Emma Goldman - A Bankrupt Principle

'The State Idea, the authoritarian principle, has been proven bankrupt by the experience of the Russian Revolution. If I were to sum up my whole argument in one sentence I would say : The inherent tendency of the State is to concentrate, to narrow, and monopolize all social activities; the nature of the revolution is, on the contrary, to grow, to broaden, and disseminate itself in ever wider circles. In other words, the State is institutional and static; revolution is fluent, dynamic. These two ideas are incompatible and mutually destructive. The State Idea killed the Russian Revolution and it must have the same result in other revolutions, unless the libertarian idea prevail.'

'Revolution is indeed a violent process. But, if it is to result only in a change of dictatorship, in a shifting of names and political personalities, then it is hardly worth while. It is surely not worth all the struggle and the sacrifice, the stupendous loss of human life and cultural values that result from every revolution. If such a revolution were even to bring greater social well being ( which has not been the case in Russia) then it would also not be worth the terrific price paid: mere improvement can be brought about without bloody revolution.'

'Witness the tragic condition of Russia. The methods of State centralisation have paralysed individual initiative and effort; the tyranny of the dictatorship has cowed the people into slavish submission and all but extinguished the fires of liberty; organized terrorism has depraved and brutalized the masses and stifled every idealistic aspiration; institutionalised murder has cheapened human life, and all sense of the dignity of man and the value of life has been eliminated; coercion at every step has made every effort bitter, labour a punishment, has turned the whole of existence into a scheme of mutual deceit, and has revived the lowest and most brutal instincts of man.'

'America has declared war on Spain.......It did not require much political wisdom to see that America's concern was a matter of sugar and had nothing to do with humanitarian feelings. Of course there were plenty of credulous people, not only in the country at large, but even in liberal ranks, who believed in America's claim. I could not join them. I was sure that no one, be it individual or government, engaged in enslaving and exploiting at home, could have the  integrity or the desire to free people in other lands.'