LENIN ON ORGANIZATION 
wavering intellectuals the difference between the 
exploiting side of the factory (a discipline based 
on mortal fear of starvation) and its organizing 
side (a discipline based upon common labor united 
by the conditions of highly developed technical 
production). Discipline and organization, which 
come so hard to the bourgeois intellectual, are, 
thanks to the factory “school,” acquired very easily 
by the proletariat. Mortal fear of this school and 
utter failure to comprehend its organizing value are 
characteristic of the habits of thought which reflect 
petty-bourgeois conditions of existence, and which 
give rise to the species of anarchism which the 
German Social Democrats call “Edelanarchismus,” 
i. e., the anarchism of the “well-born” person— 
noble anarchism. Noble anarchism is specially 
characteristic of the Russian nihilist. To him the 
Party organization appears to be a monstrous “fac- 
tory,” the subordination of the part to the whole 
and of the minority to the majority he regards as 
“enslavement” (see Axelrod’s article) ; the division 
of labor under the guidance of the centre wrings 
from him a tragi-comic outcry against the trans- 
formation of men into “wheels and bolts” (and 
what is to him particularly monstrous is the trans- 
formation of editors into contributors) ; reference 
to the Party statutes on organization he meets with 
8 contemptuous grimace and a deprecatory remark 
(addressed to “the formalists’”) to the effect that 
perhaps statutes are altogether unnecessary. 
It is almost unbelievable, but nevertheless a fact, 
187