V. I.

Lenin

Dear Comrades, The recent No. 25 issue (the second to come out during
the war) of Gazeta Robotnicza , [2] the organ of the opposition of the Polish Social-Democratic
Party, carries the resolutions of their conference (a conference
of the Editorial Board) adopted back in June 1915.

These resolutions clearly show that as a body (we say nothing of its members as individuals, some of whom are doing
extremely useful work in the German Social-Democratic press), the
Polish Social-Democrats are once again vacillating in a
most spineless manner.

There’s not a word against Kautskyism, not a word about any determined and resolute struggle against
opportunism, as the source and buttress of social-chauvinism!! This can be read in one way only: they
are prepared once again (as in Brussels, July 3-16, =

1914 [3] ) “to play ball” with the Kautskyites.

We quote the main (IV) resolution in full. Here it is:

Gazeta Robotnicza P.S.D. (of the opposition) No. 25 (January 1916). “Resolutions of the Editorial Board conference
held on June 1-2, 1915.”

IV. The Attitude of the Social-Democrats of Poland and Lithuania to the R.S.D.L.P. [1] “ The Polish revolutionary Social-Democrats regard the
Central Committee of the R.S.D. L.P, as a body consisting of
the most resolute revolutionary internationalist elements in Russia,
and, while leaving it to the regional organisation to settle its organisational relations with. it in the future, will
give it political support and co-ordinate their activity with
it.

“ The common revolutionary stand of the Polish Social-Democrats
and the Central Committee on the main essential [ wytycznych
( definite? )] points of their policy makes it incumbent on the Social-Democrats of Poland and
Lithuania to continue taking a critical attitude to its obvious tactical exaggerations [ wybujatoşci
( “wild” growth of corn, etc. )].

“ While justly desiring to emphasise the proletariat’s unquestionably hostile attitude to tsarism’s plunderous policy,
the Central Committee puts forward the slogan of
Russia’s defeat, basing it on the especially reactionary
part tsarism has to play in Europe and the specific significance
of a Russian revolution; however, this brings the Central
Committee into contradiction with the method of internationalism, which does not allow proletarian hopes and tasks
to be pinned on any definite outcome of the war, and even provides
the German social-patriots with arguments.

“ While justly noting the need for revolutionary action to build
a new international, while justly opposing every attempt to gloss
over the conflict, and piece together the broken old international, the C.C., however, overrate the importance of
automatically fencing themselves off from all less resolute
elements which do not accept their standpoint a priori, and forget [ przeocta ] that the
task of the revolutionary camp
[ obozu ] must not be to repulse these elements but to draw them into the struggle against the
fraud [ szalbierstwem ] of social-patriotism, and to promote their radicalisation by
sharply criticising their ideological instability.

“ As for the O.C. (R.S.D.L.P), the conference
[ narada ] reaffirms that its main group, which is in
Russia, and also its literary representative
[ ekspozytura lileracka ] take the social-patriotic standpoint, and that its weak internationalist wing has neither
the strength nor the courage to break with the social-patriots, and that the O.C. Centre takes the pacifist
standpoint; the conference considers that the attitude of the
Social-Democrats of Poland and Lithuania to the O.C. can
consist exclusively of criticism of its position, promoting
its disintegration [ rozktadu ] and separating from the O.C. its internationalist elements grouped
around Nashe Slovo, an organ which has done a great deal
to elaborate [crysiallise] internationalist-revolutionary views
in the ranks of the R.S.D.L.P.

“ The same applies, in particular, also to the Bund, which is a
part of the O.C., for its attitude is an even greater chaotic
mixture of social-patriotic and pacifist, Russophile and
Germanophile elements.”

The Polish Social-Democrats say here that they wish to “co-ordinate” their activity with the Central Committee.

We believe it to he our unquestionable duty to toll the Central
Committee this: title Central Committee must not and cannot
“co-ordinate” their activity with the P.S,D.

Why not?

Because the P.S.D. is vacillating again and again, for the nth time (or playing a game, which is objectively the same
thing) on our Party’s cardinal question. There is no doubt that the key issue in the Russian Social-Democratic movement
today is that of the split .

On this point we are adamant, because the entire experience of the Social-Democratic movement in Russia,
especially in the 1903-09 period, and even more between 1910 and
1914, and most of all in the years 1915 and 1916, has served to convince us that unity with the O.C. (or
with the Chkheidze group, which is the same thing) is harmful to the working-class movement, and, ensures its subjugation to the bourgeoisie.

The war and
Gvozdyovism [4] have provided the final proof.

But it is on this chief, basic and fundamental issue that the
Polish Social-Democrats are again equivocating.

They say not a word about the war having convinced them of the need for a split and of tire erroneousness of
their tactics at Brussels (July 3–16, 1914).

On the contrary, they have inserted in the resolution a
phrase which looks as if it had been deliberately worded
to justify and do another “Brussels” desertion to the O.C. or
Chkheidze. Here it is:

“ The Central Committee overrate the importance of automatically
fencing themselves off....”

That is the whole point. The rest is just rhetoric. If the Central Committee “overrate” the need for a split, it is clear
that the P.S.D. are entitled today or tomorrow to vote again for another Brussels-Kautskyite “unity” resolution.

It is the same old Tyszka trick, [5] the old game
Between the C.C. and the O.C., the old eclectical (to put it
mildly) use of the pendulum position.

We have no objection at all to working with the
P.S.D., either in general, or in the Zimmerwald Left in
particular; nor do we defend every fetter of our resolutions; but we are adamant on (1)
the split in Russia and (2) that there be no reconciliation
with Kautskyism in Europe. We consider it to be our duty to warn
all comrades that the Polish Social Democrats are unreliable, and to insist that the C.C. must not let itself he drawn once
again into a repetition of “Brussels” experiments, or trust the
authors of these experiments or participants in them.

With comradely greetings, C.O.A.