V. I. Lenin

Source: ru:LS/v19;es:MT
Translated: machine translation (DeepSeek) from the Russian; AI-translated.

*  REPORT IN LONDON.
NOVEMBER 29, 1902.
• RECORD OF THE SPEECHES OF THE OPPONENTS.
Cherkezov. 10.20 p.m.
Does not understand the difference (1) between revolutionaries (Kautsky, etc.) and
Bernstein (2) between Struve and the orthodox.
Schwarz. (Not worthy of serious consideration)
Are not immediate demands: may they be included?
Lazarev. The Economists and Iskra? What did the revolutionary Social-Democrats do before they came out with their polemics against the Economists,
what did they do while the Economists were working.
Tchaikovsky. I do not belong organisationally to the Socialist-Revolutionary Party.
REPORT IN LONDON
217
That the programme did not give—Grigorovich, etc. A party of action, of practical workers.
[The reporter did not develop the difference.]
“On the part of Iskra it was tactless to get at people’s throats:
give us programmes, because we want to have a scrap.”
People are beginning to search, not satisfied with the doctrinaire programme:
1) terror is needed, 2) the peasantry must not be forgotten.
“You give us no weapons” (to the workers at demonstrations).
Lenin in Zarya: all the others are not socialists, only the Social-Democrats are socialistic. The Social-Democrats temporarily defend small property.
(
( Peasants = petty bourgeois (either proletarians, or struggle
/ with them).
( Is the peasant working in a seasonal trade a bourgeois or a
( proletarian?
Primitive social matter, from which later both bourgeois and proletarian will be formed, but at present a primitive working class.
The worker who has not joined the struggle is also a primitive class.
The Social-Democrats have guardianship (to give to the peasant, not to draw him into the struggle).
Too superficial an attitude from the party point of view—
did not take part in the squabbling, in the bickering.
The Socialist-Revolutionary Party is not a group of phrase-mongers, wishing only to take advantage of the situation.
\
In Paris the Social-Democrats wanted to throw out the red banner (??)
\
(Who?)
Cherkezov. The Social-Democrats always said that before them there were no real socialists.
They wanted to give the land to the people
Iskra—to turn the commune into private property.
They do not want to socialise labour, but only 8 hours of labour.
Struve in Osvobozhdeniye
Plekhanov in No. 2—3 of Zarya. The immediate aim: political, but a social revolution is impossible.
What then is the difference?
Why then did Marx and Engels distinguish themselves from the radicals?
Kobylinsky. Is terror lost “for nothing”? And do the Bitumtsy perish for nothing? At demonstrations they only offer their backs.
a mass of energy is wasted
Lazarev.—would like to put forward “his anarchist” views.
The peasantry knows nothing about the political movement: it is all the same to them whether Plekhanov or someone else is tsar.
A purely socialist peasant movement, only primitive. Here is the transition to anarchism (the commune).
The Social-Democrats say that first the bourgeoisie must be developed among the peasantry. To force the struggle on the peasant.
Terror cannot be overcome by persuasion. It is ridiculous not to know psychology.
Iskra says that each individual must defend himself—but stops halfway.
The Social-Democrats obscure the revolutionary movement.
The West-European working-class movement only elects deputies.
The Russian working-class movement is not Social-Democratic.
Not to fight oneself, but to send someone else to fight for one.
Schwarz. Can the peasantry be revolutionary?
Do you recognise the views of other parties? (Italy and Hungary)
There was Turati there too (whom you perhaps do not recognise).
The Bologna Congress 5.
[
The Congress of Agricultural Workers—for the unification of all
( ) associations of agricultural labourers, share-croppers and small
( peasants.
Belgium—the small peasantry; 600,000 peasant proprietors—various categories of workers own them.
The Russian Social-Democrats sharply turned back after the peasant revolts.
Denmark:
341
Aladyin.
contradict the spirit of sober analysis “onslaughts”.... on English life.
The Fabians—incorrectly presented: the Russian party will also come to it.
“also” will agree
Hl Co-operatives—went through all countries, except Belgium.
(I also stand for clarification of consciousness)
VAscqovE* Of the Belgian party these co-operatives
— the backbone. Ed.