The voluminous literature of Communism contains bold and sometimes harsh answers to almost any question a student may care to ask. However, few students have an opportunity to meet anyone who will admit he is a well indoctrinated Communist, and few people have the time or inclination to read the technical, cumbersome documents of Communist lore. Therefore, the following symposium is designed to bring some of these answers together under a number of general headings.
It will be observed that Communist propaganda sometimes contradicts these answers when a true statement of doctrine would prove embarrassing. However, the answers presented here are taken in most instances from the foremost exponents of Marxism and in all such cases represent unembellished, non-propaganda answers which teachers of Marxism pass along to their own followers.
Student: “Do you think there is a possibility that the democracies and the Soviet can somehow co-exist?”
Lenin: “The existence of the Soviet Republic side by side with imperialist states for a long time is unthinkable. One or the other must triumph in the end. And before that end supervenes, a series of frightful collisions between the Soviet Republic and the bourgeois states will be inevitable.”{132}
Official Statement: “The proletariat in the Soviet Union harbours no illusions as to the possibility of a durable peace with the imperialists. The proletariat knows that the imperialist attack against the Soviet Union is inevitable; that in the process of a proletarian world revolution wars between proletarian and bourgeois states, wars for the emancipation of the world from capitalism, will necessarily and inevitably arise. Therefore, the primary duty of the proletariat, as the fighter for socialism, is to make all the necessary political, economic and military preparations for these wars, to strengthen its Red Army—that mighty weapon of the proletariat—and to train the masses of the toilers in the art of war.”{133}
Student: “Why do you not go ahead and prove that Communism will work in your own country before trying to force it upon other nations?”
Lenin: “Final victory can be achieved only on an international scale, and only by the combined efforts of the workers of all countries.”{134}
Stalin: “This means that the serious assistance of the international proletariat is a force without which the problem of the final victory of socialism in one country cannot be solved.”{135}
Student: “I am in favor of cordial relations between nations. Would you call me an Internationalist?”
P. E. Vyshinsky: “At present the only determining criterion… is: Are you for or against the USSR, the motherland of the world proletariat? An internationalist is not one who verbally recognizes international solidarity or sympathizes with it. A real internationalist is one who brings his sympathy and recognition up to the point of practical and maximum help to the USSR in support and defense of the USSR by every means and in every possible form.”{136}
Student: “I thought that during World War II the Communist leaders said they wanted to be friends with the United States. I hoped we could continue to be friends.”
Varga: “The fact that the Soviet Union and the greatly shaken capitalist countries showed themselves to be in one powerful camp, raged against the Fascist aggressors (during World War II), showed that the struggle of the two systems within the democratic camp was temporarily alleviated, suspended, but this of, course does not mean the end of the struggle.”{137}
Marshall Tito: “Our collaboration with capitalism during the war which has recently ended, by no means signifies that we shall prolong our alliance with it in the future. On the contrary, the capitalistic forces constitute our natural enemy despite the fact that they helped us to defeat their most dangerous representative. It may happen that we shall again decide to make use of their aid, but always with the sole aim of accelerating their final ruin.”{138}
Student: “In other words, you pretended to be our friends merely as a matter of expediency? Why would it not be to our mutual advantage to continue being friends?”
Dimitry Z. Manuilsky: “War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable.”{139}
Student: “Then why do you even try to maintain peaceful relations with the West?
Stalin: “We cannot forget the saying of Lenin to the effect that a great deal… depends on whether we succeed in delaying war with the capitalist countries… until proletarian revolution ripens in Europe or until colonial revolutions come to a head, or, finally, until the capitalists fight among themselves over the division of the colonies. Therefore, the maintenance of peaceful relations with capitalist countries is an obligatory task for us.”{140}
Student: “Do you think we should expect this “inevitable” conflict soon or far in the distant future?”
Lenin: “To tie one’s hands beforehand, openly to tell the enemy, who is at present better armed than we are, whether and when we will fight him, is stupidity and not revolutionariness. To accept battle at a time when it is obviously advantageous to the enemy and not to us is a crime; and those political leaders of the revolutionary class who are unable to ‘tack, to maneuver, to compromise’ in order to avoid an obviously disadvantageous battle, are good for nothing.”{141}
Student: “Perhaps this explains why you Communists continue building up a tremendous war machine while proclaiming that you want peace. Don’t you think the West sincerely wants peace and would like to disarm?”
Official Statement: “There is a glaring contradiction between the imperialists’ policy of piling up armaments and their hypocritical talk about peace. There is no such contradiction, however, between the Soviet Government’s preparation for defense and for revolutionary war and a consistent peace policy. Revolutionary war of the proletarian dictatorship is but a continuation of a revolutionary peace policy by other means.”{142}
Student: “But would not a so-called revolutionary peace policy by ‘other means’ simply be a demand for unconditional surrender under threat of extermination? Why do you perpetuate the myth of peaceful coexistence when you openly consider the West your enemy?”
Dimitry Z. Manuilsky: “Today, of course, we are not strong enough to attack…. To win we shall need the element of surprise. The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record. There will be electrifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will jump at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched fist.”{143}
Student: “Perhaps this helps to explain why the Communist strategists have never been able to take over a single country by persuasion or by the popular election of legal candidates. Must you Communists always resort to subversion and illegal political operations?”
Lenin: “The absolute necessity in principal of combining illegal with legal work is determined not only by the sum total of the specific features of the present period… but also by the necessity of proving to the bourgeoisie that there is not, nor can there be, a sphere or field of work that cannot be won by the Communists…. It is necessary, immediately, for all legal Communist Parties to form illegal organizations for the purpose of systematically carrying on illegal work, and of fully preparing for the moment when the bourgeoisie resorts to persecution. Illegal work is particularly necessary in the army, the navy and police.”{144}
Student: “What happens to a person who is selected for illegal operations?”
Lenin: “A working class agitator who in any way shows talent and promise should not work eleven hours a day in a factory. We should see to it that he lives on the funds of the Party, that he is able in good time to adopt an illegal manner of existence, that he has the opportunity of changing his sphere of activities; otherwise he will not gain experience, he will not broaden his outlook, and will not be able to hold out for at most several years in the struggle against the police.”{145}
Student: “Could an American who might be converted to Communism belong to the Party but still hold out for peaceful reform instead of revolutionary violence?”
Lenin: “It is not enough to take sides in the question of political slogans; we must take sides also in the question of an armed uprising. Those who are opposed to armed uprising, those who do not prepare for it, must be ruthlessly cast out of the ranks of the supporters of the revolution and sent back to the ranks of its enemies, of the traitors or cowards; for the day is approaching when the force of events and conditions of the struggle will compel us to separate enemies from friends according to this principle.”{146}
Student: “Then apparently you believe social progress is possible only by revolutionary violence rather than by legislative reform?”
Lenin: “Marxists have never forgotten that violence will be an inevitable accompaniment of the collapse of capitalism on its full scale and of the birth of a socialist society. And this violence will cover a historical period; a whole era of wars of the most varied kinds—imperialist wars, civil wars within the country, the interweaving of the former with the latter, national wars, the emancipation of the nationalities crushed by the imperialist powers which will inevitably form various alliances with each other in the era of vast state-capitalist and military trusts and syndicates. This is an era of tremendous collapses, of wholesale military decisions of a violent nature, of crises. It has already begun, we see it clearly—it is only the beginning.”{147}
Student: “Do you mean it is impossible for an American to be a true Communist without betraying his own country?”
Lenin: “Hatred for one’s own government and one’s own bourgeoisie—the sentiment of all class conscious workers… is a banal phrase if it does not mean revolution against their own governments. It is impossible to rouse hatred against one’s own government and one’s own bourgeoisie without desiring their defeat.”{148}
Student: “Would an American Communist be expected to engage in subversive and disloyal activities even if the United States were at war?”
Lenin: “A revolutionary class in a reactionary war cannot but desire the defeat of its government…. And revolutionary action in wartime against one’s own government undoubtedly and incontrovertibly means not only desiring its defeat, but really facilitating such defeat.”{149}
Student: “But if you are so anxious to break down loyalty to individual governments why you do insist on American Communists maintaining a loyalty toward the USSR?”
Official Statement: “In view of the fact that the USSR is the only fatherland of the international proletariat, the principle bulwark of its achievements and the most important factor for its international emancipation, the international proletariat must on its part facilitate the success of the work of socialist construction in the USSR and defend it against the attacks of the capitalist powers by all the means in its power.”{150}
Student: “In other words—and to be more specific—you are against nationalism except when applied to the USSR?
P. E. Vyshinsky: “The defense of the USSR, as of the socialist motherland of the world proletariat, is the holy duty of every honest man everywhere and not only of the citizens of the USSR.”{151}
Student: “If American Communists are expected overthrow their own Government and serve the interests of the USSR, would that not make them anarchists and insurrectionists?”
Lenin: “Only insurrection can guarantee the victory of the revolution.”{152}
Lenin: “The revolution confronts us directly with the problem of armed insurrection. And to speak of this without proper technical preparations, is merely to mouth empty phrases. He who wants the revolution must systematically prepare for it the broad masses, which will, in the process of preparation, create the necessary organs of the struggle.”{153}
Student: “And all this for the violent overthrow of the Government?”
Lenin: “The purpose of insurrection must be not only the complete destruction, or removal of all local authorities and their replacement by new… but also the expulsion of the landlords and the seizure of their lands.”{154}
Student: “Does not such an inflammatory policy completely contradict your widely publicized program for a peace offensive?”
Official Statement: “Complete Communism will know no more war. A real, assured people’s peace is possible only under Communism. But the goal cannot be reached by peaceful, ‘pacifist’ means; on the contrary, it can be reached only by civil war against the bourgeoisie.”{155}
Student: “In other words, Communists in all countries constitute a war party rather than a political party designed to promote peace?”
Official Statement: “In the capitalist world today, the revolutionary proletariat supports the war of defense of the proletarian state (the USSR) against the imperialist states.”{156}
Student: “But the Soviet Union has consistently waged or encouraged wars of aggression. How can you conscientiously support these?”
Official Statement: “Every war of the Soviet Union is a war of defense, even if it is conducted with offensive means.”{157}
Student: “If you are going to call all Soviet wars ‘defensive’ even when you admit she is using ‘offensive means’ what will be your attitude toward other nations which maintain heavy armaments simply as a defense against Communist aggression?”
Official Statement: (We stand for the) “systematic exposure and stigmatizing of all capitalist armaments, war pacts and war preparations and especially of the defense of the Soviet Union against the league of the imperialists.”{158}
Student: “Are the Communist leaders expecting a spontaneous uprising in various countries or will they order their followers to engineer an uprising?”
Lenin: “If the situation is ripe for a popular uprising, in view of the fact that the revolution in social relationships has already taken place, and if we have prepared for it, we can order an uprising.”{159}
Student: “What methods would you use to overthrow the Government?”
Lenin: “Riots—demonstrations—street battles—detachments of a revolutionary army—such are the stages in the development of the popular uprising.”{160}
Student: “Based on experience, what are the most ideal circumstances for a successful insurrection?”
Lenin: “Combining of a mass political strike with an armed uprising.”{161}
Student: “Originally, what did you say about the organization which was supposed to run the world revolution?”
Official Statement: “The Communist International is the concentrated will of the world revolutionary proletariat. Its mission is to organize the working class of the world for the overthrow of the capitalist system and the establishment of Communism. The Communist International is a fighting body and assumes the task of combining the revolutionary forces of every country.”{162}
Student: “Was the purpose of the Communist International to spread dissension and build the Red Army?”
Official Statement: “In order to overthrow the international bourgeoisie and to create an International Soviet Republic as a transition stage to the Communist Society, the Communist International will use all means at its disposal, including force of arms.”{163}
Stalin: “The tasks of the Party in foreign policy are: 1—to utilize each and every contradiction and conflict among the surrounding capitalist groups and governments for the purpose of disintegrating imperialism; 2—to spare no pains or means to render assistance to the proletarian revolution in the West; 3—to take all necessary measures to strengthen the Red Army.”{164}
Student: “What was the program of the Communist International?”
Official Statement: “The Communist International must devote itself especially to… everyday organization work… in the course of which work legal methods must unfailingly be combined with illegal methods; organized work in the army and navy—such must be the activity of the Communist Parties in this connection. The fundamental slogans of the Communist International in this connection must be the following:
“Convert imperialist war into civil war;
“Defeat ‘your own’ imperialist government;
“Defend the USSR and the colonies by every means in the event of imperialist war against them.”{165}
Student: “Did the Communist International depend upon Communist parties in various countries or did it operate independently?”
Official Statement: “The successful struggle of the Communist International for the dictatorship of the proletariat presupposes the existence in every country of a compact Communist Party hardened in the struggle, disciplined, centralized, and closely linked to the masses.”{166}
Student: “What was the obligation of an organization such as the Communist Party of America when it affiliated with the Communist International?”
Official Statement: “Each party desirous of affiliating to the Communist International should be obliged to render every possible assistance to the Soviet Republics in their struggle against all counter-revolutionary forces. The Communist parties should carry on a precise and definite propaganda to induce the workers to refuse to transport any kind of military equipment intended for fighting against the Soviet Republics, and should also by legal or illegal means carry on a propaganda amongst the troops sent against the workers’ republics, etc.”{167}
Student: “Was it intended from the beginning that Communist leaders in Russia would dictate the policies of the Communist Party of America?”
Earl Browder: “The Communist Parties of the various countries are the direct representatives of the Communist International, and thus, indirectly of the aims and policies of Soviet Russia.”{168}
Official Statement: “Representatives of Soviet Russia in various countries, engaging in political activities, should co-ordinate these activities in some form or other with the activities and policies of the respective Communist Parties.”{169}
Alexander Trachtenberg: “Consistently supporting the Soviet Union since its inception, American Communists were acting as internationalists and as Americans.”{170}
Student: “In 1943 the Communist International was suddenly dissolved. Was this designed to pacify a rising wave of anti-Communist sentiments during World War II?”
Hans Berger: “Since correct strategy consists in uniting and concentrating all forces against the common enemy, necessitating the elimination of everything which makes such unification and concentration difficult, therefore, the dissolution of the Communist International, decided upon unanimously by the Communist Parties, was doubtless an act in the interests of facilitating victory over the fascist enemy.”{171}
Student: “Did the dissolution of the Communist International result in a weakening of the solidarity between Communist Parties throughout the world?”
Hans Berger: “Among the reasons which the leaders of the Communist Parties considered in supporting the dissolution of the Communist International was doubtless the question of strengthening the Communist Parties.”{172}
Student: “Did it weaken the plans for world revolution?”
Hans Berger: “The Communist Parties have thus never sacrificed their Marxist-Leninist principles, which know no boundaries, and which can never be given up by them, but guided by their principles fight on with the utmost consistency.”{173}
Student: “Would this represent the official view of the Communist Party of America?”
Gil Green: “Since November, 1940, our Party has not been an affiliate of the Communist International and has had no organizational ties with it. But who can deny that our Party has nonetheless fulfilled its obligation to the American Working class and people and in this way to the working class and people of the world?”{174}
“Nor is the further existence of the Communist International necessary as the living embodiment of the principle of internationalism and international working class solidarity. The fight for internationalism has not disappeared. It has been raised to new and more glorious heights.”{175}
“The dissolution of the Communist International does not, therefore, mark a step backward…. Millions all over the world live, work and fight under the bright banner of Marxism.”{176}
Student: “During World War II what did Stalin say the Russian policy was toward nations which were then under Nazi domination?”
Stalin: “We are waging a just war for our country and our freedom. It is not our aim to seize foreign lands or to subjugate foreign people. Our aim is clear and noble. We want to free our Soviet land of the German-Fascist scoundrels. We want to free our Ukrainian, Moldavian, Byelorussian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian and Karelian brothers from the outrage and violence to which they are being subjected by the German-Fascist scoundrels….
“We have not and cannot have such war aims as the imposition of our will and regime on the slavs and other enslaved peoples of Europe who are awaiting our aid. Our aim consists in assisting these people in their struggle for liberation from Hitler’s tyranny and then setting them free to rule in their own lands as they desire.”{177}
Student: “What excuse could Stalin and the Communist leaders have for doing the very opposite of what they had promised?”
Lenin: “The strictest loyalty to the ideas of Communism must be combined with the ability to make all necessary practical compromises, to maneuver, to make agreements, zigzags, retreats and so on, so as to accelerate the coming to power.”{178}
Stalin: “Sincere diplomacy is no more possible than dry water or iron wood.”{179}
Student: “Doesn’t this approach to international relations sound more like a criminal code of conduct rather than sincere diplomacy? Does Communist Morality permit this?”
Lenin: “We say: Morality is that which serves to destroy the old exploiting society and to unite all the toilers around the proletariat, which is creating a new Communist society. Communist morality is the morality which serves this struggle….”{180}
Official Statement: “Morals or ethics is the body of norms and rules on the conduct of Soviet peoples. At the root of Communist morality, said Lenin, lays the struggle for the consolidation and the completion of Communism. Therefore, from the point of view of Communist morality, only those acts are moral which contribute to the building up of a new Communist society.”{181}
Student: “But this sounds like an excuse for doing whatever one may find expedient rather than following a system of rules for right living. Assuming Communism was right; would that justify a communist in lying, stealing or killing to put Communism into effect?”
William Z. Foster: “With him the end justifies the means. Whether his tactics be ‘legal’ and ‘moral,’ or not, does not concern him, so long as they are effective. He knows that the laws as well as the current code of morals are made by his mortal enemies…. Consequently, he ignores them in so far as he is able and it suits his purposes. He proposes to develop, regardless of capitalist conceptions of ‘legality,’ ‘fairness,’ ‘right,’ etc., a greater power than his capitalist enemies have.”{182}
Student: “Would you then deny the possibility of there being an eternal, God-given code for moral or ethical conduct?”
Lenin: “We do not believe in eternal morality, and we expose all the fables about morality.”{183}
Marx: “Law, morality, religion are… so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests.”{184}
Engels: “We therefore reject every attempt to impose on us any moral dogma whatsoever as an eternal, ultimate and forever immutable moral law on the pretext that the moral world too has its permanent principles which transcend history and the difference between nations. We maintain on the contrary that all former moral theories are the product, in the last analysis, of the economic stage which society had reached at that particular epoch. And as society has hitherto moved in class antagonisms, morality was always a class morality; it has either justified the domination and the interests of the ruling class, or, as soon as the oppressed class has become powerful enough, it has represented the revolt against this domination and the future interests of the oppressed.”{185}
Student: “Then what is the Communist attitude toward the Bible which contains many moral teachings?”
Official Statement: “A collection of fantastic legends without any scientific support. It is full of dark hints, historical mistakes and contradictions. It serves as a factor for gaining power and subjugating the unknowing nations.”{186}
Engels: “It is now perfectly clear to me that the so-called sacred writings of the Jews are nothing more than the record of the old Arabian religious and tribal tradition, modified by the early separation of the Jews from their tribally related but nomadic neighbours.”{187}
Student: “If you reject the Bible, do you also reject all religion and all of the institutionalized morality which it represents?”
Official Statement: “The philosophy of Marxism-Leninism—the theoretical foundation of the Communist Party—is incompatible with religion.”{188}
Lenin: “Religion is a kind of spiritual gin in which the slaves of capital drown their human shape and their claims to any decent human life.”{189}
Student: “Could not a Communist enjoy religious activity as a matter of conscience and as a private right?”
Lenin: “To the party of the Socialist proletariat… religion is not a private matter.”{190}
Yaroslavsky: “Every Leninist, every Communist, every class-conscious worker and peasant must be able to explain why a Communist cannot support religion [and] why Communists fight against religion.”{191}
Student: “But supposing I were a Communist and still wanted to go to Church?”
Official Statement: “If a Communist youth believes in God and goes to Church, he fails to fulfil his duties. This means that he has not yet rid himself of religious superstitions and has not become a fully conscious person (i.e., a Communist).”{192}
Lenin: “A young man or woman cannot be a Communist youth unless he or she is free of religious convictions.”{193}
Lenin: “We must combat religion—this is the ABC of all materialism, and consequently Marxism.”{194}
Student: “What is your attitude toward individual churches? Take the Catholic Church, for example.”
Yaroslavsky: “The Catholic Church, with the pope in its van, is now an important bulwark of all counter-revolutionary organizations and forces.”{195}
Student: Are you against all Christianity?”
Lunarcharsky: (Russian Commissioner of Education): “We hate Christians and Christianity. Even the best of them must be considered our worst enemies. Christian love is an obstacle to the development of the revolution. Down with love of one’s neighbor! What we want is hate…. Only then can we conquer the universe.”{196}
Student: “How do you justify Communist ‘hate’ propaganda of this kind?”
Official Statement: “Hatred fosters vigilance and an uncompromising attitude toward the enemy and leads to the destruction of everything that prevents Soviet peoples from building a happy life. The teaching of hatred for the enemies of the toilers enriches the conception of Socialist humanism by distinguishing it from sugary and hypocritical ‘philanthropy.’”{197}
Stalin: “It is impossible to conquer an enemy without having learned to hate him with all the might of one’s soul.”{198}
Student: “And what is your attitude toward the Jewish people and their religion?”
Marx: “What was the foundation of the Jewish religion? Practical needs egoism. Consequently the monotheism of the Jew is in reality the Polytheism of many needs…. The God of practical needs and egoism is money…. Money is the jealous God of Israel, by the side of which no other God may exist…. The God of the Jews has secularized himself and become the universal God…. As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of Judaism, the huckster and the conditions which produce him, the Jew will become impossible…. The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism.”{199}
Student: “In view of all this, why is it that Communist propaganda sometimes pretends a tolerance for religion?”
Yaroslavsky: “In our work among religious people we must bear in mind Lenin’s advice to utilize every method available to us, or, as he said, we must ‘approach them this way and that way’ in order to stimulate them to criticize religion themselves.”{200}
Student: “If religion is so bad, do you think it will gradually die out?”
Yaroslavsky: “It would be a great mistake to believe that religion will die out of itself. We have repeatedly emphasized Lenin’s opinion that the Communist Party cannot depend upon the spontaneous development of anti-religious ideas—that these ideas are molded by organized action.”{201}
Student: “Do you think a person’s attitude toward religion should be changed by friendly persuasion?”
Lenin: “The fight against religion must not be limited nor reduced to abstract, ideological preaching. This struggle must be linked up with the concrete practical class movement; its aim must be to eliminate the social roots of religion.”{202}
Official Statement: “The struggle against the Gospel and Christian legend must be conducted ruthlessly and with all the means at the disposal of Communism.”{203}
Student: “Is it true that you have already suppressed the clergy in Russia?”
Stalin: “Have we suppressed the reactionary clergy? Yes, we have. The unfortunate thing is that it has not been completely liquidated. Anti-religious propaganda is a means by which the complete liquidation of the reactionary clergy must be brought about. Cases occur when certain members of the Party hamper the complete development of anti-religious propaganda. If such members are expelled it is a good thing because there is no room for such ‘Communists’ in the ranks of the Party.”{204}
Student: “What do you propose to substitute for religion?”
Lenin: “We said at the beginning… Marxism cannot be conceived without atheism. We would add here that atheism without Marxism is incomplete and inconsistent.”{205}
Student: “If you are going to take away the concept of God, what spiritual substitute do you propose to offer your people?”
Official Statement: “What better means of influencing pupils than, for example, the characteristic of the spiritual figure of Stalin given in the Short Biography: ‘Everyone knows the irresistible, shattering power of Stalin’s logic, the crystal clearness of his intellect, his iron will, devotion to the party, his modesty, artlessness, his solicitude for people and mercilessness to enemies of the people.”{206}
Student: “I understand Soviet leaders missed no opportunity when Stalin was alive to indoctrinate the children with the idea of Stalin as a spiritual figure. What was the slogan stamped on children’s toys?”
Official Statement: “Thank you, Comrade Stalin, for my joyous childhood.”{207}
Student: “Is there any opportunity for freedom and democracy under Communism?”
Engels: “We say: ‘A la guerre comme a la guerre’; we do not promise freedom nor any democracy.”{208}
Student: “Then you do not believe that men should be free and equal in the enjoyment of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?”
Engels: “As long as classes exist, all arguments about freedom and equality should be accompanied by the question: Freedom for which class? And for what purpose? The equality of which class with which? And in what relation?”{209}
Student: “But is it not your desire to have freedom and equality for all classes?”
Engels: “We do not want freedom for the bourgeoisie.”{210}
Student: “Do not the people in Communist satellites want freedom and equality for their citizens?”
Engels: “Anyone who talks about freedom and equality within the limits of toiler democracy, i.e., conditions under which the capitalists are overthrown while property and free trade remain—is a defender of the exploiters.”{211}
Student: “Do you believe in freedom at all?”
Lenin: “While the state exists there is no freedom. When freedom exists, there will be no state.”{212}
Student: “But the USSR still preserves the State. Does this mean the government of Russia is not intended to promote the freedom of the Russian people?”
Engels: “So long as the proletariat still uses the state it does not use it in the interest of freedom but in order to hold down its adversaries.”{213}
Student: “Then do I conclude from this that in Russia you do not even pretend to has the civil liberties which we enjoy over here?”
Vyshinsky: “In our state, naturally there is and can be no place for freedom of speech, press, and so on for the foes of socialism. Every sort of attempt on their part to utilize to the detriment of the state, that is to say, to the detriment of all the toilers—these freedoms granted to the toilers, must be classified as a counter-revolutionary crime.”{214}
Student: “Supposing I were living in Russia and wanted to publish a newspaper which criticized the government. Would I be granted the same freedom of press which I enjoy in America?”
Stalin: “What freedoms of the press have you in mind? Freedom of the press for which class— the bourgeoisie or the proletariat? If it is a question of freedom of the press for the bourgeoisie, then it does not and will not exist here as long as the proletarian dictatorship exists.”{215}
Student: “Then you mean freedom of the press is only for the privileged proletariat? It would not include a person like myself?”
Stalin: “We have no freedom of the press for the bourgeoisie. We have no freedom of the press for the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, who represent the interests of the beaten and overthrown bourgeoisie. But what is there surprising in that? We have never pledged ourselves to grant freedom of the press to all classes, and to make all classes happy.”{216}
Student: “But how can a government fairly administer its laws unless they apply equally to all the people?”
Lenin: “Dictatorship is power based upon force and unrestricted by any laws. The revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat is power won and maintained by the violence of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie—power that is unrestricted by any laws.”{217}
Student: “But if laws are against classes rather than violators, how can there be any justice?”
Vyshinsky: “The task of justice in the USSR is to assure the precise and unswerving fulfillment of Soviet laws by all the institutions, organizations, officials and citizens of the USSR. This the court accomplishes by destroying without pity all the foes of the people in whatever form they manifest their criminal encroachments upon socialism.”{218}
Student: “Let me ask a few questions about Soviet schools and the Communist theory of education. How would you describe the objectives of education in Russia?”
Official Statement: “It is in the schools, at the desk, in the first class, that the foundations for a Communist outlook are laid in future Soviet citizens. The country entrusts the school with its most treasured possessions—its children—and no one should be allowed to indulge in the slightest deviation from the principles of the Communist materialistic upbringing of the new generation.”{219}
Student: “Would it not be better to give students a broad view of all governments and different economies so they could draw their own conclusions?”
Official Statement: “The Soviet school cannot be satisfied to rear merely educated persons. Basing itself on the facts and deductions of progressive science, it should instill the ideology of Communism in the minds of the young generation, shape a Marxist-Leninist world outlook and inculcate the spirit of Soviet patriotism and Bolshevik ideas in them.”{220}
Student: “Is it fair to force the minds of the rising generation to accept only the values which a current political regime wishes to impose upon them?”
Official Statement: “It is important that pupils should clearly realize the doom of the capitalistic world, its inevitable downfall, that they should see on the other hand the great prospects of our socialist system, and actively get prepared when they leave school to be ready to take their place in life, in the struggle for a new world, for Communism.”{221}
Student: “Since Communism claims to represent the interests of the laboring class, what is the official Communist attitude toward the labor movement?”
Lenin: “It will be necessary… to agree to any and every sacrifice, and even—if need be—to resort to all sorts of devices, maneuvers and illegal methods, to evasion and subterfuge, in order to penetrate into the trade unions, to remain in them, and to carry on Communist work in them at all costs.”{222}
Student: “I think the average American working man would be interested in knowing what the Communists do when they control a labor union. How do the Communists treat labor unions in Russia where they have complete control?”
Victor Kravchenko (Former Government Official now defected): “The local (Communist) party organization elects one of its suitable members to become president of the trade union. Generally speaking, the Soviet trade unions have to see that the workers execute the program.”{223}
Student: “But does that not make the union a subservient arm of government rather than an organization of workers? What if a nation wanted to strike?
Kravchenko: “The union’s job is to see that strict discipline is maintained, that there will be no strikes that the workers work for wages established by the central government that the workers carry out all the decisions, resolutions. et cetera, of the party.”{224}
Student: “But what would happen if I were a worker in Russia and wanted to quit my job?”
Kravchenko: “Every citizen in the Soviet Union has a passport. On the passport is his photograph. There is also a special page on which a stamp is put which indicates the place, date and type of employment. If you leave your job in one factory and go to another without the permission of your director you will be prosecuted under the law for violation of the law prohibiting unauthorized change of employment. This refers not only to laborers but to any kind of employee.”{225}
Student: “In view of these statements I would like to conclude with one more question: Is this the hope for humanity which the Soviet offers the world?”
Official Statement: “The Soviet is an inspiring example for the proletarian revolution in the rest of the world…. (It) shows the powerful achievements of the victorious proletariat and the vast superiority of Socialist to Capitalist economy. The Soviet Union is an inspiring example for the national self-determination of the oppressed peoples.”{226}