The second argument of principle against the method of minority violence is that abandonment of law, when it becomes widespread, lets loose the wild beast, and gives a free rein to the primitive lusts and egoisms which civilization in some degree curbs.  Every student of mediaeval thought must have been struck by the extraordinarily high value placed upon law in that period.  The reason was that, in countries infested by robber barons, law was the first requisite of progress.  We, in the modern world, take it for granted that most people will be law-abiding, and we hardly realize what centuries of effort have gone to making such an assumption possible.  We forget how many of the good things that we unquestionably expect would disappear out of life if murder, rape, and robbery with violence became common.  And we forget even more how very easily this might happen.  The universal class-war foreshadowed by the Third International, following upon the loosening of restraints produced by the late war, and combined with a deliberate inculcation of disrespect for law and constitutional government, might, and I believe would, produce a state of affairs in which it would be habitual to murder men for a crust of bread, and in which women would only be safe while armed men protected them.  The civilized nations have accepted democratic government as a method of settling internal disputes without violence.  Democratic government may have all the faults attributed to it, but it has the one great merit that people are, on the whole, willing to accept it as a substitute for civil war in political disputes.  Whoever sets to work to weaken this acceptance, whether in Ulster or in Moscow, is taking a fearful responsibility.  Civilization is not so stable that it cannot be broken up; and a condition of lawless violence is not one out of which any good thing is likely to emerge.  For this reason, if for no other, revolutionary violence in a democracy is infinitely dangerous.

IV

REVOLUTION AND DICTATORSHIP

The Bolsheviks have a very definite programme for achieving Communism—­a programme which has been set forth by Lenin repeatedly, and quite recently in the reply of the Third International to the questionnaire submitted by the Independent Labour Party.

Capitalists, we are assured, will stick at nothing in defence of their privileges.  It is the nature of man, in so far as he is politically conscious, to fight for the interests of his class so long as classes exist.  When the conflict is not pushed to extremes, methods of conciliation and political deception may be preferable to actual physical warfare; but as soon as the proletariat make a really vital attack upon the capitalists, they will be met by guns and bayonets.  This being certain and inevitable, it is as well to be prepared for it, and to conduct propaganda accordingly.  Those who pretend that pacific methods can lead to the realization of Communism are false friends to the wage-earners; intentionally or unintentionally, they are covert allies of the bourgeoisie.