Grand Forks herald., 1917-03-19
D1aloonAoY AND DEsPor1sM.
The partition which separates de,

The partition which separates des-
potsm from democracy. stout and
impenetrable though It seems. Is very
thin in places. after all. Of which the
history Of nations furnishes US abun-
dant evidence. China is one example.
So far as forms 90. one step brought
her from medieval absolutism. en-
trenched In ancient superstition. to a
republican system which, whatever its
defects and difficulties. now seems
likely TO endure. Russia has effected
another transition even moro sudden
ana startling. The despotism Of yes
terday has become . democracy Of to-
day and the activities Of government
continue. apparently. with little in
terruption.
1t is we'll understood that Of all
the great nations. Russia had q form
Of government the most nearly despot-
ic Of any on earth. It IL not 50 we'll
known that with an autocracy in con-
troll Of its general affairs. and exercis-
ing an intimate control or the person.
al acts Of its people. there has long
existed in Russia a governmental form
which may be said to represent the
very extreme Of democracy. Yet It Is
true that in tho same nation these
two forms have gone hand in hand.
This remarkable expression Of de-
mocraoy II found in the rural and vii
lase life Of some Of the Russian prov
incss. These local communities are
both democratic and highly commu-
nistic. All matters Of local govern
ment are handled by a local council
whose members are erected from
among the people. and, within the
sphere Of their own activities, the sys-
tenn seems to partake strongly of the
spirit Of tho early Puritan govern
ment In New England. under which
the local governing body regulated.
not only the general affairs Of the
community. but, in a very large meas
ure. tho personal conduct Of the indi-
vidual members as well.
According to one description Of
these communities. It is the custom
Of the farmers to group themselves in
small villages and to go to and from
these villages to till their lands This
Of course 10 q practice common in 9TH
er sections Of Europe. But under tho
Russian system, the lands are re.
garded. not tho property Of individu-
ais but as the common possession
Of the community. and at frequent in.
tervals there are redistributions Of
the fields in order that all tho fam
lilies may receive equal treatment.
Still further, the principle that the
welfare of tho individual and of the
community are inextracably associate
striking ways. The activities Of tho
farm are not left entirely to the whim
or judgment Of the individual. Tht
community assumes that It has an in
terest in these matters, and it exercis
es the right to regulate and supervise.
When the right time has come to
plant seed. seed must be planted, and
when tho community decides that the
hay is ready to be cut, cut it must
be.
Antagonistic as all this seems to
be toward the central despotisnn. 1t ID
easy to sec a relationship between the
two. The Russian peasant seems to
take kindly to being governed. In
his small local affairs he aids in tho
work Of governing, but. he does not
assert his right to any great measure
Of individual independence. The COM
munity group governs him in his
cominss and goings. in his planting
and his reaping. in a hundred things
which the American, for instance,
insists on regulating for himself. And,
where the individual counts for so
little. where so much Of his life is
regulated by authority outside of
himse1f. despotism at the capital fita
into the scheme much less incongru-
ously than might at first seem poss,-
BILE.