Date: 1914
Source: ru:PSS/v25

There are certain pithy sayings that, with remarkable precision, capture the essence of rather complex phenomena. Among such sayings is undoubtedly the remark made by one of the landowners— a member of the right-wing majority in the State Duma— in response to Goremikin’s speech during the historic session of the Duma on April 22.

“How pleasant it would be to have I. L. Goremikin as a neighbor on one’s estate!”

These words, uttered on the very day when workers’ and peasants’ deputies were expelled from the State Duma, are highly instructive to recall now that the expelled deputies have once again taken their seats. They vividly portray the formidable power with which democracy confronts both within the Duma and beyond its walls.

The young nobleman who coined this apt phrase meant only to jest—but inadvertently spoke a truth that was far more serious and profound than he had intended. Indeed, what, after all, is this Fourth Duma, this majority composed of Rightists and Octobrists—and later, the “officials” in the State Council—except “neighbors on the same estate”?

In Russia, the 194 Privy Councillors collectively hold 3,103,579 desyatins of land—more than twenty thousand desyatins per Privy Councillor, on average [21]. And the largest landowners in Russia—fewer than thirty thousand in number—control a staggering 70 million desyatins of land. It is precisely this class that dominates not only the State Duma and the State Council, but also the higher ranks of the civil service, not to mention the zemstvos and local governments. All of these are nothing less than “neighbors on the same estate.”

In our capitalist age, “neighbors on the same estate” are increasingly becoming industrialists, distillers, sugar manufacturers, and the like; they are taking ever greater stakes in all manner of commercial, industrial, financial, and railway enterprises. The highest aristocracy is closely intertwined with the most powerful bourgeoisie.

“Neighbors on the same estate” constitute the finest class-based organization in Russia, for they are organized not only along neighborhood lines, not only in trade unions, but also as a state‑power entity. All the most important institutions are staffed by them, built “in their image and likeness,” tailored to their “needs” and interests. Of course, there are also certain crucial features of our state structure—features shaped by Russia’s military history and the like—features that can sometimes give rise to discontent among the landed gentry. Yet, on the whole, the great Russian landowners provide an exemplary model of class organization!

Our bourgeoisie has been slow to draw inspiration from this model, for instance, fearing to even contemplate organizing its own class into a state‑power force. But the proletariat, as it organizes itself as a class, has never forgotten—and will never forget—the superb example set by the “neighbors on the same estate”…

“Path of Truth,” No. 80, May 8, 1914

Printed according to the text of the newspaper “Path of Truth.”