He is a small man with a bald head, having a fringe of reddish hair
at the back and a tiny red beard. His mouth is large and his lips
thick; his eyes are red-brown, and possess the merriest twinkle. Do
not, gentle visitor, when you meet the great man fall victim to this
twinkling eye, and make the mistake of thinking it betokens a tender
spirit. I am sure Lenin is the kindest and gentlest of men in private
relationships; but when he mentioned his solution of the peasant
problem, the merry twinkle had a cruel glint which horrified. “Do you
not have a great deal of trouble with the peasants?” he was asked.
“Do they not, as in the rest of Europe, object very strongly to the
communisation of land?”
“Oh, yes,” was the reply, “we have trouble occasionally; but it is with
the rich peasants chiefly. But we soon get over that. We send to the
village a good Communist, who explains to the poor peasant the position
and shows to him how the rich peasant is his enemy, and the poor
peasant does the rest. Ha! ha! ha!”
Lenin’s method with his visitors is clever. He has a most engaging
frankness. He suggests by his manner a more or less confidential
exchange of opinions. But when the interview is over, it is found that
he has told you far less than you have told him.
He impressed me with his fanaticism. This is surely the source of
his driving power. And yet I am told that compared with the really
fanatical Communist Lenin is mildness itself and should be classed with
the “Right.” It was rumoured that he is engaged on a new book to be
given the name “The Infant Diseases of Communism,” or some such title,
which suggests an honest confession of mistakes made in the early days
of the Commune. If this be true there is hope of happiness for Russia
yet. But I must confess, his firm belief in the necessity of violence
for the establishment throughout the world of his ideals makes one
doubt miserably.
He showed a surprising lack of knowledge of the British Labour
Movement. He gave to conscious and intelligent Communism a far larger
place in British politics than can truly be accorded to it, seeing
there is as yet no organised Communist party, but only a handful of
extremists of the older Socialist movements.
When asked why he considered a certain individual to be of importance
in the political world of Great Britain he gave as his reason that the
British Government had arrested her! He did not seem to be aware of the
fact that the policy of the British Government during the war was, as
a rule, to arrest the little people who were without following and let
the bigger folk go free. Scores of examples of this could have been
supplied to him had it been of importance, which was not the case.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account