Non-party progressivism has become the fashion. Such is the nature of the Russian intellectual—he must have a fashion. At one time Saninism was the fashion, then decadence became the rage—now it is the turn of non-partyism.

What is non-partyism?

In Russia there are landlords and peasants, their interests are antagonistic, a struggle between them is inevitable. But non-partyism ignores this fact, it is inclined to hush up the antagonism of interests. In Russia there are bourgeois and proletarians; the victory of one of these classes means the defeat of the other. But non-partyism glosses over the antagonism of interests, it shuts its eyes to their struggle. Every class has its own party, with a special programme and a special complexion. Parties direct the struggle of classes. Without parties there would be not a struggle but chaos, absence of clarity and confusion of interests. But non-partyism abhors clarity and definiteness, it prefers nebulousness and absence of programme. Glossing over of class antagonisms, hushing up of the class struggle, absence of a definite complexion, hostility to all programme, gravitation towards chaos and the confusion of interests—such is non-partyism. What is the aim of non-partyism?

To unite the ununitable, to bring about the impossible. To unite bourgeois and proletarians in an alliance, to erect a bridge between the landlords and the peasants, to haul a wagon with the aid of a swan, a crab and a pike—this is what non-partyism aims at.

Non-partyism realises that it is incapable of uniting the ununitable and therefore says with a sigh: “If ‘ifs’ and ‘ans’

Were pots and pans. . . .”

But “ifs” and “ans” are not pots and pans and so non-partyism is always left in the cart, always remains the simpleton.

Non-partyism is like a man without a head on his shoulders, or—rather—like a man with a turnip instead of a head.

This is precisely the position of the “progressive” journal Zaprosy Zhizni.103

“The parties of the Right have already taken a decision,” says Zaprosy Zhizni. “They are uniting in one reactionary mass to fight the entire progressive opposition. . . . Therefore, the bloc of the Rights must be opposed by a bloc of the Lefts, which must embrace all the progressive social elements” (see Zaprosy Zhizni, No. 6).

But who are these “progressive elements”? They are the Party of Peaceful Renovation,104 the Cadets, the Trudoviks and the Social-Democrats. That is to say, the “progressive” bourgeoisie, the pro-liberal landlords, the peasants who are thirsting for the landlords’ land, and the proletarians who are fighting the bourgeoisie. And Zaprosy Zhizni wants to unite these “elements”! Very original and . . . foolish, is it not? And this organ of people without principles wants to lecture the Social-Democrats on the tactics they should pursue in the elections to the Fourth Duma!

Simpletons! . . .

The St. Petersburg Zvezda,

Reprinted from the newspaper

No. 30, April 15, 1912

Signed: K. S—n