It is false to think that the majority of the Russian people are living
in a state of sullen subjection under a hated tyranny. There are many
who think so and suffer the agony of despair. But as far as I could
see and learn the ordinary mass of people, peasants, artisans, and
the Soviet workers, do not trouble about politics, and dislike the
Government and its petty laws and restrictions neither more nor less
than most primitive peoples dislike the far off power that imposes
taxes, issues disagreeable bye-laws and regulations, and makes a mess
of things from their point of view. Far from Moscow and its Soviets
the village folk in Russia carry on much as they did under Tsardom,
with more land, less flogging, the same amount of lice and periodical
famine. Moscow may say: “Religion is the opium of the people,” but the
Russian peasants cross themselves before their ikons and pray God for
daily bread. The “_Pravda_” may publish many lies about England or the
United States, and prophesy world revolution once a week, but not many
of the hundred million Russian peasants ever read the “_Pravda_.” They
sow their seed, plough and reap, scrape a hard life out of the earth,
love their children, beat their wives at times, die in great numbers
with Oriental resignation to the Will of God in times of famine and
disease.
Greater than the little ruthless men in Moscow, or the fanatics there,
or the idealists, or the atheistic “intellectuals” is the life in the
fields of Russia with its obedience to the laws of nature—very cruel
sometimes—its family love, its faith, its superstition, its dignity,
labour, courage, simplicity, and ordinary human passions. The danger to
Europe and the world is the control of Russian manhood by a small group
whose orders must be obeyed because they hold the power of life and
death, and in any case are the leaders of the Russian race for weal or
woe, in peace or war.
Ramsay MacDonald’s attempt to formulate a Treaty with the Soviet states
of Russia was, I believe, inspired by the hope that the official
recognition of that form of government would lead to its modification
on more liberal lines and to trade relations by which a hundred million
people might be brought back to the commonwealth of Europe. It was
also no doubt a sop to the extremists behind his own party, who have
a sentimental sympathy with the Russian revolution and believe that
Communism, whatever its failure in Russia, is the ideal towards which
humanity should strive.
I agree with Ramsay MacDonald and his followers that it is fantastic to
expect repayment of the Russian war debt, amounting to £1,000,000,000
to Great Britain alone, and that instead of keeping these mythical
figures in the national account book they may as well be wiped out as
a bad debt belonging to a bad past. But Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, honest
as he is in many ways, was deceiving himself and his followers, as
well as the Russian people, when he promised them the possibility
of a great loan. There is no possibility of any such loan, first,
because England cannot spare that capital and, second, because Russia
offers no security which would be accepted by business men. While the
Russian leaders are still encouraging world revolution, fermenting
social strife in many countries, and declaring war on capital outside
their own frontiers, it is idle to think that English capitalists will
entrust their money to the Russian Government. It would be like fond
parents throwing their babes to the wolves at the amiable suggestion of
the village idiot.
The hostility of the Liberals and Conservatives was so united against
the proposal of a guaranteed loan to Russia that Ramsay MacDonald and
his Labour Government were faced with certain defeat. This was only
accelerated by a few days when the Labour Government fell, on October
8th of this year, on a vote of censure for withdrawing a prosecution
against a Communist writer for a seditious article inspired by the Red
propaganda of Moscow.
Although in my opinion the guarantee of a loan to Russia is not within
the bounds of business common sense so long as the Soviet Government
refuses to obey the usual moralities of international relations, I am
convinced that England and other countries will be ill advised if they
refuse to “recognise” the present rulers of Russia—“recognition” not
meaning approval—or to encourage trade relations with them independent
of national loans. As long as Russia is isolated and ostracised the
Soviet tyranny will be maintained, a great potential market will be
closed to the world, and Red propaganda will work in an underground way
to promote revolution in Europe and Asia. But with recognition, which
means diplomatic intercourse, the enterprise of foreign traders and the
admission of Russia to the League of Nations, the Russian people would
be brought back to the family of nations, and it is possible, even
likely, that their present rulers would be influenced, modified and
liberalised by the general pressure of world opinion. What Russia needs
as a moral cure is the fresh air of international intercourse.