The good man
is the man who no matter how morally unworthy he has
been is moving to become better.
is the man who no matter how morally unworthy he has
been is moving to become better.
Soviet Union - 1952 - Soviet Civilization
* Not until almost
five full years after the Revolution of 1917 was the Soviet
Government able to cease military operations and settle
down to the immense tasks of peaceful reconstruction.
With the odds heavily against them at the start and the
whole world expecting their downfall, the Soviets had
struggled through to victory over foreign invasion, civil
conflict, territorial loss, economic breakdown and famine,
all inflicted on a country that had already experienced
three calamitous years of the First World War and two
far-reaching revolutions. It was an epic triumph.
These first five years of the Soviet Republic's existence
naturally conditioned its entire future. The long battle
for survival made it doubly aware and doubly suspicious
of enemies plotting violence against it both at home and
abroad. The dictatorial features of Soviet political life
were accordingly accentuated. Well-founded fears of
still another attack on the part of foreign powers retarded
the evolution of democracy in the U. S. S. R. and held
down living standards by necessitating enormous invest-
ments in the production of armaments for self-defense.
Despite earnest efforts on behalf of international
amity, Soviet Russia continued to live in a world bitterly
hostile to it and reluctant to enter into normal diplomatic
and trade relations with it. The United States did not
* Japanese military units remained in the Soviet northern half of the
Far Eastern island of Sakhalin until April, 1925.
37
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
officially recognize the Soviet Government until 1933
during the first term of President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Handicapped by a credit blockade, the Soviet regime
was unable to obtain foreign loans of any substance and
had to lift itself by its own bootstraps in regard to eco-
nomic reconstruction and development.
Fourthly, it follows from what I have already said
about the historical background of the Soviet Union that
in comparing the U. S. S. R. with other countries, we must
pay constant attention to the principle of historical rela-
tivity.
I mean by this that different peoples of the earth are
in different stages of historical development and that
it would not be fair to apply to all of them the same
absolute measuring rod of judgment. Since Russia in
1917 was from one to two centuries behind the United
States in most of the ways we deem modern, it is obvi-
ously absurd to expect that the Soviet Union, having
to cope with such Herculean tasks as the repulse of the
Nazi invasion, could completely catch up to America in
a short thirty-five years. The building of either a highly
advanced capitalist society or a highly advanced socialist
society takes a good deal of time. And frequently in dis-
cussing some special aspect of Soviet life, our real ques-
tion should be: How much have conditions improved
since Tsarist Russia of 1917?
I would apply the same principle of relative com-
parisons to any country that had been in a generally
backward condition and had made some drastic change
in government or economic system in an effort to develop
a more mature and secure civilization. So today we
would all do well to judge with restraint, and with some
38
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
understanding of the past, recent revolutionary events
in India and China, both of which have joined the
twentieth-century march toward progress.
The need of making comparisons between the U. S.
S. R. and other nations on a relative as well as an absolute
basis extends to all spheres of Soviet life. Regarding the
average material standard of living in Soviet Russia, un-
questionably it is still considerably below that enjoyed
in the United States. Yet it has gone up a great deal
since 1917 and promises to advance to much higher
levels. Those Americans who emphasize the fact that
Soviet living standards in terms of consumption goods
lag far behind what we take for granted in the U. S. A.
tend to forget that the American standard of living is
by all odds the highest in the world and has for a long
time outstripped that of any European or Asiatic country.
It is easy to overlook or romanticize the material short-
comings of lands other than Soviet Russia.
Many return from the U. S. S. R. , however, and con-
demn it wholesale for the sort of material backwardness
that they regard as merely picturesque in other parts of
the world. And they will construct whole books or lec-
ture tours around the lack of those mechanical gadgets
and modern conveniences for which the United States
is noted. But it is hardly to be expected that the Soviet
Russians, who have had a multitude of world-shaking
and world-making problems, could have turned the
U. S. S. R. into a tourist's paradise in so short a time or
would in any case have made that a main objective.
Actually, in 1938 when I last visited Soviet Russia,
traveling was becoming fairly comfortable there; and the
Russians were becoming increasingly efficient in the
39
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATIOH
small things that often loom so large in the consciousness
of travelers from abroad.
Again, the pertinency of relative comparisons be-
comes plain in regard to Soviet democracy. So far as
political democracy and civil liberties are concerned,
the Soviet Union has not caught up with the Anglo-Saxon
countries, but it has made notable headway since Tsarist
days. When we turn to other significant forms of demo-
cracy -- racial, cultural, economic, or that which consists
of equality between the sexes -- we find that Soviet pro-
gress since 1917 has been even more impressive. Indeed,
as I shall show in Chapter III, in racial democracy Soviet
Russia has gone beyond the United States and most other
nations of the world. This brings out the important
point that in some respects, even on the basis of absolute
comparisons, the Soviet Union ranks above the most
highly developed countries.
Fifthly and finally, any proper evaluation of the
Soviet Union must take into account not only the past
and present, but also the probable future.
No sensible person expects that a radical and inclusive
new social-economic order such as socialism could be built
overnight in any country, let alone in one that had as
many handicaps holding over from the past as Soviet
Russia. The construction of a socialist society entailed
a long, hard pull in overcoming the initial political chaos
and economic ruin of 1917; in warding off foreign ag-
gression and putting down civil strife; in setting up the
economic and cultural foundations of socialism; and in
eradicating the habits and psychology of the former abso-
lutist-feudalist-capitalist state. In this evolution upward
there were bound to be bad years as well as good, failures
as well as triumphs, detours as well as marches straight
40
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATING SOVIET RUSSIA
ahead. Since the Soviet Union was the first nation in
history to attempt the creation of a socialist civilization
and since the Communists and their supporters had
practically no precedents on which to draw, it was almost
inevitable that unforeseen problems should arise and
serious mistakes be made.
Accordingly, if the student of Soviet affairs concen-
trates exclusively on some present phase, perhaps one of
the bad years, in the development of Soviet socialism, he
will get a misleading impression because he will be
neglecting the possible or probable course of future
events. Again and again the Soviets have faced, fought
through and surmounted some crisis that might have
proved disastrous to a less determined people. Since the
revolution the domestic or international situation has
repeatedly called on them to make tremendous sacrifices;
but those sacrifices have always had meaning and pur-
pose. The Soviet people have suffered, bled and died, as
they did during the Nazi onslaught from 1941 to 1945,
in order to preserve their new socialist order and to
press forward with the fulfilment of the Marxist ideal of
a society guaranteeing security, abundance and freedom
to everyone. In the perspectives of history the distinction
between constructive and fruitless sacrifice is of utmost
significance. The Soviet people never forget the future.
The story of the Five-Year Plans, the long-range,
country-wide programs of social-economic development
starting in 1928, provides examples of what I am talking
about. The First Five-Year Plan, 1928-32, with its enorm-
ous stress on heavy industry and machine building, re-
quired that the Soviet people forego the more rapid rise
in living standards which could have been brought about
by concentration on the manufacture of consumer goods.
41
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATIOH
But the more Spartan policy proved sound because it
enabled the nation to lay the permanent foundations
of socialism. The Second Five-Year Plan, 1933-37, put
considerably more emphasis on consumer goods, and the
standard of living rose higher than ever before in Tsarist
or Soviet Russia.
The Third Five-Year Plan, scheduled for 1938-42,
was designed to continue this progress. But with the
growing menace of foreign aggression and the outbreak
of the Second World War in 1939, the stress had to be
shifted to the production of defense implements such
as guns, airplanes and tanks. An accelerated increase in
consumer goods was necessarily postponed. Again, the
sacrifice on the part of the Soviet people paid off in terms
of the future; for it was an essential factor in their ability
to hold off and hurl back Hitler's assault.
In examining the status of democracy in the Soviet
Union, we likewise need to consider future prospects.
In the first place, the lack of democratic institutions and
the low cultural level in the old Tsarist autocracy did
not provide an auspicious starting point for the develop-
ment of democracy under the Soviets. It was obvious
from the beginning that the evolution of the Soviet
people into modern democracy in the best sense of that
term would take decades to accomplish. As America's
greatest philosopher, the late John Dewey, repeatedly
pointed out, the intelligent and efficient functioning of
political democracy requires a fairly high development
of popular education. But as we have seen, the popula-
tion of Russia was only about 30 percent literate in 1917;
most of them, therefore, did not possess the elementary
cultural prerequisites for proper participation in the
42
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
complicated processes of democratic government. They
did not even know what a ballot was or how to mark it.
In the second place, the Soviet Communists have
frankly put into effect the Marxist theory that a tempo-
rary dictatorship of the proletariat is necessary during
the transition from capitalism to socialism, with that
dictatorship having strong elements of democracy within
it. Again in line with Marxist doctrine, the Communists
claim that the dictatorship will sink into the past entirely
as the need for it passes with the disappearance of press-
ing dangers both internal and external. They insist,
above all, that the enduring economic foundations of
democracy must be securely established in the new social-
ist system; and that democratic institutions in capitalist
countries remain weak, unstable and in danger of com-
plete overthrow by fascist movements precisely because
capitalist economies are constantly floundering about in
the quicksand of financial crisis, economic depression and
mass unemployment.
To explain is not always to excuse. The Soviet Gov-
ernment has from time to time used unnecessarily harsh
measures to maintain itself. Yet we should not lose sight
of the ultimate democratic aims of the Soviet Republic.
In my opinion the Soviet people and their leaders have
never relinquished those objectives. In the nature of
the case, however, since the Communists both in theory
and in practice give priority to the economic base of
their socialist society, and believe that democracy can
grow and expand only if this fundamental substructure
is sound, it is not surprising that the full flourishing of
democratic institutions in the Soviet Union should come
gradually and late. In this matter, taking the long view
43
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
of Soviet civilization is a helpful corrective to hasty con-
demnation and premature judgment.
In the light of the future, too, and of Soviet Russia's
many difficulties, the various compromises and shifts in
policy that occur in the U. S. S. R. become intelligible. It
was Lenin himself who enunciated the strategy of "one
step backward, if necessary, in order to take two steps
forward. " And the Soviets have frequently followed out
this common-sense procedure. In 1921, for instance,
toward the end of the trying Civil War period, the Soviet
Government, in order to expedite recovery and give the
population a breathing spell, introduced the New Eco-
nomic Policy (N. E. P. ), which encouraged certain com-
promises toward capitalist principles. Practically the
entire foreign press interpreted the N. E. P. as heralding
the final abandonment of socialism in Russia. Of course,
as the Soviet regime had planned all along, it constituted
only a temporary episode and in due course was discarded
altogether.
Another instance of the same sort of thing occurred
during the 1932-33 food crisis when, in the drive to col-
lectivize agriculture, the Communists went too fast and
provoked dangerous opposition among the peasants by
extremist policies. Joseph Stalin himself finally inter-
vened and pointed out that some of the comrades had
become over-zealous, "dizzy with success," as he put it.
The Government proceeded to make certain concessions
to the individualistic tendencies of the peasants.
Commenting on these compromise measures, the
New York Herald Tribune, in an editorial published in
November of 1932, stated that the Soviet agrarian prob-
lem could be solved "only by such a swift retreat from
Marxian first principles as will leave no doubt in any
44
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
Russian or foreign mind of the collapse of the Commun-
ist experiment under the relentless pressure of faulty but
unalterable human nature. "12 Actually "a swift retreat"
did take place, but the final result was a record-breaking
harvest in 1933 and the successful completion of the
collectivization program, which meant the extension of
socialism to the vital sphere of agriculture.
The statement from the Herald Tribune, which over
the years has run much first-rate material about the Soviet
Union, is one which I always like to quote. For it shows
how even one of the more restrained and reliable Amer-
ican newspapers is ever ready to seize upon the slightest
sign of Soviet weakness and draw from it the most exag-
gerated implications. To this day most foreign observers
of the U. S. S. R. have failed to learn that occasional steps
backward in Soviet Russia do not necessarily spell failure,
but usually indicate a willingness on the part of a radical
government with all the responsibilities of political power
to face the facts and to exercise intelligent flexibility in
the conduct of affairs. The Communists always remem-
ber their great goal of a full-fledged socialist and Com-
munist system and do not mind too much if they have to
pursue a zigzag course to get there.
In more recent years the greatest compromise which
circumstances compelled the Russians to adopt was the
extensive retreat of the Soviet armies during the high-
tide of the Nazi invasion in 1941 and 1942. During this
critical period the Soviet forces fell back almost to the
gates of Moscow and yielded most of the city of Stalin-
grad. With blood, territory and scorched earth tactics
they bought time and opportunity for preparing a mighty
counter-offensive that finally broke the back of German
military power. Yet, as we know, foreign observers
45
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
everywhere misread the signs. Just as earlier swift retreats
(of a non-military nature) had led them to forecast the
failure of the whole drive toward socialism in Soviet
Russia, so Soviet military defeats and withdrawals dur-
ing the Second World War caused them to pronounce a
premature sentence of doom on the Soviet war effort.
Sheer ignorance plus neglect of future prospects brought
them unenviable reputations as discredited prophets.
Professor John Dewey was one of the typical Ameri-
can intellectuals who, at first sympathetic toward the
Soviet Union, later turned against it in disillusionment
that was also typical. Yet he provides an answer to him-
self in an excellent passage on the sort of ethical stand-
ards that intelligence requires in the modern world: "No
individual or group will be judged by whether they
come up to or fall short of some fixed result, but by
the direction in which they are moving. The bad man
is the man who no matter how good he has been is be-
ginning to deteriorate, to grow less good.
The good man
is the man who no matter how morally unworthy he has
been is moving to become better. Such a conception
makes one severe in judging himself and humane in
judging others. "13 It is my claim, of course, that the
large group of people who make up the population of
Soviet Russia have been steadily moving in an upward
direction.
The Utopian liberals and the infantile leftists have
violated Dewey's proposed criterion by judging the
U. S. S. R. in terms of whether it comes up to or falls short
of "some fixed result" held inflexibly in their minds.
Evidently expecting that Soviet Russia would set up in
the twinkling of an eye the brave new world of all their
dreams, they have been most neglectful in considering
46
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
the future of the U. S. S. R. Impetuous, impatient souls,
they could not wait for history to catch up with their
beautiful ideals and were ever ready to consign the Soviet
Republic to limbo for its tactics of compromise and delay,
for shifting gears and reducing speed in order to over-
come mountains of trouble.
Many of them sincere idealists and humanitarians,
they apparently thought that the most tremendous social
upheaval on record, telescoping into itself the sort of
revolutions which had occurred in America, England
and France during the seventeenth or eighteenth centur-
ies, could take place with the relative restraint of a New
Deal movement in the United States. These naive Utop-
ians were offended to their depths by the rough-and-
tumble aspects of the Russian Revolution and finally
adopted a policy of resolving every doubt in a manner
hostile to the Soviet regime.
The Soviet Revolution, like the great Western Rev-
olutions long before it, constituted an irrepressible move-
ment of liberation that swept like an avalanche over
whatever opposed or threatened it. Released at last from
the tyranny and oppression of ages, the Russian workers
and peasants, led by a stern and determined Communist
minority, took destiny into their own hands and rode
roughshod over the enemies of the new order. Internally
the immense scope and rapid tempo of economic develop-
ment, especially the speedy industrialization of the coun-
try, demanded a discipline in work far removed from the
easy-going psychology of Tsarist days when "Nichevo! "
(No matter! ) was such a common response to difficulties.
Such discipline only too often had to be imposed from
above on lagging or unwilling elements of the population
during the arduous era of the initial Five-Year Plans.
47
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
Due to the continuing danger and frequent actuality
of foreign aggression, the Government and the people
developed understandable nervous tensions and a dis-
tinct crisis psychology. The Soviet Republic, with its
back to the wall in the early years and once more in the
later years during World War II, lashed out savagely to
preserve itself. Many of its actions were crude and cruel;
blood flowed throughout the Russian land; purges and
political persecutions took place; sometimes the innocent
suffered along with the guilty. But the first socialist
society in history survived, persevered and moved for-
ward into the future.
# *#
In this introductory chapter I have outlined some
elementary principles that should be helpful, I feel, in
the understanding of Soviet Russia. Having assumed at
the start the importance of the Soviet Union as a topic
of discussion and study, having laid down the proposi-
tion that much reliable information has been and is avail-
able about the U. S. S. R. , and having insisted that the
method of reason must be followed in our inquiries con-
cerning it, I have presented five standards of judgment,
often overlooked, for aid in the evaluation of Soviet
affairs.
These are, to summarize, first, that Soviet Russia is
neither a heaven nor a hell; second, that we should
realize the extraordinary complexity of the Soviet Union;
third, that we should bear in mind the historical and
cultural background of Soviet Russia; fourth, that in
comparing the U. S. S. R. with other countries, we must
make allowances for historical relativity; and fifth, that
if we are to assess Soviet civilization as a whole, we ought
to consider not only the past and present, but also future
48
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
prospects and eventual goals. Actually, these suggested
standards of judgment are applicable today not only to
the Soviet Union, but also to most other countries and
particularly to those which are emerging out of a dark
past under the leadership of new and radical regimes.
49
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? - r~T~F
CHAPTER II THE SOVIET CONSTITUTION
1. Background of the Constitution
Of all the primary documents from original Soviet
sources most conducive to an understanding of the U. S.
S. R. the Soviet Constitution ranks first. Usually printed
in pamphlet form and totaling only about forty pages,
it is also the briefest single document I know that pre-
sents an over-all survey of Soviet institutions and aims.
For it goes beyond a description of the machinery of
government, with which most state constitutions are
primarily concerned, to define the fundamental eco-
nomic, social and political principles upon which the
Soviet commonwealth is based.
It was adopted late in 1936. Instead of going through
the cumbrous process of drastically amending and bring-
ing up to date the previous Constitution of 1924, the
Soviets followed the sensible procedure of drawing up
a new Constitution altogether. The first tentative draft
of it was published in June, 1936. This text was issued
in 60,000,000 pamphlet copies and printed repeatedly
in the Soviet press. During some six months of public
discussion of the proposed Constitution 527,000 meet-
ings were held with a total attendance of 36,500,000
people. Individuals, meetings or organizations sent into
the Constitutional Commission 154,000 amendments, of
which forty-three were finally accepted. The supreme
50
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? THE SOVIET COHSTITUTIOH
legislative body of the U. S. S. R. , corresponding to the
Congress of the United States, ratified the Constitution
on December 5, 1936, and decreed that December 5
should thereafter be a public holiday, "Constitution
Day. "
The rapid development of Soviet Russia between
1924 and 1936 necessitated the framing of a new Consti-
tution that would reflect the changed conditions. The
first two Five-Year Plans, particularly, had brought
about such progress in both industry and agriculture that
Stalin was able to say: "The complete victory of the
socialist system in all spheres of national economy is now
a fact. "1 Hence the 1936 document, advancing beyond
the Constitutions of 1918* and 1924, which had pro-
claimed socialism as an object of aspiration, formalized
the new situation by treating socialism in the Soviet
Union as an achieved actuality.
At the same time the 1936 Constitution sets up new
and specific goals of aspiration within the framework of
socialism, especially in the Chapter entitled "Funda-
mental Rights and Duties of Citizens. " There, for ex-
ample, the present Constitution makes provision for a
system of civil liberties which has obviously not yet been
put fully into effect. This fact has led critics to claim
that the Soviets have been trying to fool the world with
a mere paper constitution. Of course all state constitu-
tions are paper constitutions and their actualization is
seldom speedy or complete. For example, the Bill of
Rights has been part of the United States Constitution
for almost 160 years, but is still constantly, flagrantly and
widely violated by government officials as well as non-
* The 1918 Constitution applied only to the Russian Soviet Federated
Socialist Republic.
51
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATIOH
governmental groups. We need not, then, accuse Soviet
Russia of hypocrisy simply because some of the ideals
written into its Constitution have not been fulfilled a
short sixteen years after the adoption of that document.
The truth, as we shall see, is that most of the Soviet Cons-
titution is in effect because it describes to such a large
extent the concrete functioning of the Soviet state.
2. The Structure of Soviet Society and State
In the introductory Chapter of the Soviet Constitu-
tion entitled "The Organization of Society," Article 1
reads: "The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is a
socialist state of workers and peasants. " First to be noted
in this opening statement is that, as throughout the Con-
stitution, the word socialist and not the word Communist
is used to describe Soviet society.
There are two fundamental stages, socialism and com-
munism, in the development of a Marxist society. Social-
ism is the initial stage in which the wage return is still
quite unequal and based on the principle, "From each
according to his ability, to each according to his work. "
Under socialism, also, the amount and quality of pro-
duction still falls considerably short of the ideal, and
political dictatorship may still be considered necessary.
Communism is the far-off eventual stage in which wages
become more nearly equal and are regulated on the prin-
ciple, "From each according to his ability, to each accord-
ing to his needs. " The actualization of this principle is
to be made possible by an overflowing economy of abun-
dance such as the world has never seen. Under commun-
ism, too, there is to be a complete abrogation of the dic-
tatorship.
It is essential to correct the common misunderstand-
52
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? THE SOVIET COHSTITUTIOH
ing that socialism and communism mean an absolute
equality in remuneration and living standards. Stalin
has taken pains to clarify this matter: "By equality, Marx-
ism means, not equalization of individual requirements
and individual life, but the abolition of classes, i. e. , (a)
the equal emancipation of all working people from ex-
ploitation after the capitalists have been overthrown and
expropriated; (b) the equal abolition for all of private
property in the means of production after they have
been converted into the property of the whole of society;
(c) the equal duty of all to work according to their
ability, and the equal right of all working people to re-
ceive remuneration according to the amount of work
performed (a socialist society); (d) the equal duty of
all to work according to their ability, and the equal
right of all working people to receive remuneration
according to their needs (a communist society).
"Furthermore, Marxism proceeds from the assump-
tion that people's tastes and requirements are not, and
cannot be, identical, equal, in quality or in quantity,
either in the period of socialism or in the period of com-
munism. That is the Marxian conception of equality.
Marxism has never recognized, nor does it recognize,
any other equality. To draw from this the conclusion
that socialism calls for equalization, for the leveling of
the requirements of the members of society, for the
leveling of their tastes and of their individual lives --
that according to the plans of the Marxists all should
wear the same clothes and eat the same dishes in the same
quantity -- is to deal in vulgarities and to slander Marx-
ism. "2
In any event real communism, as Marxism under-
stands it, has at no time existed in the Soviet Union,
53
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
either in an economic or political sense. The Soviet
system, however, is often called "communism" because
of its ultimate goals and because the Communist Party
is so extremely important in the life of the country. Actu-
ally, the Socialist Parties in various nations have much
the same economic aims as the Communist Parties, but
differ radically in the methods used to reach those ends,
particularly in their strict adherence to legal and demo-
cratic forms.
The second important point in Article 1 is the use
of the word Soviet, which means council in Russian
and therefore carries with it a democratic connotation.
The Soviet is the pervading governmental pattern in the
Soviet Republic, from the Supreme Soviet of the U. S. S. R.
at the top to the village Soviets at the other end of the
scale. Thus Article 3 asserts: "In the U. S. S. R. all power
belongs to the working people of town and country as
represented by the Soviets of Working People's Depu-
ties. "
Article 4 states: "The socialist system of economy and
the socialist ownership of the means and instruments
of production firmly established as a result of the aboli-
tion of the capitalist system of economy, the abrogation
of private ownership of the means and instruments of
production and the abolition of the exploitation of man
by man, constitute the economic foundation of the U. S.
S. R. " Article 5 defines socialist property as existing
"either in the form of state property (the possession of
the whole people), or in the form of cooperative and col-
lective-farm property (property of a collective farm or
property of a cooperative association). "
Yet not all property in the Soviet Union has been
1
54
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? THE SOVIET CONSTITUTION
nationalized or socialized, since, according to Article 9,
"the law permits the small private economy of individual
peasants and handicraftsmen based on their personal
labor and precluding the exploitation of the labor of
others. " Such exploitation occurs, in Marxist theory,
as soon as you hire someone else to work for you and
make a profit out of his services. Employing household
or domestic workers does not come under the heading
of exploitation.
Furthermore, as Article 10 makes clear: "The right
of citizens to personal ownership of their incomes from
work and of their savings, of their dwelling houses and
subsidiary household economy, their household furni-
ture and utensils and articles of personal use and con-
venience, as well as the right of inheritance of personal
property of citizens, is protected by law. " This state-
ment corrects the widespread misconception that collec-
tive ownership under socialism covers literally everything.
The chief economic goal of socialism is to keep on raising
the standard of living in terms of personal consumer
goods such as just described. Collective ownership is of
the main means of production and distribution like
mineral deposits, the land, forests, factories, railroads,
banks, communications and so on.
Individual property rights are further defined in
Article 7 regarding collective farms: "In addition to its
basic income from the public, collective-farm enterprise,
every household in a collective farm has for its personal
use a small plot of land attached to the dwelling and,
as its personal property, a subsidiary establishment on
the plot, a dwelling house, livestock, poultry and minor
agricultural implements. " This same Article tells us:
55
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
"Public enterprises in collective farms and cooperative
organizations, with their livestock and implements, the
products of the collective farms and cooperative organ-
izations, as well as their common buildings, constitute
the common, socialist property of the collective farms
and cooperative organizations. "
Not less than 60 percent of Soviet families own their
own homes today. Within city limits the size of the plot
permitted for a privately owned house is not more than
720 square yards; in the country it may be twice that
size. Persons building a house are entitled to a credit of
10,000 rubles to assist them in the venture. The credit
carries 2 percent interest and is to be paid back in seven
years. The owner-builder's personal investment must
not be less than 30 percent; but -- and this is a novel
feature -- it need not be in the form of cash, since the
labor put in by the builder and members of his family
is counted as part of his investment. Free timber is avail-
able for construction to war invalids and to ex-servicemen
and their families.
Article 11 gives the key, in my opinion, to the rapid
economic development of the Soviet Union and to its
general economic stability in war and peace: "The
economic life of the U. S. S.
five full years after the Revolution of 1917 was the Soviet
Government able to cease military operations and settle
down to the immense tasks of peaceful reconstruction.
With the odds heavily against them at the start and the
whole world expecting their downfall, the Soviets had
struggled through to victory over foreign invasion, civil
conflict, territorial loss, economic breakdown and famine,
all inflicted on a country that had already experienced
three calamitous years of the First World War and two
far-reaching revolutions. It was an epic triumph.
These first five years of the Soviet Republic's existence
naturally conditioned its entire future. The long battle
for survival made it doubly aware and doubly suspicious
of enemies plotting violence against it both at home and
abroad. The dictatorial features of Soviet political life
were accordingly accentuated. Well-founded fears of
still another attack on the part of foreign powers retarded
the evolution of democracy in the U. S. S. R. and held
down living standards by necessitating enormous invest-
ments in the production of armaments for self-defense.
Despite earnest efforts on behalf of international
amity, Soviet Russia continued to live in a world bitterly
hostile to it and reluctant to enter into normal diplomatic
and trade relations with it. The United States did not
* Japanese military units remained in the Soviet northern half of the
Far Eastern island of Sakhalin until April, 1925.
37
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
officially recognize the Soviet Government until 1933
during the first term of President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Handicapped by a credit blockade, the Soviet regime
was unable to obtain foreign loans of any substance and
had to lift itself by its own bootstraps in regard to eco-
nomic reconstruction and development.
Fourthly, it follows from what I have already said
about the historical background of the Soviet Union that
in comparing the U. S. S. R. with other countries, we must
pay constant attention to the principle of historical rela-
tivity.
I mean by this that different peoples of the earth are
in different stages of historical development and that
it would not be fair to apply to all of them the same
absolute measuring rod of judgment. Since Russia in
1917 was from one to two centuries behind the United
States in most of the ways we deem modern, it is obvi-
ously absurd to expect that the Soviet Union, having
to cope with such Herculean tasks as the repulse of the
Nazi invasion, could completely catch up to America in
a short thirty-five years. The building of either a highly
advanced capitalist society or a highly advanced socialist
society takes a good deal of time. And frequently in dis-
cussing some special aspect of Soviet life, our real ques-
tion should be: How much have conditions improved
since Tsarist Russia of 1917?
I would apply the same principle of relative com-
parisons to any country that had been in a generally
backward condition and had made some drastic change
in government or economic system in an effort to develop
a more mature and secure civilization. So today we
would all do well to judge with restraint, and with some
38
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
understanding of the past, recent revolutionary events
in India and China, both of which have joined the
twentieth-century march toward progress.
The need of making comparisons between the U. S.
S. R. and other nations on a relative as well as an absolute
basis extends to all spheres of Soviet life. Regarding the
average material standard of living in Soviet Russia, un-
questionably it is still considerably below that enjoyed
in the United States. Yet it has gone up a great deal
since 1917 and promises to advance to much higher
levels. Those Americans who emphasize the fact that
Soviet living standards in terms of consumption goods
lag far behind what we take for granted in the U. S. A.
tend to forget that the American standard of living is
by all odds the highest in the world and has for a long
time outstripped that of any European or Asiatic country.
It is easy to overlook or romanticize the material short-
comings of lands other than Soviet Russia.
Many return from the U. S. S. R. , however, and con-
demn it wholesale for the sort of material backwardness
that they regard as merely picturesque in other parts of
the world. And they will construct whole books or lec-
ture tours around the lack of those mechanical gadgets
and modern conveniences for which the United States
is noted. But it is hardly to be expected that the Soviet
Russians, who have had a multitude of world-shaking
and world-making problems, could have turned the
U. S. S. R. into a tourist's paradise in so short a time or
would in any case have made that a main objective.
Actually, in 1938 when I last visited Soviet Russia,
traveling was becoming fairly comfortable there; and the
Russians were becoming increasingly efficient in the
39
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATIOH
small things that often loom so large in the consciousness
of travelers from abroad.
Again, the pertinency of relative comparisons be-
comes plain in regard to Soviet democracy. So far as
political democracy and civil liberties are concerned,
the Soviet Union has not caught up with the Anglo-Saxon
countries, but it has made notable headway since Tsarist
days. When we turn to other significant forms of demo-
cracy -- racial, cultural, economic, or that which consists
of equality between the sexes -- we find that Soviet pro-
gress since 1917 has been even more impressive. Indeed,
as I shall show in Chapter III, in racial democracy Soviet
Russia has gone beyond the United States and most other
nations of the world. This brings out the important
point that in some respects, even on the basis of absolute
comparisons, the Soviet Union ranks above the most
highly developed countries.
Fifthly and finally, any proper evaluation of the
Soviet Union must take into account not only the past
and present, but also the probable future.
No sensible person expects that a radical and inclusive
new social-economic order such as socialism could be built
overnight in any country, let alone in one that had as
many handicaps holding over from the past as Soviet
Russia. The construction of a socialist society entailed
a long, hard pull in overcoming the initial political chaos
and economic ruin of 1917; in warding off foreign ag-
gression and putting down civil strife; in setting up the
economic and cultural foundations of socialism; and in
eradicating the habits and psychology of the former abso-
lutist-feudalist-capitalist state. In this evolution upward
there were bound to be bad years as well as good, failures
as well as triumphs, detours as well as marches straight
40
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATING SOVIET RUSSIA
ahead. Since the Soviet Union was the first nation in
history to attempt the creation of a socialist civilization
and since the Communists and their supporters had
practically no precedents on which to draw, it was almost
inevitable that unforeseen problems should arise and
serious mistakes be made.
Accordingly, if the student of Soviet affairs concen-
trates exclusively on some present phase, perhaps one of
the bad years, in the development of Soviet socialism, he
will get a misleading impression because he will be
neglecting the possible or probable course of future
events. Again and again the Soviets have faced, fought
through and surmounted some crisis that might have
proved disastrous to a less determined people. Since the
revolution the domestic or international situation has
repeatedly called on them to make tremendous sacrifices;
but those sacrifices have always had meaning and pur-
pose. The Soviet people have suffered, bled and died, as
they did during the Nazi onslaught from 1941 to 1945,
in order to preserve their new socialist order and to
press forward with the fulfilment of the Marxist ideal of
a society guaranteeing security, abundance and freedom
to everyone. In the perspectives of history the distinction
between constructive and fruitless sacrifice is of utmost
significance. The Soviet people never forget the future.
The story of the Five-Year Plans, the long-range,
country-wide programs of social-economic development
starting in 1928, provides examples of what I am talking
about. The First Five-Year Plan, 1928-32, with its enorm-
ous stress on heavy industry and machine building, re-
quired that the Soviet people forego the more rapid rise
in living standards which could have been brought about
by concentration on the manufacture of consumer goods.
41
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATIOH
But the more Spartan policy proved sound because it
enabled the nation to lay the permanent foundations
of socialism. The Second Five-Year Plan, 1933-37, put
considerably more emphasis on consumer goods, and the
standard of living rose higher than ever before in Tsarist
or Soviet Russia.
The Third Five-Year Plan, scheduled for 1938-42,
was designed to continue this progress. But with the
growing menace of foreign aggression and the outbreak
of the Second World War in 1939, the stress had to be
shifted to the production of defense implements such
as guns, airplanes and tanks. An accelerated increase in
consumer goods was necessarily postponed. Again, the
sacrifice on the part of the Soviet people paid off in terms
of the future; for it was an essential factor in their ability
to hold off and hurl back Hitler's assault.
In examining the status of democracy in the Soviet
Union, we likewise need to consider future prospects.
In the first place, the lack of democratic institutions and
the low cultural level in the old Tsarist autocracy did
not provide an auspicious starting point for the develop-
ment of democracy under the Soviets. It was obvious
from the beginning that the evolution of the Soviet
people into modern democracy in the best sense of that
term would take decades to accomplish. As America's
greatest philosopher, the late John Dewey, repeatedly
pointed out, the intelligent and efficient functioning of
political democracy requires a fairly high development
of popular education. But as we have seen, the popula-
tion of Russia was only about 30 percent literate in 1917;
most of them, therefore, did not possess the elementary
cultural prerequisites for proper participation in the
42
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
complicated processes of democratic government. They
did not even know what a ballot was or how to mark it.
In the second place, the Soviet Communists have
frankly put into effect the Marxist theory that a tempo-
rary dictatorship of the proletariat is necessary during
the transition from capitalism to socialism, with that
dictatorship having strong elements of democracy within
it. Again in line with Marxist doctrine, the Communists
claim that the dictatorship will sink into the past entirely
as the need for it passes with the disappearance of press-
ing dangers both internal and external. They insist,
above all, that the enduring economic foundations of
democracy must be securely established in the new social-
ist system; and that democratic institutions in capitalist
countries remain weak, unstable and in danger of com-
plete overthrow by fascist movements precisely because
capitalist economies are constantly floundering about in
the quicksand of financial crisis, economic depression and
mass unemployment.
To explain is not always to excuse. The Soviet Gov-
ernment has from time to time used unnecessarily harsh
measures to maintain itself. Yet we should not lose sight
of the ultimate democratic aims of the Soviet Republic.
In my opinion the Soviet people and their leaders have
never relinquished those objectives. In the nature of
the case, however, since the Communists both in theory
and in practice give priority to the economic base of
their socialist society, and believe that democracy can
grow and expand only if this fundamental substructure
is sound, it is not surprising that the full flourishing of
democratic institutions in the Soviet Union should come
gradually and late. In this matter, taking the long view
43
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
of Soviet civilization is a helpful corrective to hasty con-
demnation and premature judgment.
In the light of the future, too, and of Soviet Russia's
many difficulties, the various compromises and shifts in
policy that occur in the U. S. S. R. become intelligible. It
was Lenin himself who enunciated the strategy of "one
step backward, if necessary, in order to take two steps
forward. " And the Soviets have frequently followed out
this common-sense procedure. In 1921, for instance,
toward the end of the trying Civil War period, the Soviet
Government, in order to expedite recovery and give the
population a breathing spell, introduced the New Eco-
nomic Policy (N. E. P. ), which encouraged certain com-
promises toward capitalist principles. Practically the
entire foreign press interpreted the N. E. P. as heralding
the final abandonment of socialism in Russia. Of course,
as the Soviet regime had planned all along, it constituted
only a temporary episode and in due course was discarded
altogether.
Another instance of the same sort of thing occurred
during the 1932-33 food crisis when, in the drive to col-
lectivize agriculture, the Communists went too fast and
provoked dangerous opposition among the peasants by
extremist policies. Joseph Stalin himself finally inter-
vened and pointed out that some of the comrades had
become over-zealous, "dizzy with success," as he put it.
The Government proceeded to make certain concessions
to the individualistic tendencies of the peasants.
Commenting on these compromise measures, the
New York Herald Tribune, in an editorial published in
November of 1932, stated that the Soviet agrarian prob-
lem could be solved "only by such a swift retreat from
Marxian first principles as will leave no doubt in any
44
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
Russian or foreign mind of the collapse of the Commun-
ist experiment under the relentless pressure of faulty but
unalterable human nature. "12 Actually "a swift retreat"
did take place, but the final result was a record-breaking
harvest in 1933 and the successful completion of the
collectivization program, which meant the extension of
socialism to the vital sphere of agriculture.
The statement from the Herald Tribune, which over
the years has run much first-rate material about the Soviet
Union, is one which I always like to quote. For it shows
how even one of the more restrained and reliable Amer-
ican newspapers is ever ready to seize upon the slightest
sign of Soviet weakness and draw from it the most exag-
gerated implications. To this day most foreign observers
of the U. S. S. R. have failed to learn that occasional steps
backward in Soviet Russia do not necessarily spell failure,
but usually indicate a willingness on the part of a radical
government with all the responsibilities of political power
to face the facts and to exercise intelligent flexibility in
the conduct of affairs. The Communists always remem-
ber their great goal of a full-fledged socialist and Com-
munist system and do not mind too much if they have to
pursue a zigzag course to get there.
In more recent years the greatest compromise which
circumstances compelled the Russians to adopt was the
extensive retreat of the Soviet armies during the high-
tide of the Nazi invasion in 1941 and 1942. During this
critical period the Soviet forces fell back almost to the
gates of Moscow and yielded most of the city of Stalin-
grad. With blood, territory and scorched earth tactics
they bought time and opportunity for preparing a mighty
counter-offensive that finally broke the back of German
military power. Yet, as we know, foreign observers
45
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
everywhere misread the signs. Just as earlier swift retreats
(of a non-military nature) had led them to forecast the
failure of the whole drive toward socialism in Soviet
Russia, so Soviet military defeats and withdrawals dur-
ing the Second World War caused them to pronounce a
premature sentence of doom on the Soviet war effort.
Sheer ignorance plus neglect of future prospects brought
them unenviable reputations as discredited prophets.
Professor John Dewey was one of the typical Ameri-
can intellectuals who, at first sympathetic toward the
Soviet Union, later turned against it in disillusionment
that was also typical. Yet he provides an answer to him-
self in an excellent passage on the sort of ethical stand-
ards that intelligence requires in the modern world: "No
individual or group will be judged by whether they
come up to or fall short of some fixed result, but by
the direction in which they are moving. The bad man
is the man who no matter how good he has been is be-
ginning to deteriorate, to grow less good.
The good man
is the man who no matter how morally unworthy he has
been is moving to become better. Such a conception
makes one severe in judging himself and humane in
judging others. "13 It is my claim, of course, that the
large group of people who make up the population of
Soviet Russia have been steadily moving in an upward
direction.
The Utopian liberals and the infantile leftists have
violated Dewey's proposed criterion by judging the
U. S. S. R. in terms of whether it comes up to or falls short
of "some fixed result" held inflexibly in their minds.
Evidently expecting that Soviet Russia would set up in
the twinkling of an eye the brave new world of all their
dreams, they have been most neglectful in considering
46
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
the future of the U. S. S. R. Impetuous, impatient souls,
they could not wait for history to catch up with their
beautiful ideals and were ever ready to consign the Soviet
Republic to limbo for its tactics of compromise and delay,
for shifting gears and reducing speed in order to over-
come mountains of trouble.
Many of them sincere idealists and humanitarians,
they apparently thought that the most tremendous social
upheaval on record, telescoping into itself the sort of
revolutions which had occurred in America, England
and France during the seventeenth or eighteenth centur-
ies, could take place with the relative restraint of a New
Deal movement in the United States. These naive Utop-
ians were offended to their depths by the rough-and-
tumble aspects of the Russian Revolution and finally
adopted a policy of resolving every doubt in a manner
hostile to the Soviet regime.
The Soviet Revolution, like the great Western Rev-
olutions long before it, constituted an irrepressible move-
ment of liberation that swept like an avalanche over
whatever opposed or threatened it. Released at last from
the tyranny and oppression of ages, the Russian workers
and peasants, led by a stern and determined Communist
minority, took destiny into their own hands and rode
roughshod over the enemies of the new order. Internally
the immense scope and rapid tempo of economic develop-
ment, especially the speedy industrialization of the coun-
try, demanded a discipline in work far removed from the
easy-going psychology of Tsarist days when "Nichevo! "
(No matter! ) was such a common response to difficulties.
Such discipline only too often had to be imposed from
above on lagging or unwilling elements of the population
during the arduous era of the initial Five-Year Plans.
47
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
Due to the continuing danger and frequent actuality
of foreign aggression, the Government and the people
developed understandable nervous tensions and a dis-
tinct crisis psychology. The Soviet Republic, with its
back to the wall in the early years and once more in the
later years during World War II, lashed out savagely to
preserve itself. Many of its actions were crude and cruel;
blood flowed throughout the Russian land; purges and
political persecutions took place; sometimes the innocent
suffered along with the guilty. But the first socialist
society in history survived, persevered and moved for-
ward into the future.
# *#
In this introductory chapter I have outlined some
elementary principles that should be helpful, I feel, in
the understanding of Soviet Russia. Having assumed at
the start the importance of the Soviet Union as a topic
of discussion and study, having laid down the proposi-
tion that much reliable information has been and is avail-
able about the U. S. S. R. , and having insisted that the
method of reason must be followed in our inquiries con-
cerning it, I have presented five standards of judgment,
often overlooked, for aid in the evaluation of Soviet
affairs.
These are, to summarize, first, that Soviet Russia is
neither a heaven nor a hell; second, that we should
realize the extraordinary complexity of the Soviet Union;
third, that we should bear in mind the historical and
cultural background of Soviet Russia; fourth, that in
comparing the U. S. S. R. with other countries, we must
make allowances for historical relativity; and fifth, that
if we are to assess Soviet civilization as a whole, we ought
to consider not only the past and present, but also future
48
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? OH EVALUATIHG SOVIET RUSSIA
prospects and eventual goals. Actually, these suggested
standards of judgment are applicable today not only to
the Soviet Union, but also to most other countries and
particularly to those which are emerging out of a dark
past under the leadership of new and radical regimes.
49
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? - r~T~F
CHAPTER II THE SOVIET CONSTITUTION
1. Background of the Constitution
Of all the primary documents from original Soviet
sources most conducive to an understanding of the U. S.
S. R. the Soviet Constitution ranks first. Usually printed
in pamphlet form and totaling only about forty pages,
it is also the briefest single document I know that pre-
sents an over-all survey of Soviet institutions and aims.
For it goes beyond a description of the machinery of
government, with which most state constitutions are
primarily concerned, to define the fundamental eco-
nomic, social and political principles upon which the
Soviet commonwealth is based.
It was adopted late in 1936. Instead of going through
the cumbrous process of drastically amending and bring-
ing up to date the previous Constitution of 1924, the
Soviets followed the sensible procedure of drawing up
a new Constitution altogether. The first tentative draft
of it was published in June, 1936. This text was issued
in 60,000,000 pamphlet copies and printed repeatedly
in the Soviet press. During some six months of public
discussion of the proposed Constitution 527,000 meet-
ings were held with a total attendance of 36,500,000
people. Individuals, meetings or organizations sent into
the Constitutional Commission 154,000 amendments, of
which forty-three were finally accepted. The supreme
50
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? THE SOVIET COHSTITUTIOH
legislative body of the U. S. S. R. , corresponding to the
Congress of the United States, ratified the Constitution
on December 5, 1936, and decreed that December 5
should thereafter be a public holiday, "Constitution
Day. "
The rapid development of Soviet Russia between
1924 and 1936 necessitated the framing of a new Consti-
tution that would reflect the changed conditions. The
first two Five-Year Plans, particularly, had brought
about such progress in both industry and agriculture that
Stalin was able to say: "The complete victory of the
socialist system in all spheres of national economy is now
a fact. "1 Hence the 1936 document, advancing beyond
the Constitutions of 1918* and 1924, which had pro-
claimed socialism as an object of aspiration, formalized
the new situation by treating socialism in the Soviet
Union as an achieved actuality.
At the same time the 1936 Constitution sets up new
and specific goals of aspiration within the framework of
socialism, especially in the Chapter entitled "Funda-
mental Rights and Duties of Citizens. " There, for ex-
ample, the present Constitution makes provision for a
system of civil liberties which has obviously not yet been
put fully into effect. This fact has led critics to claim
that the Soviets have been trying to fool the world with
a mere paper constitution. Of course all state constitu-
tions are paper constitutions and their actualization is
seldom speedy or complete. For example, the Bill of
Rights has been part of the United States Constitution
for almost 160 years, but is still constantly, flagrantly and
widely violated by government officials as well as non-
* The 1918 Constitution applied only to the Russian Soviet Federated
Socialist Republic.
51
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATIOH
governmental groups. We need not, then, accuse Soviet
Russia of hypocrisy simply because some of the ideals
written into its Constitution have not been fulfilled a
short sixteen years after the adoption of that document.
The truth, as we shall see, is that most of the Soviet Cons-
titution is in effect because it describes to such a large
extent the concrete functioning of the Soviet state.
2. The Structure of Soviet Society and State
In the introductory Chapter of the Soviet Constitu-
tion entitled "The Organization of Society," Article 1
reads: "The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is a
socialist state of workers and peasants. " First to be noted
in this opening statement is that, as throughout the Con-
stitution, the word socialist and not the word Communist
is used to describe Soviet society.
There are two fundamental stages, socialism and com-
munism, in the development of a Marxist society. Social-
ism is the initial stage in which the wage return is still
quite unequal and based on the principle, "From each
according to his ability, to each according to his work. "
Under socialism, also, the amount and quality of pro-
duction still falls considerably short of the ideal, and
political dictatorship may still be considered necessary.
Communism is the far-off eventual stage in which wages
become more nearly equal and are regulated on the prin-
ciple, "From each according to his ability, to each accord-
ing to his needs. " The actualization of this principle is
to be made possible by an overflowing economy of abun-
dance such as the world has never seen. Under commun-
ism, too, there is to be a complete abrogation of the dic-
tatorship.
It is essential to correct the common misunderstand-
52
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? THE SOVIET COHSTITUTIOH
ing that socialism and communism mean an absolute
equality in remuneration and living standards. Stalin
has taken pains to clarify this matter: "By equality, Marx-
ism means, not equalization of individual requirements
and individual life, but the abolition of classes, i. e. , (a)
the equal emancipation of all working people from ex-
ploitation after the capitalists have been overthrown and
expropriated; (b) the equal abolition for all of private
property in the means of production after they have
been converted into the property of the whole of society;
(c) the equal duty of all to work according to their
ability, and the equal right of all working people to re-
ceive remuneration according to the amount of work
performed (a socialist society); (d) the equal duty of
all to work according to their ability, and the equal
right of all working people to receive remuneration
according to their needs (a communist society).
"Furthermore, Marxism proceeds from the assump-
tion that people's tastes and requirements are not, and
cannot be, identical, equal, in quality or in quantity,
either in the period of socialism or in the period of com-
munism. That is the Marxian conception of equality.
Marxism has never recognized, nor does it recognize,
any other equality. To draw from this the conclusion
that socialism calls for equalization, for the leveling of
the requirements of the members of society, for the
leveling of their tastes and of their individual lives --
that according to the plans of the Marxists all should
wear the same clothes and eat the same dishes in the same
quantity -- is to deal in vulgarities and to slander Marx-
ism. "2
In any event real communism, as Marxism under-
stands it, has at no time existed in the Soviet Union,
53
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
either in an economic or political sense. The Soviet
system, however, is often called "communism" because
of its ultimate goals and because the Communist Party
is so extremely important in the life of the country. Actu-
ally, the Socialist Parties in various nations have much
the same economic aims as the Communist Parties, but
differ radically in the methods used to reach those ends,
particularly in their strict adherence to legal and demo-
cratic forms.
The second important point in Article 1 is the use
of the word Soviet, which means council in Russian
and therefore carries with it a democratic connotation.
The Soviet is the pervading governmental pattern in the
Soviet Republic, from the Supreme Soviet of the U. S. S. R.
at the top to the village Soviets at the other end of the
scale. Thus Article 3 asserts: "In the U. S. S. R. all power
belongs to the working people of town and country as
represented by the Soviets of Working People's Depu-
ties. "
Article 4 states: "The socialist system of economy and
the socialist ownership of the means and instruments
of production firmly established as a result of the aboli-
tion of the capitalist system of economy, the abrogation
of private ownership of the means and instruments of
production and the abolition of the exploitation of man
by man, constitute the economic foundation of the U. S.
S. R. " Article 5 defines socialist property as existing
"either in the form of state property (the possession of
the whole people), or in the form of cooperative and col-
lective-farm property (property of a collective farm or
property of a cooperative association). "
Yet not all property in the Soviet Union has been
1
54
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? THE SOVIET CONSTITUTION
nationalized or socialized, since, according to Article 9,
"the law permits the small private economy of individual
peasants and handicraftsmen based on their personal
labor and precluding the exploitation of the labor of
others. " Such exploitation occurs, in Marxist theory,
as soon as you hire someone else to work for you and
make a profit out of his services. Employing household
or domestic workers does not come under the heading
of exploitation.
Furthermore, as Article 10 makes clear: "The right
of citizens to personal ownership of their incomes from
work and of their savings, of their dwelling houses and
subsidiary household economy, their household furni-
ture and utensils and articles of personal use and con-
venience, as well as the right of inheritance of personal
property of citizens, is protected by law. " This state-
ment corrects the widespread misconception that collec-
tive ownership under socialism covers literally everything.
The chief economic goal of socialism is to keep on raising
the standard of living in terms of personal consumer
goods such as just described. Collective ownership is of
the main means of production and distribution like
mineral deposits, the land, forests, factories, railroads,
banks, communications and so on.
Individual property rights are further defined in
Article 7 regarding collective farms: "In addition to its
basic income from the public, collective-farm enterprise,
every household in a collective farm has for its personal
use a small plot of land attached to the dwelling and,
as its personal property, a subsidiary establishment on
the plot, a dwelling house, livestock, poultry and minor
agricultural implements. " This same Article tells us:
55
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-06-10 17:29 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015020686591 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? SOVIET CIVILIZATION
"Public enterprises in collective farms and cooperative
organizations, with their livestock and implements, the
products of the collective farms and cooperative organ-
izations, as well as their common buildings, constitute
the common, socialist property of the collective farms
and cooperative organizations. "
Not less than 60 percent of Soviet families own their
own homes today. Within city limits the size of the plot
permitted for a privately owned house is not more than
720 square yards; in the country it may be twice that
size. Persons building a house are entitled to a credit of
10,000 rubles to assist them in the venture. The credit
carries 2 percent interest and is to be paid back in seven
years. The owner-builder's personal investment must
not be less than 30 percent; but -- and this is a novel
feature -- it need not be in the form of cash, since the
labor put in by the builder and members of his family
is counted as part of his investment. Free timber is avail-
able for construction to war invalids and to ex-servicemen
and their families.
Article 11 gives the key, in my opinion, to the rapid
economic development of the Soviet Union and to its
general economic stability in war and peace: "The
economic life of the U. S. S.
