V. I.

Lenin

The question whether our Cadets are democrats or a party
of the liberal-monarchist bourgeoisie is of great scientific interest.

Let us recall that even the Trudovik (bourgeois democrat) Vodovozov
showed vacillation on this question.

Concerning this question, Pravda referred to
Mr. Gredeskul’s recent statements, repeated in “Rech”. [1]

Rech answers: “We do not know what statements by Mr. Gredeskul
Pravda is talking about.”

How very nice, isn’t it? Pravda said in clear and precise
terms that it was speaking of the statements repeated in
Rech . Well? Can it be that Rech does not know what is published in Rech ?? Would it not be more natural to suppose that
the liberals want to forget certain things in their recent past
for the sake of their pre-election playing at democracy?

Be that as it may, I shall quote, with a view to clarifying an
important scientific question, what Mr. Gredeskul said in a series of
public lectures and what he repeated in Rech No. 117 (2071), without the editors making a single reservation.

“ At the very end of my lecture,” wrote Mr. Gredeskul, “in arguing against the contention of Vekhi that the Russian
emancipation movement had failed (allegedly through the fault of the
intelligentsia) and comparing it with the opinion of those who stand much
further to the left than P. B. Struve but who likewise believe that the
movement has brought us absolutely nothing, I upheld a thesis to the
contrary, saying that a very great deal had been done, that the very
foundations had been laid for the future constitutional edifice, and very
deeply and solidly, too, in the very midst of the masses of the people. To provide a critical confrontation for these two assertions
and at the same time to express an idea which I also consider of the utmost
political importance for our time, I brought both of them into relation
with the future and said that from the point of view of the former (if
nothing had been done in 1905–06), everything had to be started from the
beginning, or, in other words, a second movement had to be organised,
whereas from the point of view of the latter assertion (that 1905–06 had
seen the laying of the foundations for a Russian constitution), the
opposite was true—no second popular movement was needed but merely quiet,
persevering and confident constitutional work.

“ It was at this point that I was interrupted by the
Lepaya chief of police (it happened in Lepaya). In this manner there ensued
in Lepaya a police demonstration against a public denial of the need for a
new revolution in Russia” ( Rech , 1912, No. 117 [2071 ]).

Mr. Gredeskul has fully proved that the Lepaya chief of police made a
mistake. But besides this, Mr. Gredeskul has proved two important things:

(1) that the polemics of Mr. Gredeskul and Co. against Vekhi are
so much pretence and empty talk. Actually, in all essential respects, the
whole Cadet Party is a Vekhi party; (2) that the Marxist characterisation of the Cadet Party according to its
scientific, economic and political features is perfectly correct.

---
Notes:
[1]
See p. 246 of this volume.— Ed .