V. I. Lenin

Draft Resolution of the R.S.D.L.P. Central Committee to Terminate Publication of the Journal Kommunist {2}

Notfor the press :

Takinginto consideration (1)that Kommunist was founded—temporarily and as an
experiment—by a federated editorial board, when there had been no sign of
any difference on any substantial question between the
C.O. Editorial Board and the rest of the Editorial Board as a whole; (2)that after No. 1–2 of “ Kommunist ” three
members of the Editorial Board put forward such differences in their sighed
theses on the question of self-determination; (3)that an exchange of opinion on this question revealed deep
divergence over the assessment of the role of democratic demands and the
minimum programme in general;— —theC.C. resolves: to recognise the continuation of the journal
Kommunist as impossible and to declare that this publication is hereby terminated .— Furthermore. With a view to extending the discussion on the
controversial questions and to having them clarified before a broader
circle of leading comrades, the C.C. resolves:

torequest the three comrades who have signed the theses to draw up a
motivated statement of their differences with the C.O. Editorial
Board.

Thisstatement together with a reply by the C.O. Editorial Board shall
be communicated to a broader circle of leading Party workers for a
final decision on whether it is desirable and necessary to open a
debate in the press. {3}

Ivery much regret that you are dragging out this “terribly
boring” business. I repeat —I, too, am terribly bored with
having to repeat—that I must decline to take part in
Kommunist .

Yourplan lacks principle and tends to confound the confusion. If there are no profound differences of principle, the
submission to the C.C. is either slander or intrigue, and you will be
exposed by every worker in Russia.

Ifthere are, asmuch must be said: after No. 1–2 people have begun
to confuse things outrageously; w e decline responsibility ; we believe it to be our duty
not to encourage but to expose.
As a concession we invite (see leaflet) them to have another discussion

||

before an “enlarged circle” (so as not to shame them in the press;
not to kill them outright by polemics).

{That is the only reason.}

For Sbornik Sotsial- Demokrata {4} we have, apart from a number of our
articles, [1]

Varin + Alexander + reports + indictment (I have not yet received it) +
Safarov + Latvian + Kollontai (probably).

The Japanese {5} should be invited only to be shamed; Bukharin—only
order material on the economic question.

Radekshould not be invited (his article is legal and is not at all important in this shape). We shall
have to fight against his theses.

Hereis my opinion. Kommunist is a corpse and I am not taking part in reviving it.

Alexander(and the Russian workers in the Bureau) should confront them
with this question of principle :
we do not take on the Editorial Board people who confuse things
outrageously and refuse to learn, who do not even wish to make an effort to
set forth their opinion. They want to playusoff against the P.S.D., that much is clear,
while they themselves are safe on the sidelines.

Kommunist met the task of that period: to rally everyone against social-chauvinism and Kautskyism.

Thetask now is different : we are faced with a struggle against “imperialist
Economism ”.

Salut,

Lenin

P.S. Why did you not reply whether or not Sukhanov was sent to Geneva ? I
send you material for Grimm.

No luck with translation of the theses.

---
Notes:
[1]
There will be enough “writers” for two collections! — Lenin

{2}
Kommunist was organised by Lenin and was published by the
Editorial Board of Sotsial-Demokrat together with G. L. Pyatakov
and Yevgenia Bosh, who financed the publication. N. I. Bukharin was also on
the Editorial Board. One (double) issue was published. It carried, apart
from the article “The Voice of an Honest French Socialist”, two other
articles by Lenin: “The Collapse of the Second International” and
“Imperialism and Socialism in Italy”.

Theplan for the publication of the journal was worked out by Lenin in
the spring of 1915. He directed the organisational meeting of the Editorial
Board. Lenin hoped to make it an international organ of Left-wing
Social-Democrats. However, there soon appeared serious differences between
the Editorial Board and Bukharin, Pyatakov and Bosh, which were aggravated
after the issue of No. 1–2. The Bukharin-Pyatakov-Bosh group took an
incorrect attitude on many basic questions of the Programme and tactics of
the Party—the right of nations to self-determination, the role of
democratic demands and the minimum programme in general, etc.—and tried
to use the journal for their factional aims. On the Editorial Board, Lenin
conducted a struggle against the Bukharin Pyatakov-Bosh group, exposing
their anti-Bolshevik views and factional acts, and sharply criticising the
conciliatory attitude of G. Y. Zinoviev and A. G. Shlyapnikov towards the
group.

Inview of the anti-Party behaviour of this group, the Editorial Board
of Sotsial-Demokrat , on Lenin’s proposal, declared that it
considered the further publication of the journal impossible. The
C.C. Bureau in Russia, having heard a report on the differences on the
Kommunist Editorial Board, declared, its full solidarity with the
Editorial Board of the Central Organ, Sotsial-Demokrat , and
expressed the wish that “all C.C. publications should be edited in a
strictly consistent tenor, in full conformity with the line of the C.C.,
which it had adopted at the beginning of the war”.

p. 367

{3}
The following text is an addition to the draft resolution, addressed to
G. Y. Zinoviev.

p. 367

{4}
Sbornik Sotsial-Demokrata ( Sotsial-Demokrat
Collection) was founded by Lenin and published by the Editorial Board of
the newspaper Sotsial-Demokrat . There were two issues: No. 1 in
October and No. 2 in December 1916. Material was prepared for No. 3 which
was to include Lenin’s article “A Caricature of Marxism and Imperialist
Economism”, but the publication was discontinued for lack of funds.

p. 368

{5}
The name given to G. Pyatakov and Yevgenia Bosh because they had
emigrated from Russia to Switzerland via Japan.

p. 368