WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE ITALY News Journal Update - (en) Italy, Ponte Ghisolfa: When Emma Goldman asked Lenin about the treatment of anarchists (and more) - March 1920 (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 When Angelica Balabanoff had suggested that I speak with Lenin, I had

decided to write a memorandum on the most salient contradictions of
Soviet life, but since I hadn't heard anything more about that eventual
meeting, I hadn't bothered with it any more. I was therefore very
embarrassed when, one morning, Angelica's phone call arrived informing
us that "ll'ic" was waiting for me and Sasha and that her car would come
to get us. We knew that Lenin was so busy that he was almost
inaccessible, so the exception that was made in our favor had to be
seized upon.
Lenin's car rushed through the crowded streets and into the Kremlin at
full speed, without the sentries stopping us to check the
propusks[passes]. We were asked to get off in front of the entrance to
one of the ancient buildings which stood at some distance from the
others. An armed guard stood beside the lift, evidently already informed
of our arrival.
Without saying a word, he opened the locked door and waved us in, then
closed it and put the key in his pocket. We heard the soldier on the
first floor shout our names, and the same happened on the second, and
then again on the next. As the elevator slowly climbed, a veritable
chorus announced our arrival. At the top a guard repeated the ceremony
of opening and closing the elevator door, after which he ushered us into
a large hall announcing, "Tovarishtchy Goldman and Berkman."
We were asked to wait a moment, but nearly an hour passed before the
ceremony of our approach to the high seat resumed. Finally a young man
beckoned us to follow him. We passed a number of offices where he was
bustling with typewriters clicking and couriers coming and going. We
were made to stop in front of a massive wooden door decorated with
finely carved motifs behind which, after apologizing, our companion
disappeared. A little later the door opened and our guide invited us to
enter, then closed it behind us and disappeared. We stood in the
doorway, awaiting further instructions on how to proceed. Suddenly we
became aware of two eyes that were staring at us as if to pierce us. The
man to whom they belonged was sitting behind a huge desk, where
everything was arranged with absolute precision, while the rest of the
room also gave the same impression of meticulousness. Behind him was a
panel with several telephone switches and a world map covering the
entire wall; on the sides glass containers filled with heavy volumes.
Then a large oblong table upholstered in red, twelve straight-backed
chairs, and several armchairs at the windows: nothing to enliven the
orderly monotony of the whole but that little flaming red.
It was a very fitting background for a man known for his strict living
habits and practical attitude. Lenin, the most idolized man in the
world, but also the most hated and most feared, would have been out of
place in a less austere environment.
"Ilyich doesn't waste time with foreplay, he gets straight to the
point," Zorin had once told me with obvious pride, and indeed every move
he had made since 1917 proved it. However, if we had been in doubt, the
way he received us and the manner of the interview would have quickly
convinced us of the emotional sparing that characterized him.
Extraordinary was not only the speed with which he evaluated the
emotions of others, but also the skill with which he used it for his own
purposes.
No less amazing was the burst of mirth with which he pointed out
everything he thought was funny in himself or in the visitors and,
especially if he could put the other at a disadvantage, the great Lenin
would start shaking all over with laughter, as if he wanted to force the
others to laugh with him too.
After he had gazed right through us, we were subjected to a storm of
questions that followed one another like arrows from a precision bow.
First America, with its political and economic conditions: what were the
chances of a revolution in the immediate future? Then the American
Federation of Labour: was it steeped in bourgeois ideology, or was it
just Gompers and his clique? And could the mass of subscribers
constitute fertile ground with which to break through from within? Then
the IWW: what was their strength? And were the anarchists really as
effective as our recent trial seemed to indicate?
"Anarchists in prison? Nonsense," said Lenin

He had just finished reading the speeches we had given in the courtroom.
"Well done! Clear analysis of the capitalist system, splendid
propaganda!». Too bad we couldn't have stayed in the US no matter what
the cost. Certainly we were welcome in Soviet Russia, but combative
people like us were badly needed in America, where they could contribute
to the impending revolution, 'as many of your best comrades have
contributed to ours'. "And you, tovarishch Berkman, what a clever
organizer you must be, just like Shatoff. Made of real steel, your
comrade Shatoff: he does not back down from anything and works like
twelve men put together. He is now he is in Siberia, Commissioner of
Railways of the Far Eastern Republic. Many other anarchists have held
important positions with us. All doors are wide open if they are willing
to cooperate as true ideiny anarchists[idealists]. You, tovarishch
Berkman, will soon find your place. Too bad, however, that you have been
snatched from America at this prodigious moment.
And you, tovarishch Goldman? What space you had! You could have stayed.
Why didn't you do it, even though Comrade Berkman was kicked out? Well
now you are here. Have you thought about what kind of job you would like
to do? You are both ideiny anarchists[idealists], I see it from your
position on the war, from your idea of "October", the struggle you waged
in our favor and your faith in the soviets. Just like your great comrade
Malatesta who stands alongside Soviet Russia. What do you prefer to do?».
Sasha was the first to recover the use of speech. He began to speak in
English, but Lenin stopped him immediately with a merry laugh. "Do you
think he understands English? Not even a word. And neither are the other
languages. I'm not good, even though I've lived abroad for many years.
Strange, isn't it?' More bursts of laughter. Sasha continued in Russian.
He was proud to hear his comrades praised, he said, but why were there
anarchists in Russian prisons? "Anarchists?" Lenin interrupted him.
"Nonsense! Who told you such lies, and how could you believe them? In
prison we have bandits and followers of Makhno, but no
ideiny[idealist]anarchists.'
"Even capitalist America divides anarchists into two categories,
philosophers and criminals," I intervened at that point. "The former are
welcome even in the best society and one of them is held in high regard
even by the Wilson administration. The second category, to which we have
the honor of belonging, is persecuted and often locked up in prison. You
too seem to make a distinction without there being a real difference.
Doesn't it seem so?" I reasoned wrongly, Lenin replied, I got confused
and drew similar conclusions from different premises. «Freedom of speech
is a bourgeois prejudice, a good poultice for all social ills. In the
Workers' Republic, economic well-being speaks louder than simple
speeches and its freedom is much safer.
The dictatorship of the proletariat is following this course. Right now
it is facing very serious obstacles, the main one being the opposition
of the peasants. They need nails, salt, textiles, tractors, electricity.
When we manage to give them all this, they will be with us and no
counter-revolutionary power will make them turn back. In the current
state of Russia any idle chatter about freedom only serves to fuel the
backlash that wants to knock Russia down. Only bandits are guilty of
such a crime and must be kept under lock and key.'
Sasha handed him the resolutions of the anarchist conference and
underlined what the Moscow comrades assured, namely that the imprisoned
comrades were ideyny[idealists], not bandits. "The fact that our people
are asking to be legalized proves that they are on the side of the
Revolution and the soviets," we argued. Lenin took the document and
promised to submit it to the next meeting of the party executive. We
would have been informed of the decisions taken, but in any case it was
a matter of little importance, nothing worthwhile for a true
revolutionary. Was there something else?
Lenin enthusiastic about our project...

We told him that in America we had even fought for the political rights
of our adversaries and that therefore the fact that these rights were
denied to our comrades was no small matter to us. As far as I was
concerned, I informed him, I didn't feel like collaborating with a
regime that persecuted anarchists or others for their ideas. Then there
were still more serious evils: how could we reconcile them with the high
goal to which he himself aspired? I mentioned a few to him. He replied
that my attitude denoted bourgeois sentimentality. The dictatorship of
the proletariat was engaged in a mortal struggle and secondary factors
could not be taken into account. Russia was making great strides both at
home and abroad. He was sparking the world revolution and I was
complaining of some little bloodshed. It was absurd, I had to get over
it. "Do something," he advised, "it's the best way to recover your
revolutionary poise."
Maybe Lenin was right, I told myself. I would have followed his advice.
So I told him that I would start right away, not with some internal
Russian business, but rather with something that had propaganda value in
the United States. I would have liked to organize an association of
Russian Friends of American Freedom, which would carry out activities in
support of the struggle for freedom taking place in America, just as the
American Friends of Russia had supported Russia and its fight against
the tsarist regime.
For the entire duration of the conversation Lenin had not moved from his
chair, but now he almost leaped forward. He spun around, then stood in
front of us. "Here's a brilliant idea!" he exclaimed, rubbing his hands
together with a smirk. «A nice practical proposal. You must work to
implement it now. And you, tovarishch Berkman; Will you also cooperate?"
Sasha replied that we had already talked about it among ourselves and
had already worked out the details of the project. We could have started
right away if we had the necessary equipment. No problem, Lenin assured
us, we would have everything: an office, printing equipment, couriers,
and all the necessary funds. However, we had to provide him with a
statement detailing the estimated expenses. The Third International
would take care of it. He was the right channel for our project and
would provide us with any help we needed.
Mute with amazement, we looked at each other and then turned our gaze
towards Lenin. As we spoke together, we began to explain that our
efforts would only be effective if we were free from any affiliation
with Bolshevik organizations. We had to do the project our way: we knew
the psychology of Americans and what was the best way to do the job. But
before we could go into any further detail, our guide suddenly
reappeared, as unobtrusively as he had disappeared, and Lenin held out
his hand in farewell. "Don't forget to send me the prospectus," he
repeated as we already left the room.

Emma Goldman

https://ponte.noblogs.org/2023/3330/quando-emma-goldman-chiese-a-lenin-del-trattamento-riservato-agli-anarchici-e-altro-ancora/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca