572

p Do you remember, reader, the truly brilliant description of Victor Hugo which Chernyshevsky gave in one of his notes on Kinglake’s History of the Crimean War? If not, you will probably enjoy reading it again. Here it is:

p “Before February 1848 Victor Hugo did not know what cast of mind he had in politics, he had never thought about it; but as a matter of fact he was a very fine person, an excellent family man, and a kind, honest citizen, who sympathised with everything good, including the fame of Napoleon I and the chivalrous magnanimity of Emperor Alexander I, the kind heart of the Duchess of Orleans, mother to the heir of the reigning King Louis Philippe, and the misfortunes of the noble Duchess of Berry, mother of the rival of this king and this heir; he sympathised with the fine talent of Thiers, Guizot’s rival, with the brilliantly simple eloquence of Guizot (perhaps the greatest orator of his day), the honesty of Odilon Barrot, opponent of Guizot and Thiers, the genius and honesty of Arago, the famous astronomer and chief representative of the republicans in the chamber at that time, nobility of the Fourierists, the good nature of Louis Blanc, the splendid dialectics of Proudhon, he liked monarchic institutions and all other good things, including both the Sparta Republic and William Tell,—a cast of mind which is well known and worthy of all respect if only for the fact that about ninety-nine out of every hundred honest, educated people in all countries of the world probably have the same cast of mind."  [572•* 

p Chernyshevsky wrote these brilliant lines in the summer of 1863 when he was imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress. Since then much time has passed, a great deal of water has flowed under the bridge and many changes have taken place in the world. Only the eclectics’ "cast of mind worthy of all respect" has not changed. These good people are now, as before, prepared to unite in their sympathy social strivings and modes of action which do not and cannot share anything in common. There are 573 still many such people everywhere, particularly in Russia as a result of the backwardness of our social relations. Here you will often lind “honest” and “educated” people who at the same time sympathise with, say, the selfsame Chernyshevsky, who preached materialism, and our present-day “philosophers”, who have both feet on the idealist standpoint. But that is not so very serious. It is a question of philosophy, and philosophy is for many a most obscure subject. Far more noteworthy are the “honest”, “educated”, and. most important, kind people who at the same time and in the same way sympathise today in Russia with Sazonov, who killed Plehve, and Count Tolstoy, who persistently said: "do not resist evil by violence”. The death of Count Tolstoy has loosened these people’s tongues. Things have reached a point at which their influence is beginning to spread even to socialist circles. This is being done through the agency of such journals as Nasha Zarya,^^172^^ which, like the organ of the German revisionists Sozialistische Monatshefte,^^173^^ is ready under the pretext of having broad socialist views to welcome any rubbish as long as it goes against the basic premises of Marxism. Formerly Marx was “supplemented” in Russia with Kant, Mach and Bergson. I predicted that people would soon start “supplementing” him with Thomas Aquinas. This prediction of mine has not yet come true. But nowadays there are widespread attempts to “supplement” Marx with Count Tolstoy. And this is even more surprising.

How does Marx’s world outlook actually relate to that of Tolstoy? They are diametrically opposed. And it does no harm at all to remind people of the fact.