V. I. Lenin

Source: ru:PSS/v46; en:CW/CW36;es:MT
Translated: machine translation (DeepSeek) from the Russian; AI-translated.

30. VIII. 01.

Dear P. B., I received your letter today and today sent the proofs of my article** to Dietz. I made the correction you indicated—at the end, separating the liberals from the revolutionaries who were included under one “we”. As for the “providential slip of the pen”, I could do nothing about it: such a big change would have been required to alter that passage, and besides, the whole spirit of the article does not permit changing it in the sense of eliminating “one-sidedness” (you are right, of course, that the treatment is “one-sided”: in a polemical article devoted to attacking one of the flanks of our opponents, how could one observe all-sidedness! That is, I mean to say that this defect lies too deep to be removed by a separate alteration—and not at all that I fail to see the defect here).

We received all your letters. As for my sister, I don’t know how matters stand, for I haven’t had any news from her for a long time.

You have, of course, received Alexei’s letter with the story about the obstacle to the congress***? We shall wait to see how you and Danevich settle this matter.

* See “The Agrarian Question and the ‘Critics of Marx’” (Works, 5th ed., Vol. 5, pp. 95-221). Ed.

** See “The Persecutors of the Zemstvo and the Hannibals of Liberalism” (Works, 5th ed., Vol. 5, pp. 21-72). Ed.

*** This refers to the “unity” congress held in Zurich on October 4-5, 1901 (see Note 135). Ed.

No. 7* has come out, and you have no doubt already been sent a copy. No. 8 will carry Ryazanov’s article “The Tsar’s Tavern” (on the wine monopoly), and an article is planned on the new law (June 8) concerning the allotment of lands in Siberia to the nobility**. For the Chronicle of Current Events we have a report on the congress of liberals***, on the outrages in the treatment of exiles in Siberia, on the deep excitement in such backwaters as Kursk, and on the revolt of seminarists and high-school students. Then we received a very interesting article by a worker—a reply to Dadonov, who in *Russkoye Bogatstvo* abused the Ivanovo-Voznesensk workers 137. The article is very good, they say (I haven’t read it yet), so we don’t know where it would be best to put it: in *Iskra* or in *Zarya*. In No. 8 of *Iskra* there is a letter from Danevich from France.

And *Zarya* still has no foreign review! And there will hardly be a domestic one either 138. A disaster! And this *Zarya* is swelling. Now it’s 6 sheets + 4 (Plekhanov’s “Critique”) + 2 (his against Bernstein) + 2 (Nevzorov + Alexei) + 2-3 (Velika Dmitrievna and Starover)... And I am quite stuck with the agrarian question****.

Well, I hope we shall see each other soon.

I press your hand firmly. Yours, Petrov

In Heiligenschwendi (Switzerland)