^{page 178 note 1} Gaston Monmousseau later wrote of that epoch: “If someone had said to us at that moment, “You are blindly following Lenin”, they would have been saying only the strict truth. But if they had added, “You are merely adoring the Leninist deity”, we would have responded in all simplicity, “We do not know exactly what Leninism is, but we love and follow Lenin because he is the leader of the Socialist Revolution and we are revolutionaries.” Quoted in Val, Lorwin, The French Labor Movement (Cambridge 1954), p. 51–52.Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 2} Alfred, Rosmer, Moscou sous Lénine (Paris 1953), p. 71–73.Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 3} In France the revolutionary syndicalists and the anarchists immediately felt closer to the Bolsheviks and with some reason. Trotsky was a close personal friend of Monatte and Rosmer and had preferred the company of the revolutionary syndicalists and the anarchists while he was in France to the Socialists whom he almost universally despised and distrusted. ibid., p. 103–104. See also Leon, Trotsky, My Life (New York 1930), p. 247.Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 1} This question of generations and the psychological schism within the working class organizations is not one that can be definitively settled here. I hope to discuss it at greater length in my forthcoming book on the origins and development of the French Communist Party, 1914–1924. For the moment I will limit myself to citing two observers who noted this phenomenom and who were in a position to know. Jean, Longuet, Humanité, February 11, 1920Google Scholar; and Frossard, L.-O., De Jaurès à Lénine (Paris 1933), p. 71.Google Scholar This essay, of course, presents a case study of one young Socialist in whom this alienation was dramatically evident.

^{page 179 note 2} la Rochelle, Pierre Drieu, Mesure de la France (Paris 1922), p. v-vi.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 1} Raymond, Lefebvre, L'Eponge du Vinaigre (Paris 1921), p. 15.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 2} Vaillant-Couturier, Paul, Enfance (Paris 1938), p. 249.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 3} ibid., p. 249.

^{page 180 note 4} ibid., p. 250.

^{page 181 note 1} la Rochelle, Pierre Drieu, Mesure de la France (Paris 1922), p. 159.Google Scholar

^{page 181 note 2} ibid., p. 149.

^{page 181 note 3} ibid., p. 153.

^{page 181 note 4} Parti Socialiste, S.F.I.O., 17e Congrès National, tenu à Strasbourg les 25, 26, 27, 28 et 29 Février 1920, Paris 1920), p. 250–251.

^{page 181 note 5} Vaillant-Couturier, Paul, Enfance, p. 25.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 1} The best and most complete study of the reaction of the French Socialists and syndicalists to the coming of the War is still Alfred, Rosmer, Le Mouvement ouvrier pendant la guerre (Paris 1936), Vol. I.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 2} Raymond, Lefebvre, Le Sacrifice d'Abraham (Paris 1919), p. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 3} Quoted in Lenine, N. and Zinoviev, Georges, Contre le courant (Paris 1927, 2 Vol.), Vol. II, p. 19.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 1} Raymond, Lefebvre, L'Eponge du Vinaigre (Paris 1921), p. 5–6.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 2} Clarté, December 4, 1920.

^{page 183 note 3} ibid., p. 6.

^{page 184 note 1} For Romain, Rollandsee his Au-dessus de la Mêlée (Paris 1915).Google Scholar For Pierre Monatte and the C.G.T. and for the Socialists see Alfred Rosmer, Le Mouvement ouvrier pendant la guerre, Vol. II, where the relevant documents are reproduced.

^{page 184 note 2} Raymond, Lefebvre, L'Eponge du Vinaigre, p. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 3} Humanité, , November 1, 1921.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 4} Vaillant-Couturier, Paul, Lettres à mes amis (1918–1919), (Paris 1920), p. 45.Google Scholar The preface is by Lefebvre and is particularly revealing for the development of his ideas.

^{page 185 note 1} Clarté, December 15, 1923.

^{page 185 note 2} Raymond, Lefebvre, Le Sacrifice d'Abraham, p. 265–66.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 1} Raymond, Lefebvre, L'Ancien soldat (Paris n.d., 1919?), p. 4.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 2} ibid., p. 15.

^{page 186 note 3} Vaillant-Couturier, Paul and Lefebvre, Raymond, La Guerre des Soldats (Paris 1919)Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 4} Vaillant-Couturier, Paul, Lettres à mes amis (1918–1919), p. 45.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 5} Raymond, Lefebvre, L'Ancien soldat, p. 5.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 1} An anecdote recounted by Henri Guilbeaux makes this point well. In 1917, while in Switzerland, Lefebvre complained to Guilbeaux about Loriot. Loriot, insisted Lefebvre, weakened the minority by constantly presenting his own motions. “Mais c'est un marxiste”, replied Guilbeaux. “Un marxiste!” groaned Lefebvre. “Ah, nous y voilà! mais c'est bien pour cela qu'il est sinistre.” “Avez-vous lu Marx?” asked Guilbeaux. “Non, et je ne le lirai jamais. Marx est un emmerdeur.” Henri, Guilbeaux, Du Kremlin au Cherche-Midi (Paris 1933, 5th ed.), p. 141–142.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 2} I owe this point to Madame A. Kriegel who is preparing a thesis on the French working class movement during the years 1914–1920 and who has done much to deepen my understanding of this period.

^{page 187 note 3} Which is why Trotsky considered them more dangerous than the majority. Wrote Trotsky in late 1916: “Si Renaudel et Sembat ont compromis le parti, l'organisation, la tradition officielle, Longuet et Pressemane sont en train de compromettre l'idée meme de la rébellion réparatrice contre cette trahison historique sans précédent.” Ouvrière, Vie, Vingt Lettres de Léon Trotsky (Paris 1919), p. 26.Google Scholar For the position of the majority see Le Parti socialiste: la guerre et la paix (Paris 1918) and Humanité. For the minority the best sources are the Populaire du Centre and the Populaire Socialiste-Internationaliste which was launched in 1916.

^{page 188 note 1} Parti Socialiste, S.F.I.O., 17e Congrès National, tenu à Strasbourg les 25, 26, 27, 28 et 29 Février, 1920, p. 459.Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 2} Henri, Guilbeaux, Du Kremlin au Cherche-Midi, p. 141–142.Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 3} See Poincaré, Raymond, Au Service de la France (Paris 1926–1933, 10 Vols.), v. IX.Google Scholar See also the records of the German Foreign Ministry, 4301/D1965054, for an interesting report on the situation in France and its repercussions on the French Socialist Party.

^{page 189 note 1} Clarté, , December 4, 1920.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 2} ibid.

^{page 189 note 3} Wilfred, Monod, Documents sans commentaires (Paris 1922), p. 6.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 4} Verité, La, January 22, 1918.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 5} Later Lefebvre called these two years the passive period and the beginning of the active period of his generation. Vaillant-Couturier, Paul, Lettres à mes amis (1918–1919), p. 7–8.Google Scholar

^{page 190 note 1} Including Lloyd George who warned in March, 1919, in the memorandum which he presented to the Peace Conference: “The whole of Europe is filled with the spirit of revolution.” Francesco, Nitti, Peaceless Europe (London 1922), p. 94.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 1} Raymond, Lefebvre, L'Internationale des Soviets (Paris 1919), p. 5.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 2} ibid., p. 6.

^{page 191 note 3} ibid., p. 6.

^{page 191 note 4} ibid., p. 6.

^{page 191 note 5} ibid., p. 11.

^{page 191 note 6} ibid., p. 12.

^{page 191 note 7} ibid., p. 14.

^{page 192 note 1} Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, Mesure de la France, p. 160.

^{page 192 note 2} His name was proposed by Boris Souvarine.

^{page 192 note 3} Bulletin, Communiste, October 12, 1921.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 1} Raymond, Lefebvre, Le Sacrifice d'Abraham, p. 260–261.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 2} Quoted by Jean, Bernier, Clarté, November 19, 1921.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 3} La Vie Ouvrière, December 19, 1919.

^{page 193 note 4} Clarté, , March 6, 1920.Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 1} Parti Socialiste, S.F.I.O., 17e Congrès National, tenu à Strasbourg les 25, 26, 27, 28 et 29 Février 1920, p. 168–173.

^{page 194 note 2} ibid., p. 256.

^{page 194 note 3} ibid., p. 256.

^{page 194 note 4} ibid., p. 262–263.

^{page 195 note 1} Humanité, , November 1, 1921.Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 2} Humanité, , June 28, 1920.Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 3} Antonio Gramsci came to the same conclusion after the failure of the Turin sitdown strikes in September, 1920. See Urquidi, Donald W., The Origins of the Italian Communist Party, 1918–1924, unpublished doctoral dissertation (Columbia 1962), pp. 266–267.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 1} Bulletin, Communiste, April 29, 1920.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 2} Alfred, Rosmerdescribes the difficulties of his trip to Russia for the Second World Congress in Moscou sous Lenine (Paris 1953).Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 1} Der Zweite Kongress der Kommunistischen Internationale, Protokoll der Verhandlungen vom 19. Juli in Petrograd und vom 23. Juli bis 7. August 1920 in Moskau, (Hamburg 1920), p. 270.

^{page 198 note 1} The last days of Lefebvre and the circumstances in which he died have always remained obscure. Upon learning of Lefebvre's disappearance, the French press immediately hinted that he had come away disillusioned and that the Russians had no interest in seeing him, or his companions, return to France alive. (See Liberté, La, Figaro, Le and Démocratie, La Nouvelle for December 2, 1920Google Scholar.) These rumours have never died and in 1928 Maurice Laporte suggested in his of fhand way that he had definite evidence that Lefebvre's death had been no accident. (Les Mystères du Kremlin [Paris 1928], p. 152). These accusations, however, all rest on the supposition that Lefebvre left Sovief Russia disillusioned and there is no evidence to support this assertion. Alfred, Rosmer, who was in Russia at the time, (interview, December 2, 1960Google Scholar) is convinced that Lefebvre returned home enthusiastic. Moreover, there are the posthumous letters of Lefebvre and the testimony of Victor Serge and Jacques Sadoul, which I cite further on. The case, of course, remains open to new evidence, but I see no reason to doubt Rosmer's contention that Lefebvre was tremendously enthused by what he saw. It goes without saying that the bourgeois and anarchist press had every reason to try to discredit the Soviet government. Laporte was a former Communist and his books are unreliable hodgepodges of memories, hearsay and invention. The Russians themselves admitted that Vergeat and Lepetit had never been fully won over to the methods of Bolshevism. It seems extremely unlikely that they would have deliberately sent them to their death. 1920 was not 1936.

^{page 198 note 2} Bulletin Communiste, April 21, 1921.Google Scholar

^{page 198 note 3} Bulletin Communiste, April 7, 1921.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 1} Humanité, , December 5, 1920.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 2} Clarté, , December 4, 1920.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 3} Clarté, , December 4, 1920.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 4} ibid.

^{page 199 note 5} Quoted by Halévy, Daniel in his preface to Pierre Drieu la Rochelle's Mesure de la France, p. viii.Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 1} This may surprise those who think of Cachin as the grand old man of French Communism. During the War he was one of the most rabid of majoritaires and as late as 1922 the Left of the Communist Party insisted that he be removed from the editorship of Humanité because of his opportunism. For the story of his mission to Italy see Alfred, Rosmer, Le Mouvement ouvrier pendant la guerre (Paris 1936), Vol. I.Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 2} Just after the Fourth World Congress Lenin remarked with a twinkle in his eye to Semard and Monmousseau, the leaders of the C.G.T.U.: “II n'y a pas de parti communiste en France. Voulez-vous en former un?” Quoted in Walter, Gérard, Histoire du Parti Communiste Français (Paris 1948), p. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 1} Frossard resigned from the Party at the beginning of 1923. Boris Souvarine was excluded from the Communist International at the Fifth World Congress in 1924. Rosmer and Monatte were excluded from the Party in December of 1924. Loriot retired from the Party in 1922 after the Third World Congress. He returned briefly in 1925 to lead the opposition to “bolshevization”, but by 1926 he had broken spiritually, if not materially, with the Party.

^{page 202 note 1} I have not been able to locate this pamphlet, but Lefebvre referred to it often in his articles and Victor Serge summarized it in the Bulletin Communiste of April 7, 1921. I assume that he wrote it in the spring of 1920.

^{page 202 note 2} Many representatives of this generation tried more than one. Jacques Doriot made the transition from militant Communism to fascism with amazing ease. Drieu la Rochelle was himself once attracted by the extreme Left. Most of the Surrealist poets either flirted with or joined the Communist Party after they discovered the incompatibility of artictic revolution and a conservative society. And it is interesting that Communism was so easily mingled with patriotism during the days of the Front populaire.