Under this title, a certain government scribbler, Mr. Y. P—v, placed a little article in the official "Trade and Industrial Gazette"{71} (No. 100), proving, naturally, that the peasantry is improving and "undoubtedly… with each passing year steadily progresses."

It is extraordinarily instructive that the data cited by the author actually speaks to the contrary! A characteristic demonstration of the shameless lying of government writers and government newspapers!

What then are the author's data? Let us first note that he does not cite his source precisely. Therefore we should not for a moment believe that the government scribbler quotes an unknown source at first hand and quotes it correctly.

Let us suppose, however, for a moment, that he quotes correctly.

"Certain zemstvos," he writes, "for example, the Moscow zemstvo, resort to a questionnaire (survey) in order to determine whether the peasantry is impoverishing or improving. Local zemstvo correspondents provide general answers, which are then tallied.

As a result of such multi-year investigations (over 6 years)," writes Mr. Y. P—v, "there emerged for the central region a rather curious statistical summary, namely: per 100 responses of all kinds there fell".

Responses indicating that the economic welfare of the peasants!

And so, the writer of the government newspaper draws a conclusion: "the last three years… marked a steady rise in the economic level of the peasantry, with corresponding reduction in the percentage in the categories 'declining' and 'remaining at the same level'."

Look carefully at the figures. For the first three years, evident and enormous decline. For the last three years, an increase, but considerably less strong than the decline of the first three years!!

Mr. Y. P—v himself admits that these fluctuations "coincide with fluctuations in harvests."

Why then does he, for his general conclusion, limit himself to the abundant three-year period and forget about the poor-harvest three-year periods? How would we characterize the merchant who, drawing up the accounts of his enterprise, pointed to his profits but concealed his losses? We would call him a swindler, would we not, Mr. government writer of the government gazette?

Let us perform this simple operation—simple, but obligatory for all save swindlers—the calculation not only of gains but also of losses, not only of pluses but also of minuses, not only of harvests but also of "crop failures." To do this we must add together the data for 6 years and divide the sum by 6 (astonishingly difficult, Mr. government publicist, eh?). We obtain the average data for the entire counter-revolutionary six-year period.

These data are as follows. Out of 100 responses there were:

Favorable ("peasants are improving") – 20, unfavorable ("peasants are impoverishing") – 38, neutral ("remaining at the same level") – 42.

Such is the balance sheet. What does it mean?

That the peasantry is impoverishing and being ruined. Over 6 years of counter-revolution, the number of unfavorable responses on average was almost twice the number of favorable responses!!

This conclusion can be expressed vividly, applying it to all Russia and taking 20 million peasant families, as follows:

Over six years 4 million peasant families improved their condition, 7 million 600 thousand families became impoverished, 8 million 400 thousand families remained at their former (i.e., destitute) level!

And this in a period of high prices, when landowners and the bourgeoisie are scooping up gold by the shovel.

The peasants, in all probability, will be grateful to and will bless the landowning Duma and the landowning government.

Written May 10 (23), 1913

Published May 16, 1913 in the newspaper "Pravda" No. 111. Signed: F.

Printed according to the newspaper text