Revolutionary Organization

It is not uncommon to hear condolences from the mouths of one or another revolutionary that there is not a sufficiently wide and strong general revolutionary organization to advance the cause of the people firmly and confidently, among which he could also act, instead of sitting down to juggle.

Of course, for many it is a simple mask to cover their immobility and deadness. For others, it is an artificial self-deception, with which they try to alleviate the inner anxiety that arises from the contradiction of beliefs and behavior, of word and deed, in a person. But many people are of the opinion that it is necessary to strive to create a general organization of revolutionary forces.

It is necessary to agree with the latter that any work that requires the collective efforts of many people, especially revolutionary work, whose goal is to destroy harmful social orders that have existed for centuries, can only then get a firm and quick solution, when these efforts are in some way regulated, when they are directed in solidarity against a common enemy.

But here is the problem. How do we organize the revolutionary forces when there are so many theoretical disagreements as there are now among the Armenian revolutionaries? How do we connect conflicting principles, mutually rejecting platorms?

Maybe some people will answer that it is necessary to establish a theoretical solidarity among the revolutionaries first, it is necessary to prove the wrongness of one or another idea and then, by gathering everyone under one banner, to form a common revolutionary alliance.

All that would be wonderful, of course, if only we had some measure, an infallible measure, against which it would be possible to declare an idea true or to recognize another point of view as false. But unfortunately, such a criterion is impossible to find and cannot exist now, when social science is still completely undeveloped, when it is still in the embryonic stage of its development. The very fact that all existing social theories are controversial shows their imperfection, the comparative extent of their scientific value. Undeniable scientific truths are not subject to controversy, but are necessarily accepted.

We are not talking about other inconveniences of the central organization. Let’s just say that a large part of the Armenian revolutionaries experienced the destructive and harmful influence of that “center” on their skin and was forced to withdraw from that idea. If until now those “centers” have not finally destroyed the cause, the reason is that the cause itself is an essential, organic demand for the people and continues outside the centers, independently of them and often against all of them.

“So, in your opinion,” they answer us, “the general organization of the revolutionary force is impossible?” Not at all. The only thing that follows from what we have said is that we need to look for other means and forms of organization — that we should not work in vain efforts and in vain time to form a unity of Yanun activity, but we must work with all our strength for the Yanun revolution, from which itself gave birth to a union and a permanent organization.

Let every individual, in whose veins more or less live blood boils, use all his initiative and energy. And when all the revolutionary elements, whatever they are and what direction they belong to, will find themselves facing each other in front of the enemy; when they will hear the lamentation of the Armenian peasant, with whose blood and sweat sultans and tsars make dazzling, luxurious orgies; when before their eyes the swords of the soldiers they shine, piercing into the body of the rebellious people; when they hear the cries of innocent virgins and honorable women dishonored with the most brutal savagery; when finally, behind their friends, the doors of prisons, where a person remains buried alive, are closed behind them, perhaps forever, — then activity, life develops a common plan of action for Armenian revolutionaries, then the place of current theoretical disputes will be replaced by a practical solidarity among various perfectly independent groups, none of which will try to impose either its principles or its tactics on the heads of others, and only then will we have a true organization — an organization that will arise from vital conditions, from the efforts made — an organization that will be based on the direct and close relations of the working groups.

You have to act to organize. Action, constant action — this is the only way to organization.