Lenin CW-Vol. 23.pdf - From Marx to Mao

198V. I. LENINdid not venture to speak of “defence of the fatherland” in thewar they could see was maturing and which broke out in 1914.Our Party is not afraid to declare publicly that it willsympathise with wars or uprisings which Ireland might startagainst England; Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia againstFrance; Tripoli against Italy; the Ukraine, Persia, Chinaagainst Russia, etc.But what of the social-chauvinists? And the “Centrists”?Will they have the courage openly and officially to statethat they favour, or will favour, “defence of the fatherland”in the event of war breaking out between, say, Japan and theUnited States, a clearly imperialist war prepared over thecourse of many years, and one which would imperil manyhundreds of millions of people? I dare them! I am prepared towager that they will not, for they know only too well thatif they make such a statement, they will become a laughingstockin the eyes of the workers, they will be jeered at anddriven out of the socialist parties. That is why the socialchauvinistsand those in the “Centre” will avoid any openstatement and will continue to wriggle, lie and confuse theissue, seeking refuge in all manner of sophisms, like this onein the resolution of the last, 1915 French party congress:“An attacked country has the right to defence.”As if the question were: Who was the first to attack, andnot: What are the causes of the war? What are its aims?Which classes are waging it? Could one imagine, for example,a sane-minded socialist recognising England’s right to“defence of the fatherland” in 1796, when the French revolutionarytroops began to fraternise with the Irish? And yetit was the French who had attacked England and were actuallypreparing to land in Ireland. And could we, tomorrow,recognise the right to “defence of the fatherland” for Russiaand England, if, after they had been taught a lesson byGermany, they were attacked by Persia in alliance withIndia, China and other revolutionary nations of Asia performingtheir 1789 and 1793?That is my reply to the really ludicrous charge that weshare Tolstoy’s views. Our Party has rejected both the Tolstoydoctrine and pacifism, declaring that socialists mustseek to transform the present war into a civil war of theproletariat against the bourgeoisie, for socialism.