We have not been spoiled by an excess of sympathy from other peoples, and have not been spoiled by their understanding either. There were a lot of reasons for this, most of all Petersburg policy since the year 1825. But Russia is emerging from this period—why is it America alone that guessed this and is the first to welcome it?
Because Russia and America are meeting on the other side. Because between them lies an entire saltwater ocean, but not an entire world
of outdated prejudices and concepts, envious precedence, and civilizations that have ground to a halt.
It will soon be ten years since we expressed our thoughts about the mutual relations of these futures on the road of contemporary history. We said that in the future Russia has one comrade, one fellow traveler—the Northern States; we have repeated this many times, and just a few months ago we had the opportunity to say: only empty, irritated diplomatic pride—what's more, Germanic—causes Russia to get involved in all Western issues. In the forthcoming battle, toward which Europe is unwillingly being drawn, there is no need for Russia to take an active part. We have no legacy there, and we equally are not bound by memories or expectations with the fate of that world. If Russia will liberate itself from the Petersburg tradition, it has one ally only—the North American States.
Everything that we witnessed, raising the issue at our own risk in a hostile West, everything that we predicted—from the secretly roving forces, from the inevitable emancipation of the serfs with land to the electoral similarity with the North American States—all this is happening before our eyes.
This chronological privilege is too precious for us to yield, especially at a time when a page of history is turning, and, with a new page, those laborers who came to work, having anticipated the new morning, will be forgotten.
However, no special gifts of prophecy were required in order to say what we said; it was only necessary to free oneself from domestic and other prejudices, from the leaden Petersburg atmosphere, and from forgotten concepts of an old civilization. It was sufficient to take an independent look at the world. It was clear that America and Russia were next in turn. Both countries have an abundance of strength, flexibility, an organizational spirit, persistence that knows no obstacle; both have a meager past, both begin with a complete break with tradition, both spread over endless valleys, seeking their borders, both—from different directions—reach across terrible expanses, everywhere marking their path with cities, villages, and colonies, reaching the Pacific Ocean, this "Mediterranean Sea of the future" (as we once named it and then saw with joy that American journals repeated this many times).
The contrast between the Petersburg military dictatorship—which destroys all people in the person of the autocrat, and the American autocracy of each person—is enormous. And that's not all—isn't the most fateful contradiction, with which the history of the West is coming to an end, once again the way America breaks down into
individuals, on the one hand, and Russia into communal fusion, on the other?
Notes
Source: "Amerika i Rossiia," Kolokol, l. 228, October i, i866; i9:i39-40, 4i6.
Herzen first used this phrase in the opening epigraph in i853 in his essay "Baptized Property" (Doc. 8) and reused it in Past and Thoughts and other writings.
An American diplomatic mission visited Russia from the end of July to the beginning of September i866.
The rest of this document is a citation, with slight changes, from "America and Siberia."
♦ 91 ♦
The Bell, No. 229, November i, i866. In "The Gallows and Muravyov," which was written soon after Karakozov's execution and appeared in no. 228, Herzen reacted to the chaos that ensued from having "an absolute monarch who rules over nothing" (Gertsen, Sobranie sochinenii, i9:i37-38). He wondered whether a historian with the combined abilities of Tacitus and Dante could be found to capture this historical moment. Here, Herzen continues to explore different aspects of the Karakozov theme, which dominated his lead articles for much of i866. At the top of the first page of issue no. 229, Herzen made his views clear with the words "THERE IS NO PLOT!" (ZAGOVORA NE BYLO!) in large capital letters. In chapter i2 of Past and Thoughts, Herzen told the story of another conspiracy, the one that was manufactured about an i834 gathering that he did not attend, but which nevertheless resulted for him in jail and years of exile.
The Question of a Plot [1866]
The conspiracy that many suspected after Karakozov's shot is revealing itself more and more. Over and above the individual rumors, L'Independance and the Kolnishche Zeitunghave dropped two or three remarkable hints. It is clear that Muravyov stood at the head of the plot consisting of advocates of serfdom, old fools, and the reactionaries in general. The Kolnishche Zeitung says that he retired because the sovereign was displeased with police pranks and began to suspect the reason for the excessive zeal. A few days before the commission shut down, Muravyov left for the countryside, "where he was sent documents," say the Russian newspapers.1 But how could he have dared to leave, not having completed a matter of such importance? To bless a church is hardly an urgent matter. He left in disfavor. One of his chief accomplices was the first to untie his cart from the drowned beast. The Moscow Gazette was very modest in its laments over the grave of the new Pozharsky2 (not even having become a prince, which Muravyov really wanted).
In this matter the sovereign behaved in as unsteady and foolish a way as in all other matters. Instead of naming another commission over Muravyov's and following along fresh tracks all the tricks of the black Russian gang, he did not even order the publication of Muravyov's papers, and limited himself to freeing the Perm infantry of the executioner's name. Now, of course, it is a bit late to learn about the entire intrigue, although it is still possible.
Notes
Source: "Po delu zagovora," Kolokol, l. 229, November i, i866; i9:i60, 423-24.
Muravyov had gone to his estate near Petersburg for the dedication of a new church, and died there the night of August 28, i866. His intention had been to declare the commission closed on the August 3i.
Prince Dmitry M. Pozharsky (i578-c. i64i), together with Minin, headed a force that liberated Muscovy in i6ii-i2 from Swedish and Polish invaders.
♦ 92 +
The Bell, No. 230, December i, i866 (Part I); Nos. 23i-32, January i, i867 (Part II); and No. 233-34, February i, Й67 (Part III). Herzen's notes indicate that he intended to continue this essay in subsequent issues. The first part is devoted to Europe, and Herzen reveals a greater optimism about social and political change than he had expressed in the aftermath of i848, with its return to reactionary regimes and popular lethargy. The article below was written in October i866, under the influence of the founding congress of the First International held in Geneva, and the thoughts it stimulated in Herzen (Let 4:297). Part II is a transition from the situation in Europe and the ideas of the utopian socialist Blanqui to Russia, where the promise of Alexander II had gradually dissipated and any influence The Bell might have had on him had been greatly reduced. Part III continues the theme of Russia, ending with an embrace of the i862 Land and Liberty banner. Radicals objected to Herzen's characterization of St. Petersburg activists, and Serno-Solovyovich's brother Alexander answered "Order Triumphs!" with a brochure that called Herzen "a poet, artist, performer, storyteller, novelist, anything you want, only not a political activist and even less a theoretician and founder of a school" (Let 4^ 392-93).