Communism -- Soviet Union; Goldman, Emma, 1869-1940; Soviet Union -- History -- Revolution, 1917-1921 -- Personal narratives, American
Critical inquiry in Russia is a dangerous thing. No wonder so many
newcomers avoided looking beneath the surface. To them it was enough
that the Montessori system, the educational ideas of Professor Dewey,
and dancing by the Dalcroze method have been “adopted” by Russia. I do
not contend against these innovations. But I insist that they have no
bearing whatever on the Revolution; they do not prove that the
Bolshevik educational experiment is superior to similar efforts in other
countries, where they have been achieved without a revolution and the
terrible price it involves.
State monopoly of thought is everywhere interpreting education to suit
its own purpose. Similarly the Bolsheviki, to whom the State is supreme,
use education to further their own ends. But while the monopoly of
thought in other countries has not succeeded in entirely checking the
spirit of free inquiry and critical analysis, the “proletarian
dictatorship” has completely paralysed every attempt at independent
investigation. The Communist criterion is dominant. The least divergence
from official dogma and opinion on the part of teachers, educators, or
pupils exposes them to the general charge of counter-revolution,
resulting in discharge and expulsion, if nothing more drastic.
In a previous chapter I have mentioned the case of the Moscow University
students expelled and exiled for protesting against Tcheka violence
toward the political prisoners in the Butyrki. But it was not only such
“political” offences that were punished. Offences of a purely academic
nature were treated in the same manner. Thus the objection of some
professors to Communist interference in the methods of instruction was
sternly suppressed. Teachers and students who supported the professors
were severely punished. I know a professor of sociology and literature,
a brilliant scholar and a Revolutionist, who was discharged from the
Moscow University because, as an Anarchist, he encouraged the critical
faculty of his pupils. He is but one instance of the numerous cases of
non-Communist intellectuals who, under one pretext or another, are
systematically hounded and finally eliminated from Bolshevik
institutions. The Communist “cells” in control of every classroom have
created an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion in which real education
cannot thrive.
It is true that the Bolsheviki have striven to carry education and
culture into the Red Army and the villages. But here again the same
conditions prevail. Communism is the State religion and, like all
religions, it discourages the critical attitude and frowns upon
independent inquiry. Yet without the capacity for parallelism and
opportunity for verification education is valueless.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account