the continuous struggle between the Government and the peasants.
The Russian peasants are as a rule conservative and do not trouble themselves much about the forms of government. A good many fables have been told about the peasants' love for the Little Father, the Czar. We have seen in our own experience that the downfall of the Czar aroused no protest from them. As we said above, the present Government had won the confidence of the peasants by issuing decrees giving them peace and land. The renewal of the war which has been forced upon the Government, and the subsequent mobilisation, have done a good deal to make the people lose confidence in the new Government. But it has no thought at all of overthrowing this Government. The revolts of the peasants which took place during last winter were fermented by revolutionary agitators, belonging to the parties opposed to the Government. But these revolts, serious though they were, were put down without difficulty.
The Government distinguished three classes of peasants, the poor, the moderately well-to-do and the rich. At first it tried to base its support on the poor element, but the attempt was not successful. The poor element, the proletariat, is not held in great esteem in the country. In order to live decently a peasant must have land, a house, a wagon, cattle and implements, etc. The peasant who possesses these things is not poor, and the peasant who does not possess them is no longer a peasant, and therefore loses all influence in his village.
This is the real reason why the Poverty Committees, organisations of the Proletariat, were not successful. They were formed from transitory elements which were quite unable to exercise any authority in the villages. Recognising this, the Government has abandoned that experiment and has made up its mind to look for support
22
