Letter to Vera Zasulich, April 3, 1890

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 3 April 1890


My dear Citizen,

As soon as I got your letter,[1] I let Stepaniak have the rest of the article (in proof) and, since part of it was slightly damaged, I added the corresponding MS for you to use as a check. I hope that by now it will already have reached you.

Stepaniak also gave me a copy of the Review, for which I thank you; I look forward keenly to reading your article and those of Plekhanov.[2]

You are perfectly right; in a publication of this kind all the articles in any given number should be complete in themselves and quite independent of any sequel in the ensuing number. Indeed, I should have acted on that principle had I not been pressed for time.

That it is imperative to combat Narodism,[3] no matter where—whether German, French, English or Russian—I entirely agree. Nevertheless, I believe it would have been more fitting if what I felt impelled to say had been said by a Russian. Admittedly, the partition of Poland, for example, necessarily looks very different when seen from the Russian rather than the Polish standpoint, which last has become that of the West. But I must, after all, take equal account of Polish sentiment. If the Poles lay claim to territory which most Russians regard as inalienably theirs and as being Russian by nationality, it is not for me to decide between them. All I can say is that—or so it seems to me—it is for the populations concerned to decide their fate themselves, just as the Alsatians will have to choose for themselves between Germany and France. Unfortunately, in writing about Russian foreign policy and its effect on Europe, I found it impossible not to mention things which the present generation in Russia regards as 'internal affairs'[4] and the impropriety, or apparent impropriety, consists in its being a foreigner rather than a Russian who was thus holding forth. But that was unavoidable.

If you think it might be of help to write a short note along these lines and to put my name to it, I should be glad if you would insert it wherever you think fit.

I hope that the publication of my article in English will make some impact. The faith of the liberals in the Czar's[5] liberating zeal has been severely shaken just now by the news from Siberia, by Kennan's book[6] and by the recent unrest at Russian universities.[7] That is why I hastened into print, so as to strike while the iron was hot. The diplomats in St. Petersburg were counting on the advent of Gladstone, Czarophil and admirer of the 'DIVINE FIGURE OF THE NORTH', as he called Alexander III, to enable them to embark on their next campaign in the East. After the Cretans and Armenians had been unleashed, a diversion in Macedonia might have followed; with France in thrall to the Czar and a benevolent England, they might perhaps have risked yet another step forward, and even the seizure of Czaregrad,[8] without Germany's hazarding a war in such unfavourable circumstances. And, Czaregrad once captured, there would be hope of a long spell of chauvinist intoxication of the kind we experienced in Germany after 1866 and 1870.[9] That is why the resurgence of anti-Czarist sentiment among the English Liberals seems to me so important to our cause; it is most fortunate that Stepaniak should be here and thus able to fan the flames.[10]

Now that a revolutionary movement is under way actually inside Russia, her foreign policy, once invincible, is suffering one setback after another. And that is highly desirable, for the said foreign policy is our most dangerous enemy, and not only ours, but yours. It is the only force to have remained unshaken up till now in Russia where the Czar is losing his hold even over the army, as evidenced by the numerous arrests of officers which prove that Russian officers in the matter of general intelligence and character, are infinitely superior to the Prussians. And as soon as you have partisans and loyal agents in the ranks of the foreign service—you or, come to that, the Constitutionals[11] —will have won hands down.

Kind regards to Plekhanov,

Yours very sincerely,

F. Engels

[12] These words are in Russian in the original

[13] Alexander III —[14] Constantinople

  1. ↑ On December 2, 1851 a counter-revolutionary coup d'état in France was carried out by Louis Bonaparte and his adherents. — 95, 99, 120, 254, 264, 287, 393, 653
  2. ↑ Plekhanov's article in the Review referred to here is not identified in the sources available.
  3. ↑ Narodism: a term used by Marxists to describe the populist movement in Russia that emphasized peasant-based revolution and rejected Marxism.
  4. ↑ Refers to domestic political matters considered sensitive or internal to Russia.
  5. ↑ Alexander III of Russia, known for conservative policies and suppression of dissent.
  6. ↑ George Kennan's book on Russian autocracy and repression.
  7. ↑ Student protests and unrest in Russian universities around 1890.
  8. ↑ Constantinople, modern-day Istanbul, then capital of the Ottoman Empire.
  9. ↑ Refers to German nationalist euphoria following victories in the Austro-Prussian War (1866) and Franco-Prussian War (1870).
  10. ↑ Stepaniak was a Russian revolutionary active in exile, contributing to anti-Tsarist propaganda.
  11. ↑ The "Constitutionals" likely refers to liberal reformists within Russia advocating constitutional monarchy.
  12. ↑ These words are in Russian in the original
  13. ↑ Alexander III
  14. ↑ Constantinople