V. I.

Lenin

The declaration by Comrade Maximovich, representative of the
R.S.D.L.P,’s Central Committee, which we are publishing here, fully
expresses our Party’s views on this Conference. The French bourgeois
press has excellently revealed its significance as an expedient or a
stratagem of the Anglo-French bourgeoisie. The roles have been distributed
as follows: Le Temps and L’Echo de Paris [1] have attacked the
French socialists for their allegedly excessive concessions to
internationalism. These attacks have been merely a stratagem designed to
pave the way for Premier Viviani’s well-known declaration in the
Chamber, which was marked by an aggressive patriotism. On the other hand,
Journal des Débats [2] laid the cards on the table by stating that the
whole point was in getting the British socialists, under Keir Hardie, who
had hitherto been opposed to the war and to conscription, to vote, at the
Conference, for the war to be prosecuted until victory is won over
Germany. This is tangible and important as the political outcome of the
British and French socialists having been won over to the side of the
Anglo-French bourgeoisie. As for the phrases on internationalism, socialism,
a referendum, etc., these are merely phrases, idle words of no
significance whatever.

No doubt, the clever reactionaries of the French bourgeoisie have blurted
out the real truth. The war is being conducted by the Anglo-French
bourgeoisie, plus their Russian counterpart, with the aim of ravaging and
plundering Germany, Austria and Turkey. It stands in need of recruiting
officers, as well as of socialist consent to fight on until victory over
Germany is won. The rest is idle and shameful phrase-mongering, which
prostitutes such great words as socialism, internationalism, etc. To follow
the bourgeoisie and help it plunder other countries in deed, and to regale
the masses with hypocritical recognition of “socialism and the
International” in word-such is opportunism’s cardinal sin and
the main reason why the Second International has collapsed.

The task confronting the opponents of social-chauvinism at the London
Conference was therefore clear: in the name of clear-cut anti-chauvinist
principles, they had to walk out from the Conference, without at
the same time falling into Germanophilism, since, for no other
motive but chauvinism, the pro-Germans are decidedly opposed to the London
Conference. Comrade Maximovich accomplished that task when he spoke in
definite terms of the treachery of the German socialists.

The Bundists and the adherents of the Organising Committee are unable to
grasp this simple and obvious fact. The former are Germanophiles, in the way
Kosovsky is, who frankly justifies the German
Social-Democrats’ vote for war credits (see Information Bulletin of the Bund No. 7, January 1915, p. 7, beginning of § 5); The editors
of the bulletin made no mention of their disagreeing with Kosovsky, although
they did emphasise that they were in disagreement with Borisov, that
champion of Russian patriotism. The Manifesto of the Bund’s Central
Committee (ibid., p. 3) does not contain a single explicit word against
social-chauvinism.

The Organising Committee’s supporters want a reconciliation between
the Germanophile and the Francophile brands of chauvinism as can be seen
from Axelrod’s statements (Gobs Nos. 86 and 87 and from the first
issue of Izvestia of the Organising Committee’s secretariat
abroad. [3] Feb. 22, 1915). When the editors of Nashe Shovo proposed that we take joint action against “official
social-chauvinism”, we replied outright that the Organising
Committee and the Bund had themselves sided with official
social-patriotism. In our reply we enclosed our draft declaration and
referred to Comrade Maximovich’s decisive vote.

Why is Nashe Sbovo trying to deceive itself and others in failing to mention this in its editorial of No. 32? Why is it silent about our declaration having also spoken of the

German Social-Democrats’ treachery? The Nashe Slovo declaration omitted this most important and
fundamental point: neither we nor Comrade Maximovich adopted that
declaration, or could have done so. That was why joint action by the
Organising Committee and ourselves did not result. Why, then, is
Nashe Slovo deceiving itself and others in asserting that a basis
exists for unity of action?

“ Official social-patriotism” is the main evil in present day
socialism. To combat that evil (and not to become reconciled to it, or to
declare a mutual international “amnesty” on this point), all
forces must be prepared and mustered. Kautsky and others have produced a
clear-cut programme for an “amnesty” and a peace with social-chauvinism. We have tried to give a clear-cut programme for the
struggle against it: see, in particular, No. 33 of
Sotsial-Demokrat, and the resolutions published therein. It remains
for us to express the wish that Nashe Slovo go over to something
more definite than vacillation between “platonic sympathy with
internationalism”, and peace with social-chauvinism.