When the cannon were fired in November, 1917, the Bolsheviks hoped for a world revolution. All the sacrifices. made by the revolutionists from 1917 to 1921 were directed towards this objective. Lenine and his followers were not fighting for a republic, but for a communistic commonwealth. And after five years of struggle and experiment the original idea has been abandoned. Not because the Bolshevik leaders no longer believe in the idea of world. revolution but because they have learned by bitter experience that not only does America not want to have anything to do with revolutionists, not only does Asia not yet think in such terms, but also that even the disintegrated and chaotic continent of Europe is either too apathetic or feeble for revolution.

According to Bolshevik reasoning, the only event which could have kept intact the original scheme of communism in Russia was a world revolution. Without revolution in Europe, Russia, they argue, must make a step backward. From what I have seen in Russia and from the statements of the leaders, I venture to state that the Bolsheviks have given up the idea. They are more interested in rebuilding their own country. What the Bolsheviks wish at present is to save as much as possible of what is still alive. And they seem determined to concentrate upon two essentials: (1) the land problem and (2) the ownership of the basic industries.

Regarding the land problem it must be made clear that while theoretically the state owns the land, in reality the peasant knows that he is going to keep the land for himself and his people. The condition is that the peasant must cultivate it with his own hands. But there are many provisions by which the peasants can rent the land to others who can work it with their own means.

The state ownership of the basic industries presents a more complicated picture. Russia has today state owned, privately owned, and mixed owned industries. The basic industries are owned by the government, but some important industries are given out as concessions with the government participating and holding a certain number of shares. The privately owned industries are up to the present small affairs.

Before analyzing any further the influences which the privately owned industries may exercise in the future on the government, let us see what effect the land problem may have on Russia. Soviet Russia with its federated republics has a population of 131,546,045. Out of these 110,853,734 are rural inhabitants. These people have until recently had very little to say in the politics of the country. They were used by different groups to help them to power. Bolsheviks gained their support in 1917 and that made their success possible. A few hours after the Bolsheviks came to power they issued decrees for the

nationalization of the land. Since then the Bolsheviks have been wise enough to make compromises with the peasants in order not to lose their support. While the peasants form the largest percentage of the Russian population and have had in recent times a determining influence upon the course of affairs, that influence has not been calculated or intelligent. But the effect of the revolution was to awaken in the peasant a certain interest in politics. To be sure, the peasants are not really governing the country or anything like it. The peasant, however, is learning that it is he alone who can have the last say on who shall govern.

The question arises: will not the peasant, individualistic as he is, in due time take hold of the reins of the government and will he not in a generation make of Russia a peasant Republic? There are many things which point in this direction. Notwithstanding statements to the contrary, it is an open question whether Russia can develop in the near future into an industrial nation. The Russian workers have very little in common with factory workers of Europe or America. The Russian industries were run by foreigners and there are few Russians with really great administrative ability.

On the other hand, foreign capitalists may come to Russia to exploit its resources and develop the country industrially. With what eyes will the peasant look upon those who come to Russia for this purpose? Was the peasant not told at the beginning of the revolution that the colonization of Russia by foreign capitalists had stopped and the country would run its own business? What will he say to all the Vanderbilts who come to run his industries? Will he not reply with the

words of the Bolsheviks of 1917? It is true that the peasant needs the industrial products and he will not care much who produces them as long as he can get them. But whether he will say this when his political judgment ripens, remains to be seen.

Rural life is improving. Of course, it is still in its first stages. Yet a step and a very important one forward has been made. It is true there is still tremendous suffering, famine, disorganization and neglect in cultivation. But the revolution has nevertheless liberated the peasants and given them the opportunities of becoming a mighty political factor.

In industry the story is entirely different. The country is financing today a completely run down industry. The deficits are great and during the summer of 1922 many strikes took place because the wages of the workers were not paid for months. The reconstruction of the industries is therefore the most momentous task facing Russia at present. The way chosen by the Bolsheviks is by the giving of concessions. The foreigners shut out in 1917 by the door of "world revolution" are invited back again under the sign "New Economic Policy." And there are sufficient indications that in a short time there will be a rush after concessions. Granted therefore that the concession hunters will come, will they not in due time exercise an influence upon Russia? The Bolsheviks answer: "But the basic industries and railroads remain in our hands." That may be true. Yet foreign capital is likely to have a little say, even if very little, in the affairs of the country. To all these must be added another very important factor: the new bourgeoisie.

With the introduction of the New

Economic Policy a new class came to life. It is composed of the small traders, shop-keepers and part owners of factories. This class has today no political rights. But in time as they gain more economic power political influence is likely to follow. The aim of the Bolsheviks is to oppose to the foreign and native capitalists a powerful centralized state industry. They reckon that, with the improvement of the state of agriculture and with the money they are to make out of the foreign concessions, they can rebuild their own industries.

Let us assume that the industries are brought up to their pre-war basis. Alongside of these improvements let us also assume that the agricultural conditions have been so far improved that they can export a considerable quantity of grain and other farm products. Hand in hand with these improvements will follow the strengthening of the new bourgeoisie and of the foreign investors. And the consequences can easily be foreseen. The city workers will fight for more wages, the farmer will demand more protection, the new bourgeoisie will ask more freedom of trade, the foreign capitalists will want more favors.

With the basic industries and railroads in the hands of the state and with a labor government at the helm, the city worker will most probably not be sacrificed and in time will improve his material situation. But state capitalism is not socialism and is very far from being communism. And state capitalism in Russia carries with it an especially great danger of bureaucracy. Yet the Russians will have the opportunity to prove in the next ten years how successfully nationalized industries can be run; and whether demo

cratic management will find its place in nationalized industries.

Things may, however, take a different turn if contrary to all expectation a revolution should take place in Germany, followed by other continental countries. In such case the Russians, instead of retreating, may start anew with the communistic experiments. Without such a revolution the Russians can hold to only very few of their earlier plans and the country is likely to assume the form of a peasant republic.

Are the actual results of the Russian revolution much different from what a labor government by the reformistic British Labor Party may try to get? The conditions of both countries are so different that comparison cannot be made. made. But the economic measures of present Bolshevik Russia will certainly not be too advanced for the British Labor Party. In fact prominent leaders of the British Labor Party say that if they were in power more socialistic laws would be in force. Again the Russian change was apt to come in catastrophical form, whereas the majority of British laborites expect to accomplish their aim by parliamentary methods.

What then did the Bolsheviks accomplish? (1) The revolution of March overthrew despotism. (2) The revolution of November paved the way for the economic reforms and brought a labor government to power. (3) The wars of 1919-21 defeated the foreign invasions of Kolchak, Yudenitch, Denikin and Wrangel. (4) The new economic policy was introduced.

The Bolsheviks made the Revolution of 1917 a success. Without them the monarchy might perhaps rule Russia today. It may be said that the Men

sheviks, Social Revolutionists and Cadets also fought in March, 1917, for the revolution. But those social revolutionists and their friends were weak people. A revolution needs men of action. The Social Revolutionists could and would have been carried away by one sweep of monarchist mobilization. Not so the Bolsheviks. They knew what they wanted. And besides wanting communism and world revolution they also were the people to repulse successfully any monarchist adventures. The social revolutionistshonest and fine people, perhaps too fine to be at the helm of a state during a big turmoil-received the revolution as a child receives a toy for which he was longing. The Bolsheviks caught hold of it with iron grip.

The Bolsheviks have kept their country intact and have repulsed every foreign invasion. They persistently refused to sell their rights as a nation in exchange for credits from foreign countries. In spite of blockade and famine they refused every credit which demanded from them their independence as a nation.

The Bolsheviks have been denounced as foreigners, exiles and anti-nationalists. In reality, the Bolsheviks were those who kept intact the Russian national spirit and the honest Russian nationalists have recognized it and are continually asking for admission back to their country. The great achievement of the Bolshevik rulers lies in their refusing to barter with national rights as a people.

Yet while they have succeeded in saving Russia from a new monarch or from being divided up in spheres of influences, their great experiment has failed. It was likely to fail because it was based on a theory which the world

did not want. If one were to write on "Russia's Intentions" it might make a pretty good book. But the book on "Russia's Achievements" would not look so well. Many fine paper programs rest in the drawers of the commissars The means for putting them into execution were lacking. But if the revclution has not improved materially the situation of the workers, it has brought an air of pride and interest in their work. And the peasants have actually benefited materially.

Their original solution of the land problem has been given up, the nationalization and socialization of the entire economic life of the country has been superseded by a New Economic Policy. The old bourgeoisie has been destroyed and a new one is coming to life. The foreign capitalists have been driven out and new concessionaires are invited to come in. And yet the revolution cannot be called a failure. It has succeeded to a greater degree than might have been expected although it has not reached the heights the Bolsheviks expected it to reach. Its success is not limited to what was retained in Russia. It consists especially in the guidance it gives for the future.

Now it is possible for Russia to start a new page in her history and the conditions of today indicate that she is steering towards state capitalism with the peasants holding the deciding veto power in every new legislation. Soviet Russia's first phase was world revolution. That lasted for four years. Russia's second plan was inaugurated by the middle of 1921 and for the next ten years she will have to keep busy in developing new rules and a new technique of running state industries, and will need to concentrate on the agricultural development of the country.

For a few pages let us leave the problems of Revolutionary Russia behind and regard only what one with senses even half awake can hear and see. Everywhere in public places there are pictures to fill the eyes. Like good actors the Russians create unconscious effects. Even in rags they have a way with them. They slouch into attitudes of which beards, shapkas, capes, earrings are picturesque accessories.

We are in a market place; it becomes noised abroad that there are Americans in the crowd. Then the parading begins, the peacock walk, the rooster hop, the antic display. It matters nothing that apparel is old, that bodies are of a doubtful cleanliness. All have an effect to register. The American finds himself the center of gradually narrowing circles; on every hand there is a posture to take, a story to narrate, a trinket to sell. The trinket is usually something from a great house, the last item of a priceless collection. The story that goes with it is one of former greatness eclipsed, of vast estates destroyed. The stories grow under repetition, of atrocities suffered, of reputations masquerading in rags, of millionaire relatives in America ready to pour out riches if only they can get the word.

In viewing the Russian pageant one needs to be both just and discriminat

ing. Nothing would be easier than to convince oneself that all the Russians one meets in public places are fakers. Nothing would be more false and unjust.

The histrionic is large in the Russian nature. The Revolution has placed Russia in the world's spotlight. And they play-act under all circumstances, under those of real and devastating tragedy as well as under lighter conditions.

I

It has been said many times of the Russians that they are children. hereby say it again. While statesmen are on the anxious seat lest their nicely ordered plans shall again be blown into waste paper by a big wind from the Russian plains the childlike nature of the Russian should not be forgotten. It is not that a child cannot do much harm, cannot put a well conducted house by the ears. For a child can. But it is well to remember while he is doing these things the irresponsibility of the child. He can create a man's havoc; his designs, and his pleasures in them, are those of a child. Some of the Russian disturbance comes from opinions, doctrines, new experimental ideals in the organization of human society. But at least a part of it comes from the fact that the Russian people are playing enfant terrible. In the midst of the tragedy that one saw on every hand in Russia one could not es