[To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR."J am delighted to
find at last a supporter of Bolshevism who can define his doctrine with such admirable clarity, and would like to place on record my gratitude to Mr. Tom Anderson, who has by such a definition dispelled my last wavering doubts as to the fundamental insanity of " the Bolshevik ideal." " Bolshevism is based on the materialistic conception of history," that is to say, on a conception which has been regarded as inane, ridiculous, and childish for some years by all philosophers, scientists, and intelligent men. I need only refer to such names as Oliver Ledge, Sylvanus Thompson, and a host of others, to show that the more men deal with " material faets" the more they deny a materialistic
explanation of them. Materialism, as a principle of disbelief (one can hardly call it a principle of belief), has not survived the war except among the semi-educated, on whom apparently Mr. Anderson relies to effect that world salvation which count- less Zoroasters and Christs have failed to bring to birth.
"Bolshevism is based on the dictatorship of the proletariat." That is to say, on the giving over of all control of the whole world—State, commerce, manufacture, and even the control of beliefs and morals (use the small type to please Mr. Anderson) —into the hands of those who, by definition, are only capable of use as breeding animals, and serve no higher puipose in the State. No one who has walked and worked among the " prole- tariat " can deny their efficiency in that regard, but Mr. Anderson must excuse me if I borrow a little of his sceptic spirit when asked to contemplate the idea of persons who are too ignorant to keep themselves clean attempting to control interests which stretch beyond their own cook-pots. If I may raise a side issue merely for the sake of information I would like a precise definition of what. Mr. Anderson means by his remark that "Moloch is quite modern." At what date was Moloch worshipped? and at what date does modernity (for Mr. Anderson) begin and ancient history end? That Mr. Anderson, with his accurate and deep methods of reasoning, and his perfect style of expression (" equal to me going " [sic]) has been teaching the young proletariat for so long a period as fourteen years goes far to explain the laziness, incompetence, and utter shiftlessness, both in work and morals, which so many " young industrials " are displaying at the moment.—I
Previous page
