indicate that Czolgosz ever

called himself an Anarchist, we are confronted with the same lie,

fabricated by the police and perpetuated by the press. No living

soul ever heard Czolgosz make that statement, nor is there a single

written word to prove that the boy ever breathed the accusation.

Nothing but ignorance and insane hysteria, which have never yet been

able to solve the simplest problem of cause and effect.

The President of a free Republic killed! What else can be the cause,

except that the ATTENTATER must have been insane, or that he was

incited to the act.

A free Republic! How a myth will maintain itself, how it will

continue to deceive, to dupe, and blind even the comparatively

intelligent to its monstrous absurdities. A free Republic! And yet

within a little over thirty years a small band of parasites have

successfully robbed the American people, and trampled upon the

fundamental principles, laid down by the fathers of this country,

guaranteeing to every man, woman, and child "life, liberty, and the

pursuit of happiness." For thirty years they have been increasing

their wealth and power at the expense of the vast mass of workers,

thereby enlarging the army of the unemployed, the hungry, homeless,

and friendless portion of humanity, who are tramping the country from

east to west, from north to south, in a vain search for work. For

many years the home has been left to the care of the little ones,

while the parents are exhausting their life and strength for a mere

pittance. For thirty years the sturdy sons of America have been

sacrificed on the battlefield of industrial war, and the daughters

outraged in corrupt factory surroundings. For long and weary years

this process of undermining the nation's health, vigor, and pride,

without much protest from the disinherited and oppressed, has been

going on. Maddened by success and victory, the money powers of this

"free land of ours" became more and more audacious in their

heartless, cruel efforts to compete with the rotten and decayed

European tyrannies for supremacy of power.

In vain did a lying press repudiate Leon Czolgosz as a foreigner.

The boy was a product of our own free American soil, that lulled him

to sleep with,

My country, 'tis of thee,

Sweet land of liberty.

Who can tell how many times this American child had gloried in the

celebration of the Fourth of July, or of Decoration Day, when he

faithfully honored the Nation's dead? Who knows but that he, too,

was willing to "fight for his country and die for her liberty," until

it dawned upon him that those he belonged to have no country, because

they have been robbed of all that they have produced; until he

realized that the liberty and independence of his youthful dreams

were but a farce. Poor Leon Czolgosz, your crime consisted of too

sensitive a social consciousness. Unlike your idealless and

brainless American brothers, your ideals soared above the belly and

the bank account. No wonder you impressed the one human being among

all the infuriated mob at your trial--a newspaper woman--as a

visionary, totally oblivious to your surroundings. Your large,

dreamy eyes must have beheld a new and glorious dawn.

Now, to a recent instance of police-manufactured Anarchist plots.

In that bloodstained city, Chicago, the life of Chief of Police

Shippy was attempted by a young man named Averbuch. Immediately the

cry was sent to the four corners of the world that Averbuch was an

Anarchist, and that Anarchists were responsible for the act.

Everyone who was at all known to entertain Anarchist ideas was

closely watched, a number of people arrested, the library of an

Anarchist group confiscated, and all meetings made impossible. It

goes without saying that, as on various previous occasions, I must

needs be held responsible for the act. Evidently the American police

credit me with occult powers. I did not know Averbuch; in fact, had

never before heard his name, and the only way I could have possibly

"conspired" with him was in my astral body. But, then, the police

are not concerned with logic or justice. What they seek is a target,

to mask their absolute ignorance of the cause, of the psychology of a

political act. Was Averbuch an Anarchist? There is no positive

proof of it. He had been but three months in the country, did not

know the language, and, as far as I could ascertain, was quite

unknown to the Anarchists of Chicago.

What led to his act? Averbuch, like most young Russian immigrants,

undoubtedly believed in the mythical liberty of America. He received

his first baptism by the policeman's club during the brutal

dispersement of the unemployed parade. He further experienced

American equality and opportunity in the vain efforts to find an

economic master. In short, a three months' sojourn in the glorious

land brought him face to face with the fact that the disinherited are

in the same position the world over. In his native land he probably

learned that necessity knows no law--there was no difference between

a Russian and an American policeman.

The question to the intelligent social student is not whether the

acts of Czolgosz or Averbuch were practical, any more than whether

the thunderstorm is practical. The thing that will inevitably

impress itself on the thinking and feeling man and woman is that the

sight of brutal clubbing of innocent victims in a so-called free

Republic, and the degrading, soul-destroying economic struggle,

furnish the spark that kindles the dynamic force in the overwrought,

outraged souls of men like Czolgosz or Averbuch. No amount of

persecution, of hounding, of repression, can stay this social

phenomenon.

But, it is often asked, have not acknowledged Anarchists committed

acts of violence? Certainly they have, always however ready to

shoulder the responsibility. My contention is that they were

impelled, not by the teachings of Anarchism, but by the tremendous

pressure of conditions, making life unbearable to their sensitive

natures. Obviously, Anarchism, or any other social theory, making

man a conscious social unit, will act as a leaven for rebellion.

This is not a mere assertion, but a fact verified by all experience.

A close examination of the circumstances bearing upon this question

will further clarify my position.

Let us consider some of the most important Anarchist acts within the

last two decades. Strange as it may seem, one of the most

significant deeds of political violence occurred here in America, in

connection with the Homestead strike of 1892.

During that memorable time the Carnegie Steel Company organized a

conspiracy to crush the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel

Workers. Henry Clay Frick, then Chairman of the Company, was

intrusted with that democratic task. He lost no time in carrying out

the policy of breaking the Union, the policy which he had so

successfully practiced during his reign of terror in the coke

regions. Secretly, and while peace negotiations were being purposely

prolonged, Frick supervised the military preparations, the

fortification of the Homestead Steel Works, the erection of a high

board fence, capped with barbed wire and provided with loopholes for

sharpshooters. And then, in the dead of night, he attempted to

smuggle his army of hired Pinkerton thugs into Homestead, which act

precipitated the terrible carnage of the steel workers. Not content

with the death of eleven victims, killed in the Pinkerton skirmish,

Henry Clay Frick, good Christian and free American, straightway began

the hounding down of the helpless wives and orphans, by ordering them

out of the wretched Company houses.

The whole country was aroused over these inhuman outrages. Hundreds

of voices were raised in protest, calling on Frick to desist, not to

go too far. Yes, hundreds of people protested,--as one objects to

annoying flies. Only one there was who actively responded to the

outrage at Homestead,--Alexander Berkman. Yes, he was an Anarchist.

He gloried in that fact, because it was the only force that made the

discord between his spiritual longing and the world without at all

bearable. Yet not Anarchism, as such, but the brutal slaughter of

the eleven steel workers was the urge for Alexander Berkman's act,

his attempt on the life of Henry Clay Frick.

The record of European acts of political violence affords numerous

and striking instances of the influence of environment upon sensitive

human beings.

The court speech of Vaillant, who, in 1894, exploded a bomb in the

Paris Chamber of Deputies, strikes the true keynote of the psychology

of such acts:

"Gentlemen, in a few minutes you are to deal your blow, but in

receiving your verdict I shall have at least the satisfaction of

having wounded the existing society, that cursed society in which one

may see a single man spending, uselessly, enough to feed thousands of

families; an infamous society which permits a few individuals to

monopolize all the social wealth, while there are hundreds of

thousands of unfortunates who have not even the bread that is not

refused to dogs, and while entire families are committing suicide for

want of the necessities of life.

"Ah, gentlemen, if the governing classes could go down among the

unfortunates! But no, they prefer to remain deaf to their appeals.

It seems that a fatality impels them, like the royalty of the

eighteenth century, toward the precipice which will engulf them, for

woe be to those who remain deaf to the cries of the starving, woe to

those who, believing themselves of superior essence, assume the right

to exploit those beneath them! There comes a time when the people no

longer reason; they rise like a hurricane, and pass away like a

torrent. Then we see bleeding heads impaled on pikes.

"Among the exploited, gentlemen, there are two classes of

individuals: Those of one class, not realizing what they are and what

they might be, take life as it comes, believe that they are born to

be slaves, and content themselves with the little that is given them

in exchange for their labor. But there are others, on the contrary,

who think, who study, and who, looking about them, discover social

iniquities. Is it their fault if they see clearly and suffer at

seeing others suffer? Then they throw themselves into the struggle,

and make themselves the bearers of the popular claims.

"Gentlemen, I am one of these last. Wherever I have gone, I have

seen unfortunates bent beneath the yoke of capital. Everywhere I

have seen the same wounds causing tears of blood to flow, even in the

remoter parts of the inhabited districts of South America, where I

had the right to believe that he who was weary of the pains of

civilization might rest in the shade of the palm trees and there

study nature. Well, there even, more than elsewhere, I have seen

capital come, like a vampire, to suck the last drop of blood of the

unfortunate pariahs.

"Then I came back to France, where it was reserved for me to see my

family suffer atrociously. This was the last drop in the cup of my

sorrow. Tired of leading this life of suffering and cowardice, I

carried this bomb to those who are primarily responsible for social

sufferings.

"I am reproached with the wounds of those who were hit by my

projectiles. Permit me to point out in passing that, if the

bourgeois had not massacred or caused massacres during the

Revolution, it is probable that they would still be under the yoke of

the nobility. On the other hand, figure up the dead and wounded on

Tonquin, Madagascar, Dahomey, adding thereto the thousands, yes,

millions of unfortunates who die in the factories, the mines, and

wherever the grinding power of capital is felt. Add also those who

die of hunger, and all this with the assent of our Deputies. Beside

all this, of how little weight are the reproaches now brought against

me!

"It is true that one does not efface the other; but, after all, are

we not acting on the defensive when we respond to the blows which we

receive from above? I know very well that I shall be told that I

ought to have confined myself to speech for the vindication of the

people's claims. But what can you expect! It takes a loud voice to

make the deaf hear. Too long have they answered our voices by

imprisonment, the rope, rifle volleys. Make no mistake; the

explosion of my bomb is not only the cry of the rebel Vaillant, but

the cry of an entire class which vindicates its rights, and which

will soon add acts to words. For, be sure of it, in vain will they

pass laws. The ideas of the thinkers will not halt; just as, in the

last century, all the governmental forces could not prevent the

Diderots and the Voltaires from spreading emancipating ideas among

the people, so all the existing governmental forces will not prevent

the Reclus, the Darwins, the Spencers, the Ibsens, the Mirbeaus, from

spreading the ideas of justice and liberty which will annihilate the

prejudices that hold the mass in ignorance. And these ideas,

welcomed by the unfortunate, will flower in acts of revolt as they

have done in me, until the day when the disappearance of authority

shall permit all men to organize freely according to their choice,

when we shall each be able to enjoy the product of his labor, and

when those moral maladies called prejudices shall vanish, permitting

human beings to live in harmony, having no other desire than to study

the sciences and love their fellows.

"I conclude, gentlemen, by saying that a society in which one sees

such social inequalities as we see all about us, in which we see

every day suicides caused by poverty, prostitution flaring at every

street corner,--a society whose principal monuments are barracks and

prisons,--such a society must be transformed as soon as possible, on

pain of being eliminated, and that speedily, from the human race.

Hail to him who labors, by no matter what means, for this

transformation! It is this idea that has guided me in my duel with

authority, but as in this duel I have only wounded my adversary, it

is now its turn to strike me.

"Now, gentlemen, to me it matters little what penalty you may

inflict, for, looking at this assembly with the eyes of reason, I can

not help smiling to see you, atoms lost in matter, and reasoning only

because you possess a prolongation of the spinal marrow, assume the

right to judge one of your fellows.

"Ah! gentlemen, how little a thing is your assembly and your verdict

in the history of humanity; and human history, in its turn, is

likewise a very little thing in the whirlwind which bears it through

immensity, and which is destined to disappear, or at least to be

transformed, in order to begin again the same history and the same

facts, a veritably perpetual play of cosmic forces renewing and

transferring themselves forever."

Will anyone say that Vaillant was an ignorant, vicious man, or a

lunatic? Was not his mind singularly clear, analytic? No wonder

that the best intellectual forces of France spoke in his behalf, and

signed the petition to President Carnot, asking him to commute

Vaillant's death sentence.

Carnot would listen to no entreaty; he insisted on more than a pound

of flesh, he wanted Vaillant's life, and then--the inevitable

happened: President Carnot was killed. On the handle of the stiletto

used by the ATTENTATER was engraved, significantly,

VAILLANT!

Anarchism and Other Essays · 第 5 / 16 段