New-York tribune., 1919-06-02
THE last of the "liberal" periodicals

- Russia" to be considered here is "The
Survey" For the service of "The Survey"
in it's proper field of representing and re-
porting the work Of the various social
agencies of the country I have only praise
| am concerned here onl y with its newly
added role of furthering Bolshevist propa-
ganda.
A careful search Of the issues from No.
vember 2 to April reveals vast deal OF
Bolshevist matter, but an almost total ab-
sence of anything unfavorabe to bolshe~
vism. In letter to the editor printed in
the issue of January II, correspondent,
though fay oring the Bolshevist programme
censures the Bosheviki for having aban-
doned the war and riskcd a German VIC
tory. In another letter in another issue
correspondent is permitted to enter brief
explanation in defence of the Czecho-
Slovaks.
That is the total. If there Is anything
more it has eluded my careful search
Out of all the masses Of testimony; out OF
the piles of documents, official and UNI
official, out Of the many statements of
Bolshevist journals confrmatory Of
cusations against, the existing regime
The Survey" admits to its columns dur
ing this period not line, no. a word, to
which Lcnine could reasonably object.
Space for Bolsherist Matter
But it finds ample space for Bolshevist
matter. A year ago its policy was evil
IDENTIFY uniformed. On July 81, in an article
by Arthur Gleason on the British Labor
party conference on June 1928, it quoted
briefly regarding the Boshevki from both
Kerensky and Branting. Then followed
long, long silence. The silence was broken
on November 16 by a non-committal Sec
tion on Russia in long article by Ed
ward r. Devine. In the issue of December
IA correspondent complains that the
periodical had so far published no thor
oughgong and comprehensive article
dealing with the soviet government. The
reminder was not without effect; and
though the particular thing asked for has
not been given, there have been columns
and pages Of outright Bolshevist propa-
ganda.
In the issue of January II appeared q
Boshevst account Of the Intercollegiate
Socialist Society annual dinner in New
York City, stressing the demand for Gin
formation about Russia" two letters to
the editor one of which complained about
the misrepresentation of Russian condi-
tons presumably b. the capitalist"
press) and an editorial or sub editorial
on the publication by "Ihe Nation" of the
soviet constitution.
The Snggesf;se Method
1t is in this last named composition that
the tyro in the science of apologetics may
learn the value of insinuaton over misrepre
sontaton. We are told that the document
"contains compromise whatever between
the democracy understood by tie Boil
shevik philosophy and that promulgated
by Western nations; that complete free
dom of assembly and Of press is assured;
ind that "there is, at any rate not in this
constitution, any support for the assump
tion the central government animated
by desire to assume autocratic control"
Now if Tic editorial writer on "The
Survey" had been assiduous in gathering
that real information about Russia which
he processes to yearn for he would know
that the Bolshevist leaders and the Boil
shcvist press make no prctence Of de
mocracy-that they have expressly and re-
peatedy renounced it. He would know
further that there has been no freedom
Of speech and press under tho soviet con-
stitution, and that the fact is admitted
by the Bolsheviki themselves. And he
would also know that the central power
under the present rule is an olga rchy;
that it denies participation in government
to disafected elements and that it crushes
by force the numerous revolts against its
authority. Yet he has sought to suggest
to the creduous that the rule of the Boil
shevlk is mere variant of democracy
as it is known to the Western nations, and
that because certain fundamental viola
tons Of democracy arc rot expressly pro-
vided for in the soviet constitution, there
fore they arc not practised.
These four liberal" periodicals. "'rhe
New Republic" "The Nation" The Dial
and "The Survey" have much to cay, from
time to time, of the rigidity of the official
censorship. Yet this censorship has, as they
admit, sometimes unintentonally permit
ted forbidden matter to pass. One may
imagine with what painstaking security the
editorial censorship on things Russian is