Student: “Would it not be better to give students a broad view of all governments and different economies so they could draw their own conclusions?”
Official Statement: “The Soviet school cannot be satisfied to rear merely educated persons. Basing itself on the facts and deductions of progressive science, it should instill the ideology of Communism in the minds of the young generation, shape a Marxist-Leninist world outlook and inculcate the spirit of Soviet patriotism and Bolshevik ideas in them.”{220}
Student: “Is it fair to force the minds of the rising generation to accept only the values which a current political regime wishes to impose upon them?”
Official Statement: “It is important that pupils should clearly realize the doom of the capitalistic world, its inevitable downfall, that they should see on the other hand the great prospects of our socialist system, and actively get prepared when they leave school to be ready to take their place in life, in the struggle for a new world, for Communism.”{221}
Labor
Student: “Since Communism claims to represent the interests of the laboring class, what is the official Communist attitude toward the labor movement?”
Lenin: “It will be necessary… to agree to any and every sacrifice, and even—if need be—to resort to all sorts of devices, maneuvers and illegal methods, to evasion and subterfuge, in order to penetrate into the trade unions, to remain in them, and to carry on Communist work in them at all
Student: “I think the average American working man would be interested in knowing what the Communists do when they control a labor union. How do the Communists treat labor unions in Russia where they have complete control?”
Victor Kravchenko (Former Government Official now defected): “The local (Communist) party organization elects one of its suitable members to become president of the trade union. Generally speaking, the Soviet trade unions have to see that the workers execute the program.”{223}
Student: “But does that not make the union a subservient arm of government rather than an organization of workers? What if a nation wanted to strike?
Kravchenko: “The union’s job is to see that strict discipline is maintained, that there will be no strikes that the workers work for wages established by the central government that the workers carry out all the decisions, resolutions. et cetera, of the party.”{224}
Student: “But what would happen if I were a worker in Russia and wanted to quit my job?”
Kravchenko: “Every citizen in the Soviet Union has a passport. On the passport is his photograph. There is also a special page on which a stamp is put which indicates the place, date and type of employment. If you leave your job in one factory and go to another without the permission of your director you will be prosecuted under the law for violation of the law prohibiting unauthorized change of employment. This refers not only to laborers but to any kind of employee.”{225}
Student: “In view of these statements I would like to conclude with one more question: Is this the hope for humanity which the Soviet offers the world?”
Official Statement: “The Soviet is an inspiring example for the proletarian revolution in the rest of the world…. (It) shows the powerful achievements of the victorious proletariat and the vast superiority of Socialist to Capitalist economy. The Soviet Union is an inspiring example for the national self-determination of the oppressed peoples.”{226}
APPENDIX B
How Does a People Build a Free Nation?
During the latter part of the eighteenth century a phenomenal political development occurred which created the framework for a new civilization. This was the establishment of the first free people in modern times. In the panoramic history of the human race it was an epic achievement.
At the time this important political leap took place the whole pattern of human existence was bogged down by three man-made systems which had enslaved mankind. The first was the political system throughout the world which consisted of monarchial dictatorships where life, liberty and property were subject to the more or less fickle whims of individual potentates. The second oppressive system was the economic pattern of the world which was rooted in a variety of feudal contracts where the majority of the people wore out their lives as serfs on vast estates carved from the spoils of military conquest. The third system which dominated the lives of mankind was the overexpansion of institutionalized religion. The professional guardians of man’s spiritual welfare had practically choked off all channels of free spiritual expression so that matters of opinion and conscience were often scrutinized and controlled by oppressive surveillance.
Rise of the Liberals
For several hundred years prior to the eighteenth century a few liberal rebels had struck out fiercely against the Frankenstein systems which enmeshed mankind, and many of these liberals had left their mark. They were called “liberals” because they desired to liberate the race from these man-made systems. They wanted man controlling the systems instead of the systems enslaving man. Today “liberals” are often those who would like to restore those systems and once more make man their minions, but here we shall speak of liberals in the original sense—“liberators from man-made systems.”
The first group of liberals to gravitate together in sufficient quantities to take decisive action was a contingent of visionary men scattered among the American colonies. Historians say it is surprising how few voices in that day were prepared to speak up for complete liberation, but these few were sufficiently strong to chart a blueprint for the first free nation in modern times.
Of course, in many ways it was a most reckless venture. These American political pioneers risked life, property and the rights of citizenship by participating in this liberation movement. Nevertheless, they were successful to a degree never exceeded by political leaders in any other time or generation. Perhaps the following outline will illustrate why.
Political Philosophy of American Founding Fathers
The American founding fathers were very uncommon men. They were neither anarchists nor revolutionists but were among the most successful political and business leaders from each of the colonies. In this sense, they were both physically and mentally equipped to be empire builders, and before the king had made his imperialism completely intolerable they had, in many cases, been among the most active subjects of the king carrying out the crown’s business among the colonies. Therefore, by their own contemporary standards, they could scarcely be called “proletariat.” As a group they were students of economics and political science, and when they set their
