Note: From 25 V 1901

42.
25/V 01 [Munich].
Dear P. B.! You have, of course, already heard from G. V. [Plekhanov] about the project of our organization and about the new "conciliatory" enterprise of Nevzorov [Steklov], Danevich [Gurevich] and Ryazanov (who have taken the name of the "Borba" [Struggle] group) 1). We answered their request (whether we agree to a preliminary conference between Social-Democrat], the Union, and Zarya, i.e., their representatives) with agreement 2].
G. V. [Plekhanov] said here that, of course, it is necessary to agree, and that he has already written to you about this. Today Ryazanov (who has already been here for two days) informed me that he had received a letter from Gurevich, who informs him that official agreement has only been received from us, that from the Group for the Emancipation] of Labor] there is still nothing, that he saw Krichevsky and Ivanshin and is almost sure of their agreement to the conference, that Brussels is planned and the date is around the 4th of July, that the foreign organization of the Bund is also asking for the conference.
Please write to them as soon as possible about the official agreement of the Group for the Emancipation of Labor] to the conference (as a representative of "Social-Democrat") and about how you feel about the question of place and time *). We wrote about the first, that we stand for Zurich or a place closest to it (that Switzerland, of course, is the most convenient for the Group for the Emancipation of Labor]) and want the conference to be scheduled as soon as possible, if possible in May, because in June we are not so free to manage our time.
(Our desire to speed up the conference is explained in fact by the fact that it is more advantageous for us to get it over with sooner, in order to start our organization sooner and have time to prepare for a decisive war with the Union in case of a break. And the war should probably be transferred to Russia in the summer.)
Please support our desire to speed up the conference *) (citing some motive) and the appointment of Switzerland. It seems to me that it is difficult for them to argue against Switzerland: firstly, two sides out of 4 (Zarya and Social Democrat] against the Union and Borba) stand for Switzerland]; secondly, for a congress of representatives from the Swiss, German and French groups, Switzerland must be the natural place. Maybe it is possible to agree not on Zurich, but on Basel, for example?
Please let me know about your sending official agreement.
Now I will tell you about Ryazanov. On the question of our organization (the foreign organization of "Iskra"), he first got worked up, learning that we by no means intend to expand the composition of the editorial board and offer them only consultative participation. With pathos he spoke about the fact that Nevzorov [Steklov] is a man with a great past and merits (exactly as Nevzorov [Steklov] spoke about Ryazanov last summer!), indignant, ironizing, etc., etc. But after a little while, seeing that all this has no effect on us, he began to lean towards concessions, stated that he might agree to our project ("Nevzorov [Steklov] will not agree for anything"), but the best thing would be a Federation between Social-Democrat, Zarya, and Borba, that they are ready to abandon the publication of their organ "Borba" (we never believed that they could set up their own organ) and limit themselves to a series of brochures.
In general, it seems that it will be possible to work with them: after resisting, they will still go along.
As for rapprochement with the Union, Ryazanov first stated that he has absolutely no hopes for the conference, that only Gurevich is messing with such an idea, etc. But when he learned that we do not set a *conditio sine qua non* 3) of the destruction of the Union, that we are ready to allow compatibility with a scientific organ (Zarya) and a political newspaper (Iskra) popular collection or journal for workers (Rabochego Dela), then he resolutely changed front, stated that he had long been talking about this to Krichevsky, that he considers this the natural *Finis* of the quarrel and is himself ready now to work on the implementation of such a project. Let him work! Maybe, in fact, unification or Federation on such a basis will take place - that would be a huge step forward.
I will add that we stand for Zurich, of course, also because Alexei [Martov] would very much like to have more time to talk about all sorts of things with you.
If the poll of all members of the Social-Democrat (for an official response to the Borba group) requires a lot of time, then try, please, if possible, to shorten this time in some way. Delay with the conference is extremely undesirable.
Regarding participation in the conference of the Foreign organization of the Bund, we think to reject it (not making a *casus belli* 4) out of this in the extreme case) on the basis of paragraph 1 of the decisions of the congress of the Russian Social Democratic] Labor Party of 1898. (By virtue of this paragraph, the Bund is autonomous only in matters relating specifically to the Jewish proletariat, and therefore cannot act as an independent party in negotiations) 5).
How is your article for Iskra? Do you intend to give something for the second book of Zarya, about which V. [Plekhanov] told you, of course?
I shake your hand firmly and send big greetings from everyone.
Yours, Petrov.
*) G. V. Plekhanov came to Munich at the beginning of May 1901. "About the project... of the organization" and "about the new... enterprise of Nevzorov" is described in detail in two letters from Yu. O. Martov to P. B. Axelrod of May 1 and 14. ► excerpts from which we cite:
"May 1 [1901, Munich].
Dear Pavel Borisovich!
We fully agree with you that the league we propose is only a palliative for now, but the implementation of this palliative would probably be a step forward to the ideal formulation of the matter that you are partly outlining. The whole point is to organize here, abroad, all the suitable *).
*) I repeat Gurevich's address just in case:
Mr. E. Gourevitsch.
38 bis Rue Gasssendi 38 bis P a r i s.
LENIN - P. B. AXELROD.
*) They say they want around 10.VI.
That's okay.

and the elements sympathizing with us and force them to do all the black and important work from which you would like to emancipate us.
But since this work is not only important, but also rough, the appropriate people can be drawn into it only by assigning them some “rights” along with their duties.
We were already laughing here that the "literary commission" proposed in Petrov's [Lenin's] plan will play the role of a vent through which the steam of civil strife to be created within the new “league” must be released.
But nothing can be done — people must be given free use of the right to make civil strife. — If we gather all the non-Rabocheye Delo elements in such an organization, then, it must be assumed, there will be a sufficient number of people among them capable of properly setting up the technical part of the matter.
In Russia, our organizational apparatus works quite well and would work even better if it received material for exercising in the form of regular and rapid delivery of literature. — Of course, if we put our plan into action, a conference cannot be avoided...
“N® 3 of «Iskra»... will be ready tomorrow. We cannot send you Aß 1, unfortunately, because it seems to be nowhere abroad.
If we receive it from one place, we will immediately forward it.
Yes! The "literary somersaulting" of the Geneva Social-Democrats "Chego izvolite?" [Rabocheye Delo] produces its effect: the Polish "proletariattsy," apparently, were carried away by their nods towards terrorism and, contrary to their promise to transport our literature, they are transporting the literature of "Rabocheye Delo".
For Aß 4, we are preparing several flicks at the "Historical Turn." In any case, the calls of "Rabocheye Delo" have an unpleasant effect on people with taste and a head.
I shake your hand. Alexei."
"14/V [1901, Munich].
Dear Pavel Borisovich!
I am informing you of the plan for "Ns 2 of Zarya" outlined in consultation with a friend [Plekhanov].
In addition to the continuation of G.V.’s [Plekhanov's] article against Struve, his article on the latest Russian events is also planned.
We expect you to rework Dietz's rejected article.
Petrov [Lenin] is thinking of writing about Chernov's article in the collection "Na slavnom postu," Byvaly promised "Sketches of Russian Life," and Starover [Potresov] is preparing "Journalistic Notes."
There is one article by Nevzorov [Steklov] on the emergence of Russian Social Democracy, and there will probably be an article by L.I. Akselrod [Orthodox] on Berdyaev and R. Luxembourg — on Millerand (a special article in the form of an introduction to her articles in "Neue Zeit," which we intend to publish as a separate brochure).
I intend to write about the "Report" of the "Union" at the Paris Congress and another note — about the preface to Witte's note, which will soon be finished printing.
The rest are speculative, Parvus writes correctly, V.I. [Zasulich] has not yet outlined a topic.
A detailed bibliographical section and internal review are planned....

to P. B. AKSELROD.

We talked with a friend [Plekhanov] about the "League" plans, developed a rough draft of the charter, which we will send you.
But as soon as we finished discussing this matter, which took a lot of time, we were dumbfounded by a written proposal from the Paris group "Borba" (Nevzorov and Co.), offering themselves as intermediaries to attempt "unification" with the Union.
Threatening with some kind of "independent enterprise," which they will abandon only in the event of unification, they propose to agree to a conference of "Social-Democrats," the "Union" and us.
We replied that we have nothing against the conference, but we stipulate that we intend to continue the polemic with "Rabocheye Delo".
2)
The conference mentioned in Lenin's letter took place in Geneva in 1901.
Yu. M. Steklov and E. L. Gurevich-Danevich represented the "Borba" group, B. Krichevsky represented "Rabocheye Delo," and JÉQ, O. Martov represented "Iskra."
Akimov (V. P. Makhnovets) from the "Union of Russian Social Democrats," Kossovskin, Kremer and Mill from the "Bund," and Ginzburg (Koltsov) from the "Revolutionary Organization of Social Democrats" were also present.
The conference was of a preliminary nature.
The final decisions were postponed until a broader meeting, which took place in October of the same year and at which a final split occurred between "Rabocheye Delo" and "Iskra."
See letters No. 43, 44 below for more details.
ö) Conditio sine qua non — a decisive condition.
4) Casus belli — cause of war.
6)
Point 1 of the decisions of the First Congress of the RSDLP reads as follows:
"The organizations: "Unions of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class," the "Rabochaya Gazeta" group and the "General Jewish Workers' Union in Russia and Poland" merge into a single organization under the name "Russian Social Democratic Labor Party," with the "General Jewish Workers' Union in Russia and Poland" entering the party as an autonomous organization, independent only in matters relating specifically to the Jewish proletariat."