💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › james-guillaume-michael-bakunin.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 11:17:04. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Michael Bakunin
Author: James Guillaume
Date: August 1907
Language: en
Topics: history, Michael Bakunin, biography
Source: Retrieved on September 14, 2011 from http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/guillaume/works/bakunin.htm
Notes: From Bakunin on Anarchy, translated and edited by Sam Dolgoff, 1971.

James Guillaume

Michael Bakunin

James Guillaume, Bakunin’s friend and comrade-in-arms, edited the last

five volumes of the six-volume French edition of his collected works.

Guillaume’s biographical sketch of Bakunin, originally appeared in his

introduction to Volume II of that edition.

This sketch is a primary source not only on the life of Bakunin, but

also on the most significant events in the socialist movement of that

period. It incidentally contributes valuable background information for

many of the other selections in the present volume. Guillaume, who did

not limit himself to recording events but also took part in shaping

them, had been inclined toward anarchism even before he met Bakunin in

1869. Earlier, he had been one of the founders of the First

International in Switzerland, where it held its first congress, in

Geneva, in 1866. He attended all its congresses, and eventually

published a four-volume history of the International. Guillaume also

wrote widely on libertarian theory and practice and edited a number of

periodicals. His extensive writings on cultural subjects included

substantial contributions to the theory of progressive education as

represented particularly by the early-nineteenth-century Swiss educator

Johann Pestalozzi.

I

Michael Alexandrovich Bakunin was born on May 18, 1814 on his family’s

estate in the little village of Premukhino, in the province of Tver. His

father was a career diplomat who, as a young attache, had lived for

years in Florence and Naples. Upon his return to Russia, he settled down

on his paternal estate where, at the age of forty, he married an

eighteen-year-old girl from the prominent Muraviev family. Given to

liberal ideas, he was for a while platonically involved with one of the

Decembrist’ clubs. After Nicholas I became Tsar, however, Bakunin gave

up politics and devoted himself to the care of his estate and the

education of his children, five girls and five boys, the oldest of whom

was Michael.

At fifteen, Michael entered the Artillery School in St. Petersburg

where, three years later, he was commissioned a junior officer and sent

to garrison in the provinces of Minsk and of Grodno, in Poland. He

arrived in the latter post shortly after the Polish insurrection of 1832

had been crushed. The spectacle of Poland terrorized shocked the gently

bred young officer and deepened his hatred of despotism. Two years

later, he resigned from the army and went to Moscow, where he lived for

the next six years, spending some summer vacations on the family estate.

In Moscow, Bakunin studied philosophy and began to read the French

Encyclopedists. His enthusiasm for the philosophy of Fichte, shared with

his friends Stankevich and Belinsky, led Bakunin to translate, in 1836,

Fichte’s Vorlesungen über die Bestimmung des Gelehrten (Lectures on the

Vocation of the Scholar). From Fichte, Bakunin went on to immerse

himself in the philosophy of Hegel, then the most influential thinker

among German intellectuals. The young man wholeheartedly embraced

Hegelianism, bedazzled by the famous maxim that “Everything that exists

is rational” — even though it also served to justify the Prussian state.

In 1839 he met Alexander Herzen and the latter’s friend Nicholas Ogarev,

who had returned from exile to Moscow; but their ideas and his were too

divergent at the time for a meeting of minds.

In 1840, aged twenty-six, Bakunin went to St. Petersburg and thence to

Germany, to study and prepare himself for a professorship in philosophy

or history at the University of Moscow. When, in the same year, Nicholas

Stankevich died in Italy, Bakunin still believed in the immortality of

the soul (letter to Herzen, October 23, 1840). In the course of his

intellectual evolution, however, he came to interpret the philosophy of

Hegel as a revolutionary theory. As Ludwig Feuerbach, in his The Essence

of Christianity, arrived at atheism by means of Hegelian doctrine, so

Michael Bakunin applied Hegel to bis own political and social ideas and

arrived at social revolution.

From Berlin, Bakunin moved in 1842 to Dresden. There he collaborated

with Arnold Ruge in publishing the Deutsche Jahrbücher (“German

Yearbooks”), in which he first began to formulate his revolutionary

ideas. His article “Reaction in Germany: A Fragment by a Frenchman”

concluded with the famous declaration:

Let us put our trust in the eternal spirit which destroys and

annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternally creative

source of all life. The desire for destruction is also a creative

desire.

Herzen believed at first that the article had actually been written by a

Frenchman, and wrote in his personal diary that “this is a powerful and

firm appeal, a victory for the democratic party. The article is from

beginning to end bound to arouse wide interest.”

The illustrious German poet Georg Herwegh visited Bakunin in Dresden,

and the two men formed a lasting friendship. A resident of Dresden who

also became Bakunin’s devoted friend was the musician Adolf Reichel.

Within a short time the Saxon government became overtly hostile toward

Ruge and his collaborators, and Bakunin and Herwegh left Saxony for

Switzerland. There Bakunin came into contact with the German communists

grouped around Wilhelm Weitling. In Bern during the winter of 1843–44, a

lifelong friendship developed with Adolf Vogt, who later became

professor of medicine at the University of Bern. When the Russian

government demanded that the Swiss authorities deport Bakunin to Russia,

he left Bern in February 1844, stopping first in Brussels and then in

Paris, where he remained until 1847.

II

In Paris Bakunin again met Herwegh, the latter’s wife, Emma Siegmund,

and Karl Marx, who had arrived there in 1843. Marx at first collaborated

with Arnold Ruge, but he and Engels soon went their own way and began to

formulate their own ideology. Bakunin saw much of Proudhon, with whom he

held night-long discussions, and was also on friendly terms with George

Sand. The years in Paris were the most fruitful for Bakunin’s

intellectual development — it was then that the basic outlines of the

ideas underlying his revolutionary program began to take shape, though

it was not until much later that he freed himself entirely of

metaphysical idealism. Bakunin himself informs us, in a manuscript

written in 1871, of his intellectual relations with Marx and Proudhon

during this period. He recalls that:

As far as learning was concerned, Marx was, and still is, incomparably

more advanced than I. I knew nothing at that time of political economy,

I had not yet rid myself of my metaphysical aberrations, and my

socialism was only instinctive. Although younger than I, he was already

an atheist, a conscious materialist, and an informed socialist. It was

precisely at this time that he was elaborating the foundations of his

system as it stands today. We saw each other often. I greatly respected

him for his learning and for his passionate devotion — though it was

always mingled with vanity — to the cause of the proletariat. I eagerly

sought his conversation, which was always instructive and witty when it

was not inspired by petty hate, which alas! was only too often the case.

There was never any frank intimacy between us — our temperaments did not

permit it. He called me a sentimental idealist, and he was right, I

called him vain, perfidious, and cunning, and I also was right.

Bakunin offers the following characterization of Engels in his book

Statism and Anarchy:

In 1845 Marx was the leader of the German communists. While his devoted

friend Engels was just as intelligent as he, he was not as erudite.

Nevertheless, Engels was more practical, and no less adept at political

calumny, lying, and intrigue. Together they founded a secret society of

German communists or authoritarian socialists.

In a French manuscript of 1870, Bakunin evaluates Proudhon, comparing

him to Marx:

As I told him a few months before his death, Proudhon, in spite of all

his efforts to shake off the tradition of classical idealism, remained

all his life an incorrigible idealist, immersed in the Bible, in Roman

law and metaphysics. His great misfortune was that he had never studied

the natural sciences or appropriated their method. He had the instincts

of a genius and he glimpsed the right road, but hindered by his

idealistic thinking patterns, he fell always into the old errors.

Proudhon was a perpetual contradiction: a vigorous genius, a

revolutionary thinker arguing against idealistic phantoms, and yet never

able to surmount them himself.... Marx as a thinker is on the right

path. He has established the principle that juridical evolution in

history is not the cause but the effect of economic development, and

this is a great and fruitful concept. Though he did not originate it —

it was to a greater or lesser extent formulated before him by many

others — to Marx belongs the credit for solidly establishing it as the

basis for an economic system. On the other hand, Proudhon understood and

felt liberty much better than he. Proudhon, when not obsessed with

metaphysical doctrine, was a revolutionary by instinct; he adored Satan

and proclaimed Anarchy. Quite possibly Marx could construct a still more

rational system of liberty, but he lacks the instinct of liberty — he

remains from head to foot an authoritarian.

On November 29 1847, at a banquet in Paris commemorating the Polish

insurrection of 1830, Bakunin delivered a speech in which he severely

denounced the Russian government. At the request of the Russian

Ambassador, Kiselev, he was expelled from France. To counteract the

widespread protests of those who sympathized with Bakunin, Kiselev

circulated the rumor that he had been employed by the Russian government

to pose as a revolutionary, but that he had gone too far. (This is

related by Bakunin in a letter to Fanelli, May 29, 1867.) Bakunin then

went to Brussels, where he again met Marx. Of Marx and his circle

Bakunin wrote to his friend Herwegh:

The German workers, Bornstadt, Marx, Engels — especially Marx — poison

the atmosphere. Vanity, malevolence, gossip, pretentiousness and

boasting in theory and cowardice in practice. Dissertations about life,

action, and feeling — and complete absence of life, action, and feeling

— and complete absence of life. Disgusting flattery of the more advanced

workers — and empty talk. According to them, Feuerbach is a “bourgeois,”

and the epithet BOURGEOIS! is shouted ad nauseam by people who are from

head to foot more bourgeois than anyone in a provincial city — in short,

foolishness and lies, lies and foolishness. In such an atmosphere no one

can breathe freely. I stay away from them and I have openly declared

that I will not go to their Kommunistischer Handwerkerverein [Communist

Trade Union Society] and will have nothing to do with this organization.

III

The revolution of February 24, 1848, opened the doors of France once

again to Bakunin. just as he was about to return to Paris, however,

events in Vienna and Berlin caused him to change his plans, and he left

for Germany in April. He was also then hoping to participate in the

Polish insurrectionary movement. In Cologne, he again met Marx and

Engels, who had begun publication of their Neue Rheinische Zeitung. It

was at this time that the “Democratic Legion of Paris” organized an

expedition to Germany to stage an insurrection in the Grand Duchy of

Baden. The attempt was a disastrous failure. Marx and Engels violently

attacked Bakunin’s friend Herwegh, who together with other German exiles

was one of the leaders of this ill-fated expedition. Bakunin came to his

defense. Much laterin 1871 — Bakunin wrote that “I must openly admit

that in this controversy Marx and Engels were in the right. With

characteristic insolence, they attacked Herwegh personally when he was

not there to defend himself. In a face-to-face confrontation with them,

I heatedly defended Herwegh, and our mutual dislike began then.”

Later, in June 1848, Bakunin went to Berlin and Breslau and then to

Prague, where he tried to influence the Slav Congress in a revolutionary

democratic direction. After participating in the week-long insurrection,

which was brutally suppressed, he returned to Breslau. He was still

there when the Neue Rheinische Zeitung — controlled by Marx — published

in its July 6 issue a letter from a Paris correspondent which read, in

part:

In regard to pro-Slav propaganda, we were told yesterday that George

Sand possesses documents which greatly compromise the Russian exile

Michael Bakunin and reveal him as an instrument or newly enrolled AGENT

OF RUSSIA, who played a key part in the arrest of the unfortunate Poles.

George Sand has shown these documents to some of her friends. [See Neue

Rheinische Zeitung of 3^(rd) August 1848]

Bakunin immediately protested this infamous slander in a letter

published in the Allgemeine Oder Zeitung of Breslau, and reprinted in

the Neue Rheinische Zeitung on July 16. He also wrote to George Sand

asking for an explanation. She replied in an open letter to the editor

of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung:

The allegations of your correspondent are entirely false. There are no

documents. I do not have the slightest proof of the insinuations that

you make against M. Bakunin. I have never had, nor have I ever

authorized any one else to cast, the slightest doubt on his personal

integrity and devotion to his principles. I appeal to your sense of

honor and to your conscience to print this letter immediately in your

paper.

Marx printed her letter together with the comment: “We have fulfilled

the obligation of the press to exercise strict vigilance over prominent

public individuals and at the same time given M. Bakunin the opportunity

to dispel suspicions which have been current in certain Paris circles.”

It is useless to elaborate on the singular theory that it is the duty of

the press to publish false and libelous accusations without attempting

to verify the facts!

The next month Bakunin and Marx met again in Berlin, and a reluctant

reconciliation was effected. Bakunin recalled the incident in 1871:

“Mutual friends induced us to embrace, and during our conversation Marx

remarked, half-smilingly, ‘Do you know that I am now the chief of a

secret communist society, so well disciplined that had I said to any

member, “Kill Bakunin,” you would be dead?’

Expelled from Prussia and Saxony, Bakunin spent the rest of the year

1848 in the principality of Anhalt. There he published, in German, the

pamphlet Appeal to the Slavs: By a Russian Patriot, Michael Bakunin,

Member of the Slav Congress. In this work he proposed that revolutionary

Slavs unite with the revolutionaries of other nations — Hungarians,

Germans, Italians — to overthrow the three major autocracies of the

time: the Russian Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Kingdom

of Prussia; this would be followed by the free federation of the

emancipated Slavic peoples. Marx criticized these ideas in the Neue

Rheinische Zeitung of February 14, 1849:

Bakunin is our friend, but this does not prevent us from criticizing his

pamphlet. Apart from the Russians, the Poles, and perhaps the Turkish

Slavs, no Slavic people has a future, for the simple reason that they

lack the indispensable historical, geographical, political, and

industrial conditions for independence and vitality.

Regarding the difference between Marx’s and his own views on the Slavic

question, Bakunin wrote, in 1871:

In 1848 we disagreed, and I must admit that his reasoning was more

correct than mine. Carried away, enraptured by the atmosphere of the

revolutionary movement, I was much more interested in the negative than

in the positive aspect of the revolution. Nevertheless, there is one

point on which Marx was wrong, and I was right. As a Slav, I wanted the

emancipation of the Slavic race from the German yoke, and as a German

patriot he did not admit then, nor will he admit now, the right of the

Slavs to free themselves from German domination. He thought then, as he

does now, that the mission of the Germans is to civilize — that is to

say, Germanize — the Slavs, for better or for worse.

In January 1849 Bakunin secretly arrived in Leipzig. There, together

with a group of young Czechs from Prague, he occupied himself with

preparations for an uprising in Bohemia. In spite of the growing

reaction in Germany and France, hope still lived, for there was more

than one place in Europe where the revolution had not yet been crushed.

Pope Pius IX, expelled from Rome, had been replaced by the Roman

Republic, headed by the triumvirate of Mazzini, Saffi, and Armellini,

with Garibaldi in command of the army. ‘Venice, its freedom regained,

heroically repulsed the siege of the Austrians; the Hungarians,

rebelling against Austria under the leadership of Kossuth, proclaimed

the defeat of the Habsburgs. And on May 3, 1849, a popular rebellion

broke out in Dresden, provoked by the refusal of the King of Saxony to

accept the constitution of the German Empire approved by the Frankfurt

Parliament. The King fled, and a provisional government was proclaimed.

For five days the rebels controlled the city. Bakunin, who had left

Leipzig for Dresden in the middle of April, became one of the leaders of

the rebellion and inspired the highest measure of heroism in the men

defending the barricades against the Prussian troops. A gigantic figure

of a man, already renowned as a revolutionary, Bakunin became the focus

of all eyes. An aura of legend soon enveloped him. To him alone were

attributed the fires set by the rebels; about him it was written that he

was “the very soul of the Revolution,” that he initiated widespread

terrorism, that to stop the Prussians from shooting into the barricades

he advised the defenders to take the art treasures from the museums and

galleries and display them from the barricades — the stories were

endless.

On May 9 the rebels — greatly outnumbered and outgunned — retreated to

Freiberg. There Bakunin pleaded in vain with Stephen Born (organizer of

the Arbeiter Verbruderung, the first organization of German workers) to

take his remaining troops to Bohemia and spark a new uprising. Born

refused, and disbanded his forces. Seeing that there was nothing more to

be done, Bakunin, the composer Richard Wagner, and Heubner — a democrat,

very loyal to Bakunin — went to Chemnitz. There, during the night, armed

bourgeois arrested Heubner and Bakunin and turned them over to the

Prussians. Wagner hid in his sister’s house and escaped.

The role of Bakunin in this rebellion had been that of a determined

fighter as well as a leading strategist. Even the hostile Marx felt

obliged to acknowledge his outstanding contribution in one of his

letters, some years later, to the New York Daily Tribune (October 2,

1852), entitled “ Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Germany ”:

In Dresden, the battle in the streets went on for four days. The

shopkeepers of Dresden, organized into “community guards,” not only

refused to fight, but many of them supported the troops against the

insurrectionists. Almost all of the rebels were workers from the

surrounding factories. In the Russian refugee Michael Bakunin they found

a capable and cool-headed leader.

IV

Conducted to the Königstein fortress, Bakunin spent many months in

detention, and eventually was condemned to death, on January 14, 1850.

In June his sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, and the prisoner

was then extradited to Austria, at the request of the Austrian

authorities. Bakunin was first jailed in Prague and then, in March 1851,

transferred to Olmutz, where he was sentenced to hang. Once again his

sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. He was brutally treated in

the Austrian prisons: his hands and feet were chained, and in Olmutz he

was chained to the prison wall.

Shortly thereafter, the Austrians handed Bakunin over to Russia, where

he was imprisoned in the dreadful dungeons of the Fortress of Peter and

Paul. At the beginning of his captivity, Count Orlov, an emissary of the

Tsar, visited Bakunin and told him that the Tsar requested a written

confession, hoping that the confession would place Bakunin spiritually

as well as physically in the power of the Russian Bear. Since all his

acts were known, he had no secrets to reveal, and so he decided to write

to the Tsar:

You want my confession; but you must know that a penitent sinner is not

obliged to implicate or reveal the misdeeds of others. I have only the

honor and the conscience that I have never betrayed anyone who has

confided in me, and this is why I will not give you any names.

When the Tsar, Nicholas I, read Bakunin’s letter, he remarked, “He is a

good lad, full of spirit, but he is a dangerous man and we must never

cease watching him.”

With the outbreak of the Crimean War in 1854, the Fortress of Peter and

Paul was exposed to bombardment by the English, and Bakunin was

transferred to Schlusselberg prison. ‘here he was attacked by scurvy,

and all his teeth fell out. Let me now interject what I myself wrote the

day after Bakunin died, stating only what he personally told me about

the last period of his imprisonment:

The atrocious prison diet had completely ruined his stomach (scurvy) so

that anything he ate caused nausea and vomiting, and he could digest

only finely chopped sour cabbage. But if his body was debilitated, his

spirit was indomitable. It was this above all he feared, that prison

life would break his spirit; that he would no longer hate injustice and

feel in his heart the passion for rebellion that sustained him; that the

day would come when he would pardon his tormentors and accept his fate.

But he need not have feared: not for a single moment did his spirit

waver, and he emerged from the purgatory of his confinement as he

entered, undaunted and defiant....

He recounted to us, also, that to distract his mind from his long,

loathsome solitude, he found pleasure in mentally re-enacting the legend

of Prometheus the Titan, benefactor of mankind. who while chained to the

Caucasian Rock by order of Olympus, heard the sweet plaintive melody of

the ocean nymphs bringing consolation and joy to the victim of Jupiter’s

vengeance.

It was hoped that with the death of Nicholas I Bakunin’s situation would

be to some extent alleviated. However, the new Tsar, Alexander II,

personally crossed Bakunin’s name off the amnesty list. Much later,

Bakunin’s mother went before the Tsar and begged him to have mercy on

her son; but the autocrat answered, “Madame, while your son remains

alive, he will not be freed.” One day Alexander, while reading the

letter that Bakunin had written his predecessor in 1851, remarked to his

aide, Prince Goncharov. “But I don’t see the least sign of repentance.”

In 1857 Alexander was at last induced to relent, and Bakunin was

released from prison and sentenced to perpetual exile in Siberia. He was

given permission to reside in the Tomsk region. In the latter part of

1858 he married a young Polish girl, Antonia Kwiatkowski. Somewhat later

— through the intervention of a relative on his mother’s side, Nicholas

Muraviev, Governor General of Eastern Siberia — Bakunin was permitted to

move to Irkutsk. There he was at first employed by a government agency,

the Amur Development Authority, and later in a mining enterprise.

Bakunin had expected to be freed quickly and allowed to return to

Russia. But Muraviev, who was trying to help him, lost his post because

he opposed the bureaucracy, and Bakunin realized that he could regain

his liberty in only one way: escape. Leaving Irkutsk in mid-June 1861 on

the pretext of business — alleged commercial negotiations and a

government-authorized study — Bakunin arrived in Nikolaevsk in July.

From there he sailed on the government vessel Strelok to Kastri, a

southern port, where he managed to board the American merchant ship

Vickery, which took him to Hakodate, Japan. He went next to Yokohama,

then in October to San Francisco, and in November to New York. On

December 27, 1861, Bakunin arrived in London, where he was welcomed like

a long-lost brother by Herzen and Ogarev.

V

I will briefly summarize Bakunin’s activity during the six years after

his return to Western Europe. He soon realized that despite his personal

friendship with Herzen and Ogarev, he could not associate himself with

the political line of their journal, Kolokol (“The Bell”). During the

year 1862, Bakunin expounded his current ideas in two pamphlets: To My

Russian, Polish, and Other Slav Friends and Romanov, Pugachev, or

Pestel?

The outbreak of the Polish insurrection of 1863 found Bakunin trying to

unite all men of action to render effective aid and deepen the

revolution. But attempts to organize a Russian legion failed, and the

expedition of Colonel Lapinski came to naught. Bakunin then went to

Stockholm — where he was reunited with his wife — hoping to get help

from Sweden. His plans all failed, however, and he returned to London.

He next went to Italy, and in the middle of 1864 returned to Sweden.

Thence he went back once more to London, where he again saw Marx, and

then to Paris, where he was reunited with Proudhon. Finally he went back

to Italy.

As a consequence of the war of 1859 and Garibaldi’s heroic expedition of

1860, Italy then stood on the threshold of a new era. Bakunin remained

there until 1867, living first in Florence and then in and around

Naples. It was during this period that he conceived the plan of forming

a secret organization of revolutionaries to carry on propaganda work and

prepare for direct action at a suitable time. From 1864 onward he

steadily recruited Italians, Frenchmen, Scandinavians, and Slavs into a

secret society known as the International Brotherhood, also called the

Alliance of Revolutionary Socialists. He and his friends also combated

the devoutly religious followers of the republican Mazzini, whose

watchword was “God 2^(nd) Country.” In Naples, Bakunin established the

journal Libertà e Giustizia (“Liberty and justice”), in which he

developed his revolutionary program.

In July 1866 he informed his friends Herzen and Ogarev about the secret

society and its program, on which he had been concentrating all his

efforts for two years. According to Bakunin, the society then had

members in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, England, France, Spain, and

Italy, as well as Polish and Russian members.

In 1867 bourgeois democratic pacifists of many lands (though

preponderantly French and German) founded The League for Peace and

Freedom and convened a congress in Geneva which aroused wide interest.

Although Bakunin had few illusions about the new organization, he hoped

to propagandize its members in favor of revolutionary socialism. He

attended the congress, addressed the delegates, and became a member of

the Central Committee of the League. For a whole year he tried to induce

the Committee to adopt a social revolutionary program. At the second

congress of the League, in Bern in 1868, Bakunin and his colleagues in

the Alliance of Revolutionary Socialists tried to persuade the congress

to adopt unambiguously revolutionary resolutions. After several days of

heated debate, however, the resolutions were voted down. The minority

faction of revolutionary socialists then resigned from the League, on

September 25, 1868, and that same day founded a — new, open — not secret

— organization, called the International Alliance of Socialist

Democracy. The Alliance’s Declaration of Principles was written by

Bakunin; a summary of his ideas, it was the product and culmination of

the long period of ideological development he had begun in Germany in

1842. Among other things, it stated that:

The alliance declares itself atheist; it seeks the complete and

definitive abolition of classes and the political, economic, and social

equality of both sexes. It wants the land and the instruments of labor

(production), like all other property, to be converted into the

collective property of the whole society for utilization by the workers;

that is, by agricultural and industrial associations. It affirms that

all the existing political and authoritarian States, which are to be

reduced to simple administrative functions dealing with public utilities

in their respective countries, must eventually be replaced by a

worldwide union of free associations, agricultural and industrial.

The New Alliance affirmed its desire to become a branch of the

International, whose statutes it accepted.

just a few weeks earlier (September 1) the first issue of a

Russian-language journal, Narodnoye Dyelo (“Public Affairs”), had

appeared, under the editorship of Bakunin and Nicholas Zhukovsky, and

had published a “Program of Russian Socialist Democracy” — a program

that coincided, in the main, with that of the Alliance. With the second

issue, however, the editorship changed hands: the paper fell under the

control of Nicholas Utin, who gave it an entirely different orientation.

VI

The International Workingmen’s Association was founded in London on

September 23, 1864, but its structure and its constitution were not

formally adopted until the first congress convened in Geneva, September

3–8, 1866. In October 1864 Bakunin again met Marx, whom he had not seen

since 1848. Marx requested this meeting to re-establish friendly

relations with Bakunin who had been estranged when, in 1853, Marx’s Neue

Rheinische Zeitung [Neue Rheinische Zeitung was closed down in 1849. The

newspaper which published the accusation was unconnected with Marx]

repeated the old libel that Bakunin was a Russian agent. Mazzini and

Herzen defended Bakunin, who was at that time in a Russian prison. Later

in 1853 Marx had declared in the English paper Morning Advertiser that

he was Bakunin’s friend and had personally assured Bakunin that this was

still the case. At their reunion in 1864, Marx invited Bakunin to join

the International, but Bakunin preferred to return to Italy to devote

himself to his secret organization. Bakunin’s decision was

understandable. At that time the International, outside of the General

Council in London and a few Mutualist workers from Paris, could hardly

be considered an international organization, and no one could foresee

the importance it later assumed. It was only after the second congress

at Lausanne in September 1867, the two strikes in Paris, and the great

strike at Geneva (1868) that it drew serious attention and its

revolutionary capabilities could no longer be ignored. In its third

congress, in Brussels in 1868, the theories of cooperativism and

Proudhonist Mutualism were seriously challenged by those of revolution

and collective ownership.

In July 1868 Bakunin became a member of the Geneva section of the

International, and after resigning from the “League for Peace and

Freedom” at its Bern Congress, he settled in Geneva in order to

participate actively in the labor movement of the city. Intensive

propaganda sparked the growth of the International. A trip to Spain by

Fanelli (an Italian revolutionary socialist and coworker of Bakunin)

resulted in the establishment of the International in Madrid and

Barcelona. The French sections of French-speaking Switzerland united

into a federation under the name “Romance Federation of the

International” and in January 1869 launched their official organ, the

magazine L’Égalité. L’Égalité attacked the false socialists of the Swiss

Jura (mountains) and won the enthusiastic support of a majority of the

region’s workers for revolutionary socialism. On various occasions,

Bakunin came to the Jura to denounce what he called “collaboration

between workers and employers, alliances — masked as cooperation — with

bourgeois political parties and reactionary groups,” gradually forming a

lasting friendship with the militant workers. In Geneva itself, a

conflict took place between construction workers, who were instinctively

revolutionary, and the better-paid and highly skilled watch and

jewellery workers, who called themselves “Fabrica” and who wanted to

participate in election campaigns with the bourgeois radicals. Those of

a revolutionary tendency had the powerful encouragement of Bakunin, who,

in addition to his public addresses, formulated his program and exposed

the opportunists in a series of notable articles such as “The Policy of

the International” [see selection in present volume], printed in

L’Égalité. As a result, the Bakuninists won out — although this victory

proved, regrettably, temporary. Nonetheless, since the Belgian, Spanish,

French, and French-Swiss sections of the International all favored

collectivism, its adoption by a large majority at the next congress was

assured.

The General Council of London refused to admit the Alliance as a branch

of the International because the Alliance would constitute what amounted

to a second international body in the International, thereby causing

confusion and disorganization. Unquestionably one of the motives for

this decision was Marx’s ill will toward Bakunin, whom the German

regarded as a schemer aiming to “break up the International and convert

it into his own tool.” But in any case, irrespective of Marx’s personal

sentiments, Bakunin’s idea of forming a dual organization was

unfortunate. When this was explained to him by his Belgian and Swiss

comrades, he recognized the justice of the General Council’s decision.

The Central Bureau of the Alliance, after consulting the members,

dissolved the Alliance and the local group in Geneva became a simple

section of the International which was then admitted to membership by

the General Council in July 1869.

The fourth general congress of the International (Basel, September 6–12,

1869) almost unanimously endorsed the principle of, collective property,

but it soon became evident that the delegates were divided into two

distinct ideological groups. The Germans, Swiss-Germans, and English

were state communists. The opposing group — Belgians, Swiss-French,

French, and Spaniards — were antiauthoritarian communists, federalists,

or anarchists who took the name “Collectivists!’ Bakunin, naturally,

belonged to this faction, which included the Belgian De Paepe and the

Parisian Varlin.

The secret organization founded by Bakunin in 1864 was dissolved in

January 1869 because of an internal crisis, but many of its members kept

in touch with each other. The intimate circle attracted new friends,

Swiss, Spaniards, and Frenchmen, Varlin among them. This free contact of

men united for collective action in an informal revolutionary fraternity

was continued in order to strengthen and give more cohesion to the great

revolutionary movement which the International represented.

In the summer of 1869, Borkheim, a friend of Marx, repeated in the

Berlin journal Zukunft (“The Future”) the old libel that Bakunin was a

Russian agent, and Wilhelm Liebknecht, a founder of the German Social

Democratic party, at various times continued to spread this falsehood.

When Bakunin met Liebknecht at the Basel Congress, he challenged him to

prove his charges before an impartial “court of honor.” Liebknecht

explained that he had never personally slandered Bakunin, but had only

repeated what he read in the papers, primarily the Zukunft. The court of

honor unanimously found Liebknecht guilty and signed a statement to that

effect. Liebknecht admitted that he was wrong and shook hands with

Bakunin, who then set fire to the statement, using it to light his

cigarette.

After the Basel Congress, Bakunin moved to Locarno, where he could live

cheaply and where he would not be distracted while making a number of

Russian translations for a St. Petersburg publisher (the first was of

volume one of Marx’s Das Kapital). Unfortunately, Bakunin’s departure

from Geneva left the field open for the political machinations of a

group headed by the Russian immigrant Nicholas Utin. In a few months

they disrupted the Russian section of the International, occupied the

key posts, and seized control of its organ, L’Égalité. Marx entered into

an alliance with Utin and his camarilla of pseudosocialists of the

“Temple Unico,” the old Masonic hall used as a meeting place for the

Geneva International. Meanwhile, on March 28, Marx addressed his

notorious “Confidential Communication” to his German friends in order to

stir up hatred among the German Democratic Socialists against Bakunin.

He represented him as an agent of the pan-Slavist party, from which,

Marx declared, Bakunin received twenty-five thousand francs per year.

In April 1870, Utin and his Geneva conspirators engineered a split of

the Romance Federation into two factions. The first faction, which took

the name “Jura Federation,” was in agreement with the Internationalists

of France, Belgium, and Spain. They adopted a revolutionary

antiauthoritarian position, declaring that “all participation of the

working class in the politics of bourgeois governments can result only

in the consolidation and perpetuation of the existing order.” The other,

the Temple Unico faction, backed by the London General Council as well

as by the Germans and Swiss-Germans, believed in “electoral action and

workers’ candidates for political posts.”

Bakunin was at that time preoccupied with Russian events. In the spring

of 1869 he became friendly with the fiery young revolutionist Sergei

Nechaev. Bakunin still believed at that time in the possibility of a

vast peasant uprising in Russia, much like that of Stenka Razin. The

second centennial of this great revolt of 1669 seemed almost like a

prophetic coincidence. It was then that Bakunin wrote in Russian the

manifesto Some Words to My Young Brothers in Russia and the pamphlet

Science and the Present Revolutionary Cause. Nechaev soon returned to

Russia, but was forced to flee again after the arrest of almost all his

friends and the destruction of his organization. He reached Switzerland

in January 1870. Nechaev then prevailed upon Bakunin to abandon the

translation of Marx’s Das Kapital which he had already begun, and to

concentrate entirely upon Russian revolutionary propaganda. Nechaev also

succeeded in obtaining money for his alleged “Russian Committee” from

the remainder of the Bakhmetiev Fund for Russian revolutionary

propaganda, which was administered by Ogarev.

Bakunin also wrote, in Russian, the pamphlet To the Officers of the

Russian Army, and, in French, The Bears of Bern and the Bear of St.

Petersburg. He edited a few issues of the new series of Kolokol and

engaged in feverish activity for many months. In July 1870, when Bakunin

realized that Nechaev was using him to attain a personal dictatorship by

Jesuitical methods, he broke off all relations with the young

revolutionist. He had been the victim of excessive trustfulness and of

his admiration for Nechaev’s savage energy. Bakunin wrote to Ogarev on

August 21, 1870:

We have been pretty fine fools. How Herzen would have laughed at us if

he were still alive, and how right he would have been!! Well, all we can

do is to swallow this bitter pill, which will make us more cautious in

the future.

VII

When the Franco-Prussian War of 870–7 broke out, Bakunin passionately

followed the course of battle. To his friend Ogarev he wrote in a letter

dated August 11, 1870, “You are only a Russian, but I am an

Internationalist.” To Bakunin, the crushing of France by feudal,

militarist Germany would mean the triumph of the counterrevolution; and

this defeat could only be avoided by calling upon the French people to

rise en masse and throw out both the foreign invader and their own

domestic tyrants who were holding them in economic and political

bondage. To his socialist friends in Lyons, Bakunin wrote:

The patriotic movement is nothing in comparison with what you must now

do if you want to save France. Therefore, arise my comrades to the

strains of the Marseillaise which today is once again the true anthem of

France palpitating with life, the song of liberty, the song of the

people, the song of humanity. In acting patriotically we are (also)

saving universal liberty. Ah! if I were young again, I would not he

writing letters. I would be among you!

A correspondent of the Volksstaat (Wilhelm Liebknecht’s paper) had

reported that the Parisian workers were “indifferent toward the war.”

Bakunin felt that it was perverse to accuse the workers of an apathy

which, if actually present, would be criminal on their part. He wrote to

the workers that they could not remain indifferent to the German

invasion, that they must absolutely defend their liberty against the

armed gangs of Prussian militarism.

If France were invaded by an army of German, English, Belgian, Spanish,

or Italian proletarians, holding high the banner of revolutionary

socialism and proclaiming to the world the final emancipation of labor,

I would have been the first to cry to the workers of France: “Open your

arms, embrace them, they are your brothers, and unite with them to sweep

away the rotten remains of the bourgeois world!” ... But the invasion

that today dishonors France is an aristocratic, monarchic, military

invasion.... If they remain passive before this invasion, the French

workers will betray not only their own liberty, they will also betray

the cause of the workers of the world, the sacred cause of revolutionary

socialism.

Bakunin’s ideas about the situation facing French workers and the means

that should be employed to save France and the cause of liberty were

expressed by him in a small pamphlet which appeared anonymously, in

September 1870, under the title Letters to a Frenchman on the Present

Crisis.

Bakunin left Locarno on September 9, 1870, and arrived in Lyons on the

fifteenth. On his arrival, a Committee for the Salvation of France,

whose most active and determined member was Bakunin, was immediately

organized to mount a revolutionary insurrection. The program of the

movement was printed on a huge red poster and was signed by the

delegates of Lyons, St.Étienne, Tarare, and Marseilles. Although Bakunin

was a foreigner and his position therefore more precarious, he did not

hesitate to add his signature to those of his friends, thus sharing

their perils and their responsibilities. The poster proclamation first

declares that “The administrative and governmental machinery of the

State having become impotent is abolished,” and that “The people of

France [have] regained full control over their own affairs. ‘ . .” It

then immediately proposes the formation in all the federated communes of

Committees for the Salvation of France, and the immediate dispatch to

Lyons of two delegates from each committee in the capital of each

department of France, to form the Revolutionary Convention for the

Salvation of France.

On September 28, a popular uprising put the revolutionists in possession

of the Lyons City Hall; but the treason of General Cluseret, in helping

to suppress an uprising he had endorsed, and the cowardice of some of

those who had betrayed the trust of the people caused the defeat of the

revolutionists. Bakunin, against whom the prosecutor of the Republic,

Andrieux, had issued an order of arrest, fled to Marseilles where he

remained in hiding for some time, trying to prepare a new uprising. In

the meantime, the French authorities spread the rumor that Bakunin was a

paid agent of Prussia and that the Government of National Defense could

prove it. On its part, Liebknecht’s Volksstaat, commenting on the

twenty-eighth of September and the red poster proclamation, declared

that “Not even the Berlin [government’s] press could have better served

Bismarck’s plans.”

On October 24, Bakunin, in despair over events in France, sailed from

Marseilles on a ship returning to Locarno by way of Genoa and Milan. The

day before his departure he had written the following to the Spanish

Socialist Sentinon, who had come to France hoping to participate in the

revolutionary movement:

The French people are no longer revolutionary at all... . Militarism and

Bureaucracy, the arrogance of the nobility and the Protestant Jesuitry

of the Prussians, in affectionate alliance with the knout of my dear

sovereign and master, the Emperor of all the Russias, are going to

command all Europe, God knows for how many years. Goodbye to all our

dreams of impending Revolution!!

The uprising that broke out in Marseilles on October 31, only seven days

after Bakunin’s departure, confirmed his pessimistic prediction: the

Revolutionary Commune which had been established when news of the

capitulation of Bazaine reached Marseilles held out for only five days

before surrendering to Alfonso Cent, who had been sent by Gambetta.

In Locarno, where he spent the winter in seclusion, battling against

poverty and despair, Bakunin wrote the continuation of his Letters to a

Frenchman, an analysis of the new situation in Europe. It was published

in the spring of 1871 with the characteristic title, The Knouto-Germanic

Empire and the Social Revolution. News of the Parisian insurrection of

March 18, 1871 (the Paris Commune) lightened his pessimism. The Paris

proletariat, at least, had lost neither their energy nor their spirit of

revolt. But France, exhausted and defeated, could not be galvanized by

the heroism of the people of Paris. The attempts in various provinces to

spread the communalist movement (self-governing communes) failed, and

the Parisian insurrectionists were finally crushed by their innumerable

enemies. Bakunin, who had gone to stay with friends in the Jura to be

nearer the French frontier, was unable to help and was compelled to

return to Locarno.

But this time Bakunin did not give way to discouragement. The Commune of

Paris, upon which all the reactionary forces concentrated their furious,

venomous hatred, kindled a spark of hope in the hearts of all the

exploited. The proletariat of the world saluted the heroic people whose

blood ran in torrents for the emancipation of humanity. “The modern

Satan, the great rebellion, suppressed, but not pacified!” exclaimed

Bakunin. The Italian patriot Mazzini added his voice to those who cursed

the Commune and the International. Bakunin wrote the Response of an

Internationalist to Mazzini which appeared in August 1871 in both

Italian and French. This work made a deep impression in Italy, and

produced among the youth and the workers of Italy a climate of opinion

which gave birth, toward the end of 1871, to many new sections of the

International. A second pamphlet, The Political Theology of Mazzini and

the International, even further consolidated and extended the

International. Bakunin, who by sending Fanelli to Spain had created the

International there, was by his polemic with Mazzini also the creator of

the International in Italy. Now he threw himself passionately into the

struggle not only against the domination of the bourgeoisie over the

proletariat, but against the men who were trying to install the

principle of authority in the International Workingmen’s Association.

VIII

The split in the Romance Federation (French-speaking Switzerland), which

could have been healed if the London General Council had so desired and

if the agents of that Council had been less perfidious, was aggravated

to the point of irreversibility. In August 1870 Bakunin and three of his

friends were expelled from the Geneva section because they had declared

their sympathy for the Jura Federationists. Soon after the end of the

Franco-Prussian War Marx’s agents came to Geneva to revive the discords.

The members of the now-dissolved Geneva section of the Alliance believed

that they had given sufficient proof of their friendly intentions by

dissolving their section. But the party of Marx and Utin did not cease

its harassments: a new section, called “Propaganda and Revolutionary

Socialist Action,” formed by refugees from the Paris Commune and

including old members of the Alliance section, was promptly refused

admission to the International by the General Council. Instead of a

general congress of the International, the General Council, controlled

by Marx and his friend Engels, in September 1871 convened a secret

conference in London, attended almost entirely by partisans of Marx. The

conference adopted resolutions destroying the autonomy of the sections

and federations of the International and giving the General Council

powers that violated the fundamental statutes of the International and

the conference. At the same time it tried to promote and organize, under

the direction of the General Council, what it called “the political

[parliamentary] action of the working class.”

Immediate action was necessary. The International, a vast federation of

groups organized to fight the economic exploitation of the capitalist

system, was in imminent danger of being derailed by a little band of

Marxist and Blanquist sectarians. The sections of the Jura; together

with the “Propaganda and Revolutionary” section of Geneva, met in

Sonvilier (November 12, 1871 ) and established the Jurassian Federation

of the International. This association sent a circular to all the

federations of the International urging them to jointly resist the

usurpations of the General Council and to energetically reconquer their

autonomy. The circular, among other things, declared:”

If there is an undeniable fact, attested to a thousand times by

experience, it is the corrupting effect produced by authority on those

who manipulate it. It is absolutely impossible for a man who wields

power to remain a moral man....

The General Council could not escape this inevitable law. These men,

accustomed to march at our head and to speak in our name, have been led

by the very demands of their situation to desire that their particular

program, their particular doctrine, should prevail in the International.

Having become in their own eyes a sort of government, it was natural

that their own particular ideas should appear to them as official

theory, as they had the sole “freedom of the city” [unlimited power] in

the Association whilst divergent views expressed by other groups

appeared no longer the legitimate expression of opinions With rights

equal to their own, but as veritable heresies....

We do not impugn the intentions of the General Council. The persons who

compose it found themselves the victims of an inevitable necessity. They

wanted in good faith, and for the triumph of their particular doctrine,

to introduce into the International the principle of authority.

Circumstances appeared to favor their doctrine, and it appears to us

quite natural that this school, whose ideal is THE CONQUEST OF POLITICAL

POWER BY THE WORKING CLASS, should have believed that the International

was going to alter its original structure and transform itself into a

hierarchical organization directed and governed by the General

Council....

But while we understand these tendencies we feel obliged to fight them

in the name of that Social Revolution whose program is “Emancipation of

the workers by the workers themselves.” ...

The future society must be nothing else than the universalization of the

organization that the International has formed for itself. We must

therefore strive to make this organization as close as possible to our

ideal. How could one expect an egalitarian society to emerge out of an

authoritarian organization? It is impossible. The International, embryo

of the future society, must from now on faithfully reflect our

principles of federation and liberty, and must reject any principle

tending toward authority and dictatorship.

Bakunin enthusiastically welcomed the Sonvilier circular and devoted

‘all his energies to actively propagating its principles in the Italian

sections of the International. Spain, Belgium, most of the French

sections (secretly reorganized in spite of the Versailles reaction

following the defeat of the Paris Commune), and most of the United

States sections declared themselves in agreement with the Swiss-Jura

Federation. It was soon certain that the attempts of Marx and his allies

to capture the International would be repulsed. The first half of 1872

was marked by a “confidential circular” issued by the General Council,

written by Karl Marx and printed as a pamphlet entitled Les prétendues

scissions dans I’Internationale (“The Alleged Splits in the

International”). Prominent Federalist militants and others seeking

independence from the General Council were personally slandered, and the

widespread protests against certain acts of the General Council were

depicted as sordid intrigues by members of the old International

Alliance of the Social Democracy (the Alliance) who, directed by “the

Pope of Locarno” (Bakunin), were working for the destruction of the

International. Bakunin gave his reaction to this circular in a letter:

“The sword of Damocles that hung over us so long has at last fallen over

our heads. It is not really a sword, but the habitual weapon of Marx, a

heap of filth.”

Bakunin passed the summer and autumn of 1872 in Zurich, where on his

initiative a Slavic section was founded, composed almost entirely of

Serbian and Russian students, which joined the Jura Federation of the

International. Since April Bakunin had been in contact with Russian

emigre youths in Locarno who organized themselves into a secret action

and propaganda group. The most militant member of this group was Armand

Ross (Michael Sazhin). In intimate contact with Bakunin from the summer

of 1870 to the spring of 1876, Ross was the principal intermediary

between the great revolutionary agitator and Russian youth.

Bakunin’s propaganda during this period was an inspiration to the young

Russians in the following years. Bakunin’s dictum that the youth must

“GO TO THE PEOPLE” had become an axiom within the populist movement. In

Zurich, Ross established a Russian-language printing plant which in 1873

published Istoricheskoye Razvitiye Internatsionala (“ne Historical

Development of the International”), a collection of articles translated

from Swiss and Belgian socialist papers, with explanatory notes by

different writers, and a chapter on the Alliance written by Bakunin. In

1874 Ross’s press printed Gosudarstvennost i Anarkhiya (“Statism and

Anarchy”). A conflict with Peter Lavrov and personal dissensions among

some of its members led to the dissolution of the Zurich Slav section of

the International in 1873.

in the meantime the General Council decided to convene a general

congress for September 7, 1872. It chose to meet at The Hague for two

main reasons: it was a location close to London, and thus allowed many

delegates who agreed with Marx’s policies or held fictitious credentials

to get to the congress easily; at the same time, the location made it

more difficult for delegates representing remote or legally ‘banned

federations to attend; there was no possibility, for example, of

Bakunin’s attending. The newly constituted Italian Federation refused to

send delegates. The Spanish Federation sent four, the Jura Federation

two, the Belgian Federation seven, the Dutch Federation four, the

English Federation five. These twenty-two delegates, the only ones truly

representing constituents of the International, made up the core of the

minority. The majority of forty who, in reality, represented only

themselves had already pledged themselves in advance to faithfully carry

out the orders of the clique headed by Marx and Engels. The only

decision of the congress with which we deal here is the expulsion of

Bakunin [Guillaume was also expelled] from the International. This

action was taken on the last day of the congress, September 7, after

one-third of the delegates had already gone home, by a vote of

twenty-seven for and seven against, with eight abstentions. A mock

inquiry by a five-member commission, held behind closed doors, found

Bakunin guilty of the charges made by the Marxist clique, and he was

expelled on two grounds:

1. That a draft of principles and letters signed “Bakunin” proves that

said citizen has tried to establish, and perhaps has succeeded in

establishing, a society in Europe named “The Alliance’ with rules on

social and political matters entirely different from those of the

International.

2. That Citizen Bakunin has made use of deceptive tricks in order to

appropriate some portion of another person’s fortune, which constitutes

fraud; that further he or his agents resorted to threats lest he be

compelled to meet his obligations.

The second Marxist accusation refers to the three hundred rubles

advanced to Bakunin for the translation of Marx’s Das Kapital and the

letter written by Nechaev to the publisher Poliakov.

A protest against this infamy, immediately published by a group of

Russian immigrants, made these points:

Geneva and Zurich, October 4, 1872. They have dared to accuse our friend

Michael Bakunin of fraud and blackmail. We do not deem it necessary or

opportune to discuss the alleged facts on which these strange

accusations against our friend and compatriot are based. The facts are

well known in all details and we will make it our duty to establish the

truth as soon as possible. Now we are prevented from so doing by the

unfortunate situation of another compatriot who is not our friend, but

whose persecution at this very moment by the Russian government renders

him sacred to us. [This refers to Nechaev, who was arrested in Zurich on

August 14, 1872, and extradited to Russia via Switzerland on October 27,

1872.] Mr. Marx, whose cleverness we do not, like others, question, has

this time at least shown very bad judgment. Honest hearts in all lands

will doubtless beat with indignation and disgust at so shameful a

conspiracy and so flagrant a violation of the most elementary principles

of justice. As to Russia, we can assure Mr. Marx that all his maneuvers

will inevitably end in failure. Bakunin is too well esteemed and known

there for calumny to touch him. Signed: Nicholas Ogarev, Bartholomy

Zaitsev, Vladimir Ozerov, Armand Ross, Vladimir Holstein, Zemphiri

Ralli, Alexander Oelsnitz, Valerian Smirnov.

The day after the Hague Congress of September 5, 1872, another congress

of the International — comprising delegations from the Italian, Spanish,

Swiss-Jura federations, as well as representatives from American and

French sections — convened in St.-Imier Switzerland. The congress stated

that it unanimously:

Rejects absolutely all resolutions of the Hague Congress and does not

recognize to any extent the powers of the new General Council named by

it. [The General Council had been transferred to New York.]

The Italian Federation had already affirmed, on August 4, 1872, the

resolutions of the St.-Imier Congress, which the Jura Federation also

adopted at a special meeting held the same day as that of the congress.

Most of the French sections hastened to express their complete approval.

The Spanish and Belgian federations endorsed the resolutions at their

congresses held respectively in Cordoba and Brussels during Christmas

week of 1872. The American Federation did likewise at its meeting in New

York City on January 12, 1873. The English Federation, which included

Marx’s old friends Eccarius and Jung, refused to recognize the decisions

of the Hague Congress and the new General Council.

On June 5, 1873, the General Council in New York, exercising the powers

vested in it by the Hague Congress, suspended the Jura Federation,

declaring it subversive. As a result, the Dutch Federation, which had

been neutral, joined the other seven federations of the International,

declaring on February 14, 1873, that it refused to recognize the

“suspension” of the Jura Federation.

The publication by Marx and the little group that still remained

faithful to him of a pamphlet filled with gross lies, entitled The

Alliance of the Social Democracy and the International [written in

French in the second half of 1873], only provoked the disgust of all

those who read this product of blind hatred.

On September 1, 1873, the sixth congress of the International opened in

Geneva. The Belgian, Dutch, Italian, French, English, and Swiss-Jura

federations were represented and the Lasallean socialists of Berlin sent

a telegram of greetings. The congress concerned itself with the revision

of the statutes of the International, pronounced the dissolution of the

General Council, and made the International a free federation without

any directing authority over it:

The federations and sections comprising the International each reclaims

its complete autonomy, the right to organize itself as it sees fit, to

administer its own affairs without any outside interference, and to

determine the best and most efficient means for the emancipation of

labor. [Article 3 of the new statutes]

His lifelong battles had left Bakunin exhausted. Prison had aged him

before his time, his health had seriously deteriorated, and he now

craved repose and retirement. When he saw the International reorganized

in a way that fulfilled the principle of free federation, he felt that

the time had come to take leave of his comrades. On October 12, 1873, he

addressed a letter to the members of the Jura Federation:

I beg you to accept my resignation as a member of the Jura Federation

and the International. I no longer feel that I have the strength needed

for the struggle: I would be a hindrance in the camp of the Proletariat,

not a help ... I retire then, dear comrades, full of gratitude to you

and sympathy for your great cause — the cause of humanity. I will

continue to follow, with brotherly anxiety, all your steps and I will

greet with joy each of your new victories. Till death I will be yours.

[For full text, see p. 351.]

He had but three years to live.

His friend, the Italian revolutionist Carlo Cafiero, invited him to stay

in his villa near Locarno. There Bakunin lived until the middle of 1874,

apparently absorbed by his new life, one in which he had at last found

tranquillity, security, and relative well-being. But he still regarded

himself as a soldier of the revolution. When his Italian friends

launched an insurrectionary movement, Bakunin went to Bologna in July

1874 to participate. But the insurrection, poorly planned, collapsed and

Bakunin returned in disguise to Switzerland.

At this time Bakunin and Cafiero became estranged. Cafiero, having

sacrificed his entire fortune for the cause of the revolution, found

himself ruined and was forced to sell the villa. Bakunin, unable to stay

in Locarno, settled in Lugano where, thanks to his paternal inheritance

sent to him by his brothers, he was able to support himself and his

family. The temporary coolness between Bakunin and Cafiero did not last

long, and friendly relations were soon re-established. But Bukunin’s

illness progressed, ravaging both spirit and body, so that by 1875 he

was only a shadow of his former self. Hoping to find relief, Bakunin

left Locarno for Bern to consult his old friend, Vogt, to whom he said,

“I have come to be restored to health or to die.” He was taken to a

hospital, where he was affectionately attended by Dr. Vogt and another

close friend, the musician Reichel.

In one of his last conversations, recalled by Reichel, Bakunin in

speaking of Schopenhauer remarked:

All our philosophy starts from a false base; it begins always by

considering man as an individual, and not as he should be considered —

that is, as a being belonging to a collectivity; most of the

philosophical (and mistaken) views stemming from this false premise

either are led to the conception of a happiness in the clouds, or to a

pessimism like that of Schopenhauer and Hartmann.

In another conversation, Reichel expressed his regret that Bakunin could

never find time to write his memoirs. Bakunin replied:

And why should you want me to write them? It is not worth the effort.

Today the people in all lands have lost the instinct of revolution. No,

if I get a bit of strength back again, I would rather write an ethic

based on the principles of collectivism, making no use of philosophical

or religious phrases.

He died at noon on July 1, 1876.

On July 3, socialists from all parts of Switzerland arrived in Bern to

pay their last respects to Michael Bakunin. At his graveside, eulogies

were offered by some of his friends from the Jura Federation: Adhemar

Schwitzguebel, James Guillaume, Elisee Reclus; by Nicholas Zhukovsky,

representing the Russians; by Paul Brouse for the French Revolutionary

Youth; by Betsien for the German proletariat. At a meeting after the

funeral all were moved by one sentiment: to forget, upon the grave of

Bakunin, all personal bickering, and to unite on the basis of liberty

and mutual tolerance all the socialist factions in both camps. The

following resolution received unanimous approval:

The workers gathered in Bern on the occasion of the death of Michael

Bakunin belong to five different nations. Some are partisans of a

Worker’s State, while others advocate the free federation of groups of

producers. But all feel that a reconciliation is not only very essential

and very desirable, but also easy to establish on the basis of the

principles of the International, as formulated in Article 3 of the

revised statutes adopted at the Geneva Congress of 1873.

Therefore this assembly, meeting in Bern, calls upon all workers to

forget the vain and unfortunate dissensions of the past and to unite on

the basis of strict adherence to the principles enunciated in Article 3

of the above-mentioned statutes [autonomy of the sections].

Do you want to know how this moving appeal to forget past hatreds and to

unite in liberty was answered? The Marxist Tagwacht of Zurich on July 8

printed the following:

Bakunin was regarded by many fair-minded men and good socialists as a

Russian agent. This suspicion, doubtless erroneous, was aroused by the

fact that Bakunin greatly harmed the revolutionary movement; it was the

reaction which benefited most from his activity.

Similar malevolent accusations vented by the Volksstaat of Leipzig and

the Russian-language Vpered of London compelled the friends of Bakunin

to conclude that his enemies did not intend to desist from their

campaign of hatred. Hence the Bulletin of the Jura Federation on

September 10, 1876, faced with hostile manifestations, declared:

We desire, as our conduct has always established, the most complete

reconciliation possible of all socialist groups: we are ready to extend

our hand in friendship to all those who sincerely wish to struggle for

the emancipation of labor. But we are at the same time determined not to

allow anyone to insult our dead.

Will the time come when posterity will assess the personality and

achievements of Bakunin with the impartiality that we have a right to

expect? Further, can one hope that the wishes expressed by his friends

on his freshly covered grave will someday he realized?