Note: Dated 30 I 1901

25.
30/101 [Munich].
I just received a letter, dear G. V., having just returned from a “final” conversation with Judas Struve 1).
The deal is done, and I am terribly dissatisfied with how it was done.
I hasten to write to you, so as not to lose the freshness of the impression.
Judas [Struve] did not argue about the "democratic opposition":
he is not a romantic, and you will not frighten him with words.
But regarding the "7th point" (utilization of material for the "Iskra", material
coming to the "Sovremennoe Obozrenie") he cleverly bypassed
ours, who all, and P. B. [Axelrod] compris 2) stood up for him,
against me.
He, Judas [Struve], - you see, - expected that the "Iskra" would be more popular, more "working-class," he finds that
our free utilization of material coming into Sovremennoe Obozrenie may create competition...
He demands that the utilization of material for the Iskra be possible only
by agreement with a representative of the Sovremennoye] Obozrenie—
agreement is waived only if it is impossible to contact this
representative, - a condition, obviously, very rare, for Judas
[Struve] directly says that he anticipates either finding
a representative im Auslande3) ("no more than 12 hours from Munich"),
or the most careful correspondence.
He would like to publish five sheets every month – approximately 200 thousand letters –
exactly as much as in 2 sheets of "Iskra". That he will be able
to provide that much material is hard to doubt, for he is a well-off man, who writes much, and has good connections.
The matter is clear: the competition is directed not so much
against the Zarya, as against the Iskra: the same predominance of polit-V. I. LENIN to G. V. PLEKHANOV.

to G. V. PLEKHANOV.

ical] material, the same newspaper character - review of current events, short articles (Judas [Struve] with very
correct tact attaches enormous importance to the frequent publication
of thin books with small articles). We will be overwhelmed
with material of this kind, we will run around carrying out Judas [Struve]'s assignments, who with his management in the Sovremennoye] Obozrenie (it is obvious that he will be the master there, and the complete master,
for he has money and 99% of the materials - we will be able to give there something small only very rarely)
will make a magnificent liberal career and an attempt to push aside not only the heavy-handed Zarya, but also the Iskra. We will
run around, bustle about, proofread, transport, and his excellency
Mr. Judas [Struve] will be Rédacteur en chef 4) of the most influential (in the broad so genannten] "public" opinion) little magazine.
And the "romantic" consolation can be left to these rechtgläubigen 5): let it be called "an appendix to the social
democratic journal "Zarya", let them console themselves with little words, and I will take the matter into my own hands for now. The question is, will the
famous "hegemony" of social democracy not turn out to be
a simple Cant’on6) in this case? How will it be expressed, except in the words:
"appendix to social democratic journal"?
That he will overwhelm us with material - this is undoubtedly true, because we cannot even keep up writing for the Zarya and Iskra.
One of two things: either the Sovremennoye] Obozrenie is an appendix to the journal Zarya - (as agreed) - and then it
should not come out more often than the Zarya, with complete freedom to utilize the material for the Iskra. Or we sell... *) the right of our
birthright for a mess of pottage and turn out to be genach
sp ü h rt7) by Judas [Struve], who feeds us with words.
If we are destined and it is possible to achieve real hegemony, then exclusively with the help of a political newspaper
(supported by a scientific organ), and when we are told with outrageous
insolence that the political section of our newspaper must not
compete with the political enterprise of Mr. Liberals, then our miserable role is as clear as day.
I made a copy of this letter, I attach it to the "protocol"
of today's meeting, as a statement of my protest and my
"dissenting opinion," and I invite you to also raise the banner of re-

*) In the original there is a gap here.
Lenin Collection, III.
Ed.

sistance.
Better a break than this actual subordination to the Credo 8) program, along with loud Phrases against Cred’n3Ma.
If the majority speaks out for it, - I, of course, will submit,
but only after washing my hands beforehand.
Lenin.
1)
This letter from Vladimir Ilyich, like the letter to Axelrod of
27/111901, is a supplement to the record he made on *December 29
1900 immediately after returning from the "historical" meeting, at
which negotiations were held on an agreement between the social democrats, represented by
the editorial board of the "Iskra", with liberals, represented by P. B. Struve (Lenin Collection
ik, Л51, pp. 72-75.)
Back in Russia in April 1900, in Pskov, when Vladimir Ilyich and A. N. Potresov lived there, a meeting was held with the participation of Yu. O. Martov
at which Struve and Tugan*G>aranovsky were present, where the issue of joint publication of a revolutionary organ abroad was discussed.
After that, Struve was in Munich and continued negotiations in December
1900.
The meeting about which Vladimir Ilyich writes to Plekhanov in this letter took place in Munich at the end of January. Participants in this
meeting: Vladimir Ilyich, A. N. Potresov (Arsenyev), Vera Ivanovna
Zasulich, Struve, his wife N.A. Struve and I. B. Axelrod; G. V. Plekhanov
had already left Munich by this time.
The subject of discussion at the meeting was the question of [publication by the "Iskra" group jointly with Struve as a representative of the "democratic opposition" group of a general political appendix to the journal "Zarya" under
The Name of "Sovremennoe Obozrenie."
Vladimir Ilyich turned to Plekhanov for help, inviting him to raise the "banner of revolt," because Judas (Struve) "cleverly bypassed
ours", i.e. the remaining members of the Iskra editorial board.
Plekhanov, however, did not support Vladimir Ilyich.
Upon receiving the commented letter from Vladimir Ilyich, Plekhanov wrote on February 2 to Munich:
"I have read Petrov's [Lenin's] letter and your three (two of yours [P. B. Axelrod's] and one of V [V. I. Zasulich's], and I think that we must agree to the terms
of the agreement; there is no other way out now; and then we shall see.
It is true that it would be necessary to bargain about the material for the "Iskra," but if he
(Simon [P. B. Struve]) does not agree, then we should still not break off."
See also below, letter No. 26.
As a result, the negotiations, which dragged on until March, led to the development of a certain agreement between the two groups, which, however,
was not implemented.
Indications of these negotiations and of the documents developed during them are contained in the article by A. N. Potresov "The Evolution of Socio-Political Thought in the Pre-Revolutionary Era." ("Society and War Movement
in Russia at the Beginning of the 20th Century." Volume 1, SPB. 1909. Pp. 615-616.) In this
article, excerpts are given of two statements for the press, which should

V. I. LENIN to G. V. PLEKHANOV.

were to motivate the cooperation of the two groups.
One of them was written on behalf of "Zarya" -- by Plekhanov (see below, letter No. 26), the second on behalf of the "democratic opposition" -- by Struve.
The refusal of the publisher of "Zarya" to print these statements prevented the publication of these documents at the time of negotiations with Struve, and the subsequent final break of "Iskra" with the latter was the reason that these documents did not appear in print at all. We present here excerpts from both statements, as they are printed in A. N. Potresov's article.
"Russian Social-Democracy," the announcement from the editors of "Zarya" stated, "in the person of its conscious elements... has always understood that victory over"...the old regime "can only be bought at the price of simultaneous efforts of all revolutionary and opposition elements of your country. Therefore, it has always been ready... to support, to the best of its ability, any more or less progressive movement directed against the existing order in our country. Sharply condemning—as completely inexpedient—the idea of a complete merger of all the above-mentioned elements into a single political party, conscious Russian Social-Democrats have always firmly adhered to the conviction that these diverse elements... must go side by side and support each other where the struggle against a common... enemy is concerned. In view of this, our readers will not be surprised to learn that the editors of "Zarya" have undertaken the publication of a general political supplement to their journal jointly and on equal rights of participation in the editorial board with representatives of the democratic opposition, setting among other goals the task of "politically interpreting the legal struggle with... the excellently organized autocracy of the bureaucracy"... This political interpretation of the legal struggle of so-called society... will undoubtedly constitute a politically necessary and long-desired complement to the revolutionary activity of Russian Social-Democrats in the working-class environment and will therefore find their fullest sympathy... In Russia, the practical interest common to all parties, except the party of the knout and the stick, consists... in the triumph of political freedom, and within the limits of this common practical interest, the most elementary political calculation dictates that these parties draw closer to each other and support each other." On the pages of "Sovremennoe Obozrenie"... "any political opinion will be freely expressed, except the opinion of opponents of political freedom"...
For their part, representatives of the democratic opposition stated: ..."desiring to serve the cause of broad public propaganda of the ideas of freedom, we do not set ourselves the task of developing any party program that predetermines in detail this or that political structure of our multi-tribal and multilingual country... Our attention will be equally devoted both to the illegal, so-called "revolutionary" struggle and to all actually implemented and possible attempts to fight the existing political order of things on its own ground. We declare in advance that one of the main tasks of the literary enterprise will be—to politically interpret the legal struggle with... the excellently organized autocracy of the bureaucracy... The ever-increasing conviction of both the Russian opposition and... the government in the inseparable historical

9*

LENIN COLLECTION.
connection between so-called legal and cultural activity and activity directly and openly aimed at changing the existing political order is, in our view, the most important acquisition of political consciousness in recent times... We do not reject in legal public activity the inevitability of certain compromises, but we will only recognize those compromises that are dictated by an unwavering desire to quickly and more firmly win for the Russian person the conditions of a worthy political existence. Beyond these limits, practicality turns into morally despicable and politically dangerous unscrupulousness... Finally, we consider it necessary to emphasize that we, as well as the Social-Democratic group united with us for a common cause, recognize the paramount political significance and vocation of the Russian workers' movement. In it, the political thought of the intelligentsia has found a powerful ally, with the growth of which the fate of political freedom in Russia is now inextricably linked. We expect that "Sovremennoe Obozrenie" will meet with sympathy and support from all opposition elements. Its task is to unite all these elements in one literary enterprise, in the closest union with the only organized force of the Russian opposition—Social-Democracy"...
2) Y compris — including.
3) Im Auslande — abroad.
4) Redacteur en chef — editor-in-chief.
5) Rechtglaübigen — credulous.
6) Sanctum — hypocritical chanting.
7) Geiiachspiirt — caught.
8) Credo — a symbol of faith, the name of a famous exposition of "Economist" views, belonging to Kuskova (see Collected Works of Lenin, vol. I, p. 363).