Skip to content

Pacifism As The Servant of Imperialism

Core Argument

Trotsky's central thesis is that pacifism, far from being a genuine opposition to war, functions as the ideological handmaiden of imperialism. The argument is that petty-bourgeois pacifism provides a moral veneer for militarism, disarms opposition to war by channelling it into harmless manifestos, and ultimately delivers the masses — pacified and consenting — into the hands of the imperialist state. Pacifism does not prevent war; it prepares the ground for it by reconciling the petty bourgeoisie to the very catastrophe it claims to oppose. The article's specific target is the "revolutionary defensism" of the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries in Russia in 1917, but the analysis extends to Wilson in the United States, Asquith and Lloyd George in Britain, and the Radical Party in France.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis draws on the Marxist theory of the state and the class character of ideology. Trotsky roots pacifism in the same social base as bourgeois democracy: the petty bourgeoisie. Its theoretical weakness — the refusal to cut beneath surface phenomena to the underlying economic facts — mirrors the fundamental limitation of democratic ideology itself. Pacifism, like reformism, assumes the possibility of harmonising antagonistic class interests within the framework of capitalism. The argument sits squarely in the Leninist tradition of the critique of "social-pacifism" developed during the First World War, and anticipates later Marxist analyses of "humanitarian intervention" and liberal internationalism. Trotsky's method is to trace the material interests behind apparently noble sentiments: American pacifism is explained not by the moral character of Wilson or Bryan but by the catastrophic growth of US war exports from $2.5 billion in 1913 to $5.5 billion in 1916, and the consequent need to open new markets for the munitions industry.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article was written in July 1917, at a critical juncture of the Russian Revolution. The Provisional Government, led by Kerensky and including the Menshevik Tseretelli, was preparing a military offensive under the slogan of "revolutionary defensism" — the claim that Russia must fight on to defend the revolution and secure a democratic peace. Trotsky exposes this as a contradiction: the "pacifist" rhetoric of revising imperialist treaties is meaningless when the government remains bound to the Entente and dependent on American loans. The conjuncture is one where the revolutionary movement faces a choice: break with the imperialist war entirely, or be absorbed into it. The article's relevance today lies in its method: any political force that claims to oppose war while refusing to break with the capitalist state and its alliances will end up, like Kerensky and Tseretelli, calling for an offensive. The same logic applies to contemporary "anti-war" movements that demand peace while supporting NATO, or that oppose specific wars while accepting the legitimacy of the imperialist state system.

Where the Argument Continues

This article is a fragment of a much larger argument Trotsky developed in the period 1914–1917. It connects directly to his pamphlet The Bolsheviki and World Peace (1915), his writings in Nashe Slovo (Our Word), and his later History of the Russian Revolution. The argument about pacifism as the servant of imperialism is developed further in the IDOM corpus in articles on the Ukraine war, the Kosovo intervention, and the "humanitarian bombing" of Yugoslavia. The theoretical grounding — the critique of petty-bourgeois ideology and the class basis of pacifism — is elaborated in Trotsky's Terrorism and Communism and in Lenin's The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky. The specific analysis of Wilsonian pacifism connects to the broader Marxist literature on American imperialism, including Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism.

Connections

  • Lenin, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky — the critique of "pure democracy" and pacifism as bourgeois ideology.
  • Trotsky, The Bolsheviki and World Peace — the argument that only socialist revolution can end war.
  • Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution — the concrete analysis of the Menshevik and SR role in 1917.
  • Rosa Luxemburg, The Crisis of German Social Democracy (the Junius Pamphlet) — the critique of social-patriotism.
  • IDOM articles on the Ukraine war, particularly those analysing the "anti-war" position of liberal pacifists who refuse to break with NATO.
  • The broader Marxist tradition on the state and war: Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State; Bukharin, Imperialism and World Economy.

Key Quotes

  1. "Pacifism is of the same historical lineage as democracy. The bourgeoisie made a great historical attempt to order all human relations in accordance with reason, to supplant blind and dumb tradition by the institutions of critical thought."

  2. "The inherited failing of pacifism, however, was the fundamental evil which characterises bourgeois democracy. Its criticism touches only the surface of social phenomena, it has not the courage to cut deeper into the underlying economic facts."

  3. "Theoretically and politically, pacifism has just the same basis as the doctrine of social harmony between different class interests."

  4. "And so pacifism had its allotted part to play in the mechanism of the war, like poison gas, and the ever-rising pile of war loans."

  5. "'If it comes to war,' thus for instance Bryan telegraphed to an anti-war meeting held in Chicago in February, 'then, of course, we shall support the government, but up to that moment it is our most sacred duty to do everything that lies in our power to save the people from the horrors of war.' In these few words we have the whole programme of petty bourgeois pacifism."

  6. "A 'pacifism' which rallies the petty-bourgeoisie and brings us to the support of the offensive will naturally be most warmly welcomed, not only by Russians but also by Entente imperialism."