V. I. Lenin

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

7. VII. 01.

Dear G. V.! How is your work getting on? I have not been able to bring myself to write to you about the end of the article by Ortodox, i.e., the addition sent later concerning Berdyayev’s article in No. 6 of *Mir Bozhy*. Our *Struvefreundliche* Party rejected this end by a majority of 2¼ votes against 1¼ (Alexei “split” into ¼ and ¼), and I remained in the minority with my “for”. They also did not like the note about romantic love and the general character of the addition. But in my opinion, it cut that gentleman short, briefly, sharply, clearly, and to the point, and the concluding verses are especially good!

We are again being informed from Russia that a congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party is being convened—in one town an invitation has even been received.

It is extremely

G. V. PLEKHANOV. JULY 7, 1901

important to hurry with the programme. Please write whether you intend to undertake this work and whether you can undertake it. Apart from you and P. B., there is no one else: it requires enormous deliberation in formulation, and here, for example, in the bustle, it is quite impossible to concentrate and think things over properly. Those old drafts of the programme and articles (i.e., one draft and one article) which Alexei brought to you—and which he quite unnecessarily took back—are unlikely to be of much use? What do you think? If you need them, we will send them immediately.

I have ordered Shakhovskoi and Tezyakov. Why did you need them for the programme? Do you intend to base demands in favour of agricultural workers on them? And what is your attitude to demands in favour of the peasantry? Do you in general recognise the possibility of such demands in a Russian Social-Democratic programme or not?

The proof of your article has not yet arrived. In No. 2 of *Zarya* the following are writing: Starover—about *Russkoye Bogatstvo*, V. I.—about Berdyayev, I have written about Witte’s memorandum and criticised the preface* (I think of sending it to you for advice, but I do not know if there will be time), Alexei has a report “The Tasks of the Socialist Intelligentsia”—you have seen it, of course, what do you think of it? I shall also write against Chernov**. And will you give a review of the symposium *Na Slavnom Postu*?

For *Iskra* (No. 6 is being set up and will appear in July, No. 7 should be in August) we are expecting from you an article on the worker’s letter and on “The Revival of Revolutionism in Russia”.

Parvus is still insisting on his “organisation”!!

Kautsky passed through here. He is going to rest and write, and promises nothing at present.

Nevzorov has sent to *Iskra* a “vile” (V. I.’s and Puttman’s opinion) article against the article “Where to Begin?”—glorification of the committees, defence (evasive) of *Rabocheye Dyelo*, etc. We shall return it to the author (we will take a copy and, if you wish, send it to you).

Yes, regarding the project of federation or fusion with the Union—I hope you have seen our counter-project? If not, ask Koltsov to get it from Dvinskaya. It is unlikely that anything will come of all this.

I press your hand firmly. Yours...

Yes, about the money from the Belgians for our movement. In my opinion, give a third to *Rabocheye Dyelo*: it is not worth giving cause, even for talk alone, over 50-100 francs.