31
This was said by people who acknowledge men like Dittmann, who made his name in bourgeois circles by his articles against Soviet Russia as their chiefs.
Whence, then, such hypocrisy, whence such double-dealing? There is no doubt that all these Hilferdings, Crispiens, Dittmanns and Co. hate the Bolsheviks from the bottom of their hearts, and secretly yearn (Kautsky did it openly—he wrote a number of times that the Bolshevik regime would fall in a couple of months) for that happy moment when "Democracy" will destroy the Soviet Government in Russia. The thing is easily explained. The workers of Russia, by their great struggle, have won the hearts of the workers of the world. The workers of all countries, including those of Germany, do not allow anyone at their meetings to speak against Soviet Russia. The workers are firmly on our side. Whosoever wishes to win the least confidence from the German workers must at least pretend that he is a friend of Soviet Russia. Even the Scheidemannists pretend to be friends of Soviet Russia. The Right Independents, whose chief watchword is 'keep your nose to the wind," had of course to pretend that they, in spite of everything, are in favour of Soviet Russia.
But the Right Independents were, of course, unable to follow logically their line of conduct. Their outbursts against the "Moscow knout," their accusations against the Lefts at the preliminary discussions displayed the most outspoken jingoism directed precisely against Soviet Russia.
The "Freiheit" tried its best to preserve the decorum of a paper friendly to Soviet Russia. But on Dittmann's arrival from Russia he commenced a series of articles against Soviet Russia. But the "overwhelming" success, which he had in bourgeois and black-hundred circles, at once discredited him in the eyes of the workers. It became impossible for him to show himself at any workers' meeting. The "Freiheit" was boycotted by the working people. Under such circumstances the paper preferred to discontinue the proposed series, after printing two libellous articles. But in spite of the efforts of Hilferding, who as editor of the paper tried to restrain its tendencies, his grip on it became feebler and the paper became more and more anti-Bolshevik. During the congress the "Freiheit" pub-
