Запрещенная речь Равашоля

Ravachol 1892, “Ravachol’s Forbidden Speech”, public translation into Russian from English More about this translation.

See also 193 similar translations

Translate into another language.

Participants

cornelius49 points
SilverBaby30 points
Join Translated.by to translate! If you already have a Translated.by account, please sign in.
If you do not want to register an account, you can sign in with OpenID.
Pages: ← previous Ctrl next next untranslated
1 2 3 4

Ravachol’s Forbidden Speech

Запрещенная речь Равашоля

History of edits (Latest: cornelius 1 year, 1 month ago) §

On trial for murder after a series of bombings, Ravachol attempted to give the following speech, not to deny his guilt, but to accept and explain it. According to contemporary accounts, he was cut off after a few words, and the speech was never delivered. He was guillotined shortly afterwards.

На судебном процессе по делу об убийстве и серии взрывов, Равашоль пытался произнести эту речь не с целью отрицания вины, но с принимая и объясняя её. Согласно современным данным, речь была прервана после нескольких произнесенных слов и так и не была произнесена. Равашоль же был гильотинирован.

History of edits (Latest: cornelius 1 year, 1 month ago) §

If I speak, it’s not to defend myself for the acts of which I’m accused, for it is society alone which is responsible, since by its organization it sets man in a continual struggle of one against the other. In fact, don’t we today see, in all classes and all positions, people who desire, I won’t say the death, because that doesn’t sound good, but the ill-fortune of their like, if they can gain advantages from this. For example, doesn’t a boss hope to see a competitor die? And don’t all businessmen reciprocally hope to be the only ones to enjoy the advantages that their occupations bring? In order to obtain employment, doesn’t the unemployed worker hope that for some reason or another someone who does have a job will be thrown out of his workplace. Well then, in a society where such events occur, there’s no reason to be surprised about the kind of acts for which I’m blamed, which are nothing but the logical consequence of the struggle for existence that men carry on who are obliged to use every means available in order to live. And since it’s every man for himself, isn’t he who is in need reduced to thinking: “Well, since that’s the way things are, when I’m hungry I have no reason to hesitate about using the means at my disposal, even at the risk of causing victims! Bosses, when they fire workers, do they worry whether or not they’re going to die of hunger? Do those who have a surplus worry if there are those who lack the basic necessities"?

There are some who give assistance, but they are powerless to relieve all those in need and who will either die prematurely because of privations of various kinds, or voluntarily by suicides of all kinds, in order to put an end to a miserable existence and to not have to put up with the rigors of hunger, with countless shames and humiliations, and who are without hope of ever seeing them end. Thus there are the Hayem and Souhain families, who killed their children so as not to see them suffer any longer, and all the women who, in fear of not being able to feed a child, don’t hesitate to destroy in their wombs the fruit of their love.

Pages: ← previous Ctrl next next untranslated
1 2 3 4

License: CopyLeft: Creative Commons (Attribute & ShareAlike)