Date: 1902
Source: ru:PSS/v7

Sketches and Notes for the Article "New Events and Old Questions"[74]

Especially V. Intrigue and Confusion in Government Circles.

Lull – increased despair and disbelief – terror – its actual significance – its failure to stir up the lull.

Now before us is the beginning of the political "season" and a revival of the revolutionary movement.

** In brief. Ed.

* The phrase breaks off here. Ed.

Apparently, it is passing

α – temporary lull

β – terror and "Narodnaya Volya-ism" as its offspring alas, the people will not soon

it is easy to talk about armed demonstrations individual resistance must be answered

γ – the Rostov struggle

again and again shows the revolutionary energy of the working masses

truly encourages

truly disorganizes the government, excites tens of thousands, clarifies the meaning of the activities of revolutionaries, "disorganizes"

truly there is a direct transition to a popular uprising.

Truly the "encouraging" significance of the Rostov events.

Apparently, the lull (some, temporary) in the popular-revolutionary movement is coming to an end and a wave of revival is beginning again.

Along with the lull, its offspring – lack of principle, its triumph, the revival of Narodnaya Volya-ism, despair etc. terror recedes into the realm of something distant

– individual resistance

– the people will not soon

– disorganization of the government (and not of the revolutionaries?)

– it is easy to talk about armed demonstrations

etc. etc.

The Rostov struggle

When there are and act such volcanoes of revolutionary indignation in the working masses, how absurd and pretentiously ridiculous are the talks about artificial incitement, agitation, disorganization by means of shots etc.?

What an obvious deviation from the direct task: to help these already rising masses, to organize their leaders etc.

And, contrary to the talk about the discouraging effect of demonstrations, we derive encouragement from the speeches of their participants – the Nizhny Novgorod workers.

And here deep roots in the working masses

" indignation and

" readiness for struggle and sacrifice.

Reminding about these "roots" of the movement and its "backbone" should show how deeply erroneous are the theories and attempts to move away from the workers' movement, to replace the socio-class point of view with the vagueness of Narodism etc.

* See Works, 5th ed., vol. 4, p. 373. Ed.

Fusion with the workers' movement does not = weakening and narrowness. On the contrary, from this absolutely solid ground we can and must attract everything else.

It is the workers' movement that has caused a revival in other strata, and now it is growing: the Zemstvo opposition is beginning to move in some places to "action."

{a couple of words about Voronezh}{141}

– student and gymnasium movement

– peasant movement

General aspect of government tactics:

– fragmentation, distraction, flirting with the masses

– revolutionaries were distracted by the chase after "dogs" ((as one liberal called the Valeys, Obolenskys, and Co. We may return to this liberal)).

Do not allow yourselves to be provoked.

Do not lose your principled ground.

Strengthen your ties with the working masses and go together with them, participate in such events as the Rostov ones, trying to raise them to a popular uprising.

Written at the end of November 1902

First published in 1939 in the journal "Proletarskaya Revolyutsiya" No. 1

Printed from the manuscript

Plan of the Letter "On the Question of Reports of Committees and Groups of the RSDLP to the All-Party Congress"[75]

I. The workers' movement, its history and current state.

(1.3–7.36)

II. History of the Social-Democratic movement, the struggle of trends and modern theoretical questions.

(2.13)

III. Committees and groups of the Social-Democrats. Their composition and functions.

Regional organizations.

(2.9 + 26.35)

IV. Content, breadth, and nature of local work.

(10–12.14–19.30)

V. Attitude towards revolutionary (especially Social-Democratic) groups of other races and nations.

(31)

VI. Practical enterprises and conspiratorial equipment.

(32–34)

VII. Connections and work in other strata of the population, except for the working class.

(20–25)

VIII. The state of non-Social-Democratic revolutionary and opposition currents and the attitude towards them.

(27–29)

Written in December 1902 – January 1903

Published for the first time, from the manuscript

Materials for the Pamphlet "To the Rural Poor"

1. Plans for the Pamphlet

1

1. The workers' struggle in the cities, which many have already heard about.

2. What do the workers want? (Social-Democratic Party. Socialism.)

3. Idem[76] for the peasants. The oppression of taxes, landlessness, capital etc.

4. The union of the peasant poor with the workers.

5. Agrarian system.

{illusions of the "communal principle"}

6. 6 1/2 million union with workers in the cities (and attracting 2 million to their side).{142}

7. The deceptiveness of expectations from personal diligence, dexterity etc. hard work, thrift etc.

8. Obstacles to the union of these 6 1/2 million:

9. Political disenfranchisement. The struggle with the workers for political freedom.

10. – Civil disenfranchisement of the peasant in particular. Collective responsibility, lack of freedom of movement, attachment to the commune, attachment to the landlord's economy by means of labor service, bondage, cut-offs etc. Σ[77] = remnants of serfdom.

11. The need to liberate the entire peasantry (both middle and bourgeois) to liberate the poor for their struggle for socialism.

12. Analysis of the demands of our agrarian program.

13. Distrust of the well-to-do peasantry: whether it will go further, or not.

14. Experience with the peasantry in other countries: betrayal of the well-to-do and middle peasantry after political and agrarian reform.

15. Utilization of this experience for Russia, i.e., uniting 6 1/2 million in advance with the urban worker, with the Social-Democratic Party.

16. This union is beginning now in Europe as well.

We in Russia must immediately secure this connection and thereby facilitate our entire struggle for socialism.

2

1. The workers' struggle in the cities. The struggle against the government.

Its spread and aggravation.

2. What do the workers want? They are fighting

* Against. Ed.

148 This refers to V.I. Lenin's graphic representation of the agrarian system of Russia in the form of four horizontal stripes: the first - 0.1 million landlord farms, the second - 1 1/2 million rich peasant farms, the third - 2 million middle and the fourth - 6 1/2 million poor farms (see this volume, p. 380).)

8. What remnants of serfdom? Analysis of the demands of the agrarian program.

Cut-offs at the end.

in this order:

* Points 1-5 are crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

Liberation of both the well-to-do peasant and the middle peasant and the proletarian from serf oppression, liberation for a free struggle for socialism.

3

(1) 1. The workers' struggle in the cities.

(2) 2. What do the Social-Democrats want?

(3-6) 3. Wealth and poverty in the countryside.

(7) 4. Participation of the rural poor in the workers' struggle.

Uniting rural workers with urban workers.

(8) 5. Elimination of the remnants of serfdom.

(9) 6. Class struggle in the countryside.

Appendix I (draft program)

Appendix II.

4

I. The struggle of urban workers.

II. What do the Social-Democrats want?

III. Wealth and poverty, owners and workers in the countryside.

IV. Where should the middle peasant go?

V. Uniting rural workers with urban workers.

VI. Elimination of the remnants of serfdom.

VII. Class struggle in the countryside.

2. Plans and Sketches of Individual Chapters of the Pamphlet

Neither fish nor fowl

improved tools, sell plow and soul

cooperation

"high profitability"

deception = lottery

4 questions

4 questions:

landlords

rich peasants

149 {143}

3 1/2 + 3 million poor

struggle for money.

Cooperation

"highest profitability"

for small production

diligence and zeal

deception = lottery, attracting upwards

4 questions

cooperation {credit and dairy}

(German data)

1 "highest profitability"

2 "zeal", diligence, hard work – pull up the ladder

3 one will be raised, 10 will be deceived. Lottery…

* Section IV is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

V. For what improvements in the life of the peasantry are the Social-Democrats fighting?

(α) 1. The Social-Democrats are against the entire bourgeoisie, all those who live by the labor of others.

2. For all improvements in the life of the peasant that can be obtained, for any liberation from the oppression of landlords, the state, officials, the police, priests.

(β) 3. Political freedom.

** Points 4-10 are crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

(γ) Factory laws in the countryside.

*** The text from the words "working day" to the words "from the workers" is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

In addition, not only to rural workers, but also to peasants: § VI.

Answers of the Narodniks, Socialist-Revolutionaries, Social-Democrats.

§ VI in fine[78]:

α. 3 demands – β. unification of the interests of the rich and the poor – γ. further than cut-offs? depends on the rich – δ. socialist revolution – ε: it is important not to ask for much, but to take a step towards uniting the peasants

1) Agreement will reveal the interests of the rich and the poor.

2) First step: together with the rich, for the most modest demands.

3) Uniting the rural poor with the help of committees.

4) Further: the struggle for socialism.

5) Some say: not cut-offs, but all the land from the landlords.

The poor – socialism.

Rich peasants??

6) You cannot rely on rich peasants[79].

VII. Class struggle in the countryside.

1. What is class struggle? The struggle of the oppressed part of the population against the oppressors. The struggle against serfdom. – The struggle of the poor against the rich.

2. The peasant movement of 1902. The heroism of the fighters: their great beginning. We must continue. But we must analyze why they were defeated?

3. From unconsciousness, from unpreparedness. The peasants did not know what to demand. The peasants did not know who their enemy was. The peasants did not see the connection between the landlords and the government. The peasants wanted life to be fair, according to God, without knowing how to do it.

[distrust]

4. Our answer. Once again: The union of the countryside and the city against

3 demands together.

5. Practical methods of unification and struggle.

Agitation. Circles. Support of urban workers.

§ VII.

1) The peasant movement of 1902.

2) Heroism. Reprisal.

3) How to win?

4) You must understand clearly. Not God's, but human.

3 demands.

5) You must prepare an alliance with urban workers

Social-Democratic circles.

agitation (leaflets, books).

Class struggle in the countryside (distrust of rich peasants).

6) Support for workers when they start in the cities.

3. Excerpts from the "Encyclopedic Dictionary" of Brockhaus and Efron and Calculations on Land Ownership in Russia

Volume 12 "Land Ownership"

Land Ownership in Russia (Encyclopedic Dictionary)

In 49 provinces of European Russia (without the Don Cossack Host region)

The treasury owns 69.3% of its lands as forest (100 million desyatinas in the Arkhangelsk, Vologda, Olonets, and Perm provinces). 28.1% is inconvenient land and 2.6% is convenient {less than 4 million desyatinas}

The three northern provinces (Arkhangelsk, Olonets, Vologda) belong almost entirely to the treasury (97, 93, and 83% of the area of the provinces). The 2 eastern ones (Perm and Vyatka) are half (51 and 48%). In these five provinces there are 1337 million desyatinas of state land (= 88 1/2% of state lands).

Ergo[80]:

households:

76 thousand large landowners – 85.2 million desyatinas of land + 7.4 million desyatinas – of appanages 93 million

4. Distribution of Horses among Peasants in Rural Societies

1888 and 1891. 49 provinces of European Russia{144}

1893/94 38 provinces: 8,288,987 peasant households – 11,560,358 horses.

1900

Lokhtin, p. 280:

Horses in 50 provinces

1846 – 16,056,000

1861 – 15,300,000

1870 – 15,611,400

1882 – 20,015,000

1888 – 19,663,000

1898 – 17,004,300

5. Calculations and Graphic Illustrations for the Analysis of Class Groups in the Countryside

1

Agrarian system of the "peasantry"

10 million peasant households 14 million horses households

2 {145}

In total in Russia about 21 million horses

3

Land ownership (total about 250 million desyatinas)

Written in March – April 1903

First published in 1932 in Lenin Miscellany XIX

Printed from the manuscript

Plan of a Pamphlet Against the Socialist-Revolutionaries{146}

The fact of war. It is only beginning. Literary polemic. Why? Clarification of the grounds that make war inevitable.

Particular attention should be paid to theoretical, principled disagreements.

A) Half-hearted and unprincipled position between revolutionary Marxism and opportunistic criticism.

1. Article in No. 2 of the "Herald of the Russian Revolution" (editorial). Examination of it.

2. Theory of collapse. Quote p. 55–56 = denial of the economic necessity of socialism. (Trusts are forgotten.)

3. Agrarian question. Quote p. 57 ("even").

4. Theory of value. Quote p. 64. "Shaken"!

p. 66 (again "even"!)

{p. 67 and 48 = crisis of all socialism}

5. "Sharp and exclusive Marxism is receding into the realm of history" (75)!! NB

6. Zhitlovsky in "Sozialistische Monatshefte"...

* To point B. 3. Ed.

8. "Herald of the Russian Revolution" No. 2, pp. 82 and 87. "Amendments", "revision" etc. [81]

9. Σ[82] = complete lack of principle. Anyone who wants can be a Socialist-Revolutionary.

10. Complete detachment from international socialism: "originality."

B) Half-hearted and unprincipled position between Russian Marxism and Narodnaya Volya-ism, or rather: the liberal-Narodnik trend.

153 This refers to the program appeal "From the Peasant Union of the Party of Socialist-Revolutionaries to All Workers of Revolutionary Socialism in Russia," published on June 25, 1902, in the newspaper "Revolutionary Russia" No. 8. Below, in section C, point 3, Lenin refers to the same appeal.

4. Σ = a purely eclectic combination of Narodism and Marxism with the help of "criticism."

C) Half-hearted attitude to the class struggle and the workers' movement.

1. From theoretical sins, the positions move to practical ones. Their attitude to the class struggle and the workers' movement. How do they pose the question?

4. The intelligentsia and the proletariat. And the Narodnaya Volya-ists too!!! No. 3 of the "Herald of the Russian Revolution" – pp. 9–11. Special leaflet.

5. In practice, their attitude? Illustrated by "Economism." "Iskra": a long process of work, persuasion, education. "Iskra's" rejection of illusions of unity.

Cf.: Schadenfreude

+ Throwing sticks under the wheels of revolutionary Marxism.

Σ = spectator-dilettante.

6. How do they explain their difference from the Social-Democrats? No. 9, p. 4, column 2.

D) Regardless of their will, they lead to the subordination of the working class to bourgeois democracy.

1. We have examined the theoretical position of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and their attitude to the workers' movement. Σ = half-heartedness, eclecticism. Their attitude to Russian bourgeois democracy.

154 This refers to A. N. Potresov's article "The Modern Vestal Virgin. (From Studies on Modern Journalism)" under the pseudonym "St.," published in December 1901 in the journal "Zarya" No. 2–3.

3. And Mr. Struve? And the liberal-Narodnik trend? They are kowtowing to him!!! And this means kowtowing to bourgeois democracy, not explaining the class contradictions to the working class, not developing an independent socialist ideology.

4. And what does the intelligentsia + the proletariat + the peasantry mean? In practice, the intelligentsia and the peasantry represent nothing other than bourgeois democracy!!

5. And their attitude to the liberals? Return to

We have a war, not verbose reasoning: on the one hand, on the other hand.

But we understand that the liberals represent a class, that they are tenacious, that they have a social, popular movement, but the Socialist-Revolutionaries do not!!

6. L. M. was right in "Zarya" (No. 2–3): the Socialist-Revolutionaries bear their double nickname because their socialism is not at all revolutionary, and their revolutionary spirit has nothing in common with socialism. This also = leads to defeat before bourgeois democracy.

* In fine – at the end. Ed.

1) Modern countryside can support and strengthen the pressure on the government "and can, probably, more energetically than we think, completely cut off in most cases from the peasant for so many years, thanks to government espionage and oppression." "Revolutionary Russia" No. 4 (February 1902), p. 2.

3. "Socialization of the land." Bourgeois nationalization? (and its significance in a class state?) "Socialization of the land" is an empty promise (minimum!).

This is = to the Narodnaya Volya-ist "the people are ready for revolution" de facto.

4. Cooperation (instead of class struggle!) is a purely (bourgeois-) petty-bourgeois demand.

5. For the commune. Against free disposal.

6. "Narodnoye Delo"{147} No. 2, pp. 18–19. How to combine the peasant and workers' struggle?

"Narodnoye Delo" No. 2, p. 51: "simply." Unprintable.

F) Terror.

1. Polemic about Balmashov. Unprecedented.

2. Polemic about the proclamation of April 3. Quote (No. 11, p. 25 inf.){148} and the conclusion of fiction.

3. "Vpered" No. 5. Quote, No. 5, pp. 7–8

157 Lenin refers to an article (without a title) under the pseudonym "S.-R." from the hectographed periodical "Vpered" No. 5 of September 15, 1902, published in St. Petersburg by the Narodnik circle "Vpered."

* The same. Ed.

** The text marked (α) is located on the reverse side of the page in the manuscript. Ed.

158 In this paragraph, Lenin quotes the article "The Terrorist Element in Our Program," printed in June 1902 in the newspaper "Revolutionary Russia" No. 7.

159 This refers to the article "How to Respond to Government Atrocities?", printed in October 1902 in the newspaper "Revolutionary Russia" No. 12.

* The text marked ((3) is located on the reverse side of the page in the manuscript. Ed.

(G) Conclusion.

Tasks of modern revolutionaries:

α) Theoretical defense and development of revolutionary Marxism.

β) Full participation in the international ideological struggle.

γ) Development of Russian Marxism, its application, the struggle against the liberal-Narodnik trend, exposing its bourgeois and petty-bourgeois nature to the working class.

δ) Organization of the proletariat. There are a multitude of gaps. Urgent requirements.

ε) "There are masses of people and no people." Leaders must prepare the masses for an uprising.

Written in the spring of 1903

First published in 1939 in the journal "Proletarskaya Revolyutsiya" No. 1

Printed from the manuscript

Plan of an Article Against the Socialist-Revolutionaries{149}

About the Socialist-Revolutionaries (a party without a program).

* Programs, statements of worldview. Ed.

** Summa summaram – overall summary. Ed.

Written in the first half of July 1903

First published in 1939 in the journal "Proletarskaya Revolyutsiya" No. 1

Printed from the manuscript

Materials for the Second Congress of the RSDLP

1. Notes for the Report at the Second Congress of the RSDLP on the Activities of the "Iskra" Organization{150}

Protest against Credo – {151}

formation of a literary group – {152}

attempt to participate in the party congress – {153}

trips around Russia by members of the literary group – meetings in St. Petersburg, Pskov, Moscow, Nizhny, Kazan, Samara, Poltava, Kharkov, Ufa, in the Crimea, in Kiev.

Work on "Iskra" + "Zarya" from Russia.

1) February 1900 – December 1900{154}.

2) December 1900 – February 1902.

166 "Horses" is the conspiratorial name of the Baku group of Iskra-ites, who in 1901 organized the transportation of "Iskra" and Iskra literature from abroad to Russia and the printing of "Iskra" in an illegal Baku printing house. The transport went through Vienna to Persia (Tabriz), and from there the literature was transported to Baku on horses (hence the conspiratorial name of this group – "horses"). The group included L. B. Krasin, V. 3. Ketskhoveli, S. Ya. Alliluyev, V. A. Shelgunov, L. E. Galperin, and others.

3) February 1902 –

167 This refers to the organization of the transport of "Iskra" and illegal Iskra literature from abroad to Russia. The transportation of literature was carried out by special transport groups and individuals by land and sea routes.

The Latvians mentioned above are a group of Zurich Latvian students E. Rolau, E. Skubik, and others, who organized the transport of illegal literature to Russia through the Baltic States. As it turned out later, the gendarmes had information about the work of this group; the transports of Iskra publications organized by the Latvians in December 1900 and in June 1901 were confiscated.

There is no information about the work of the Polish group mentioned above.

"Suitcases" is one of the ways to transport illegal literature in travel suitcases with a false bottom.

* The lower edge of the manuscript page, where the last words of the phrase were written, is torn off. Ed.

Written in May – July, no later than 17 (30), 1903

First published in 1927 in Lenin Miscellany VI

Printed from the manuscript

2. Program of the Second Regular Congress of the RSDLP{155}

The first page of V.I. Lenin's manuscript "Program of the Second Regular Congress of the RSDLP". – 1903

A. Rules of procedure of the congress and its constitution.

B. List and order of questions to be discussed and decided at the congress.

A. Rules of procedure of the congress.

* In the manuscript, apparently a typo: the total number of bureau members planned by Lenin is 12. Ed.

** The text in parentheses is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

* Point 4, as well as point 11 in section B ("List and order of questions"), was inserted by Lenin additionally. In view of this, as well as in connection with the change in the order of points, their numbering by Lenin changed. Here is the latest version of the numbering of points.

Subsequently, Lenin crossed out point 4 and wrote after it: "ad 3" (to point 3). Ed.

* This refers to § 9 (according to the original numbering § 8). Ed.

** The text in parentheses is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

* The text in parentheses is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

* Point 4 is crossed out. An unknown hand wrote above: "Delegate reports." Ed.

** The text from the word "Approval" to the words "point by point" is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

*** The text in parentheses is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

* The text from the word ""Struggle"" to the words "and so on" is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

** The paragraph is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

** The text from the words "i.e. with the provision" to the word "decision" is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

* Near this point, an unknown hand wrote: "23. The attitude of the RSDLP to other revolutionary and opposition parties and currents existing in Russia." Before the point number, Lenin's hand wrote: "23". Ed.

** The text is crossed out by Lenin. Ed.

Written in the second half of June – the first half of July 1903

First published in 1927 in Lenin Miscellany VI

Printed from the manuscript

3. Composition of the Second Congress of the RSDLP{156}

* The figures crossed out by Lenin are given in small print in square brackets. Ed.

170 Delegates from the Tver Committee of the RSDLP were not present at the congress, as the Tver Committee was part of the Northern Union and was represented by its delegates.

171 Delegates from the Nizhny Novgorod Committee of the RSDLP did not arrive at the congress.

172 Delegates from the Caucasus had not eight votes at the congress, but six. Having corrected the zero to six, Lenin, however, did not cross out the number two he had written earlier.

The correction of the number of votes from the Caucasus is not taken into account in the final figures of this column.

173 The final figure 36 was written by Lenin instead of the original figure 32. It takes into account the corrections made by Lenin to the list in connection with the absence of delegates from the Nizhny Novgorod Committee (two votes) and the presence of six votes from the Caucasus instead of the originally recorded two, as well as the two votes from the Crimean Union additionally entered in the list.

174 The question mark was placed here by Lenin, apparently, because the two delegates who were supposed to be sent to the congress by the Russian organization of "Iskra" did not arrive.

175 The special mark of the number 2 expresses, apparently, Lenin's doubt about the consistently Iskra position of the delegates of the "Southern Worker".

176 The total final figure of 47 does not take into account the crossing out, correction and addition in the figures indicating the number of votes from the Nizhny Novgorod Committee, from the Caucasus and from the Crimean Union.

177 The final figure 36 does not take into account the correction of the number of votes from the Caucasus.

* Summa summaram – overall summary. Ed.

Written in July, before 17 (30), 1903

First published in 1927 in Lenin Miscellany VI

Printed from the manuscript

4. Diary of the Sessions of the Second Congress of the RSDLP

2 h. 55 m. Opening of the congress by Plekhanov, on behalf of the OC of the Ross. SDLP (on behalf of the former Emancipation of Labor group)

3 h. election of the bureau. The majority is for open election.

178 Nikolai Petrovich is one of the conditional nicknames of the St. Petersburg Social-Democratic Committee (Iskra), which the editors of "Iskra" used for conspiracy when corresponding with local organizations. Here, apparently, this refers to the delegate of the St. Petersburg Committee at the Second Congress of the party A. V. Shotman.

Chairman – par acclamation[83]

2 chairmen – by notes (Lenin + Ignat)

3 h. 40 – – 4 hours.

Report of the OC on the convocation of the congress.

4 h. SPB "Union of Struggle"...

The Union of Russian Social-Democrats did not receive notification about the OC.

The Voronezh Committee asked to intercede: they did not receive a list of organizations. The Voronezh Committee is not present because of this{157}. I am for the Voronezh Committee.

4 h. 05.

2. Akimov's sister (from the St. Petersburg Union of Struggle).

There was no delegate from the SPB committee in the OC. (We are the real committee and there was no delegate from us.)

I was previously a member of the Voronezh Committee. I strongly protest against the expression: "indecent" polemic.

The opposition in the committee is not "personal" – I protest...

A commission was elected{158} ((4 h. 40 m.))

to the speaker 1/2 (3 times 10 m.)

Lenin's was adopted by 24 votes (15 for Martov){159}.

7 h. (without five). Lipin's order{160}:

July 31. 2nd session.

9 h. 30 m. opened.

Lenin – answer to the Bund[84].

Akimov – for the Bund.

Lipov – Lenin did not correctly illuminate the question:

not 2 lines ("prejudgment")

[Lenin has a prejudgment of the question]

10 h. 30 m.

11 h. Koltsov's report (11. 30 end).

Statement from Baku (protest that they were never for "Struggle"){161}.

Break at Yuri's request...

12 h. – Martynov speaks for the admission of "Struggle"

Plekhanov

Akimov

3 h. 30 m. to 3 h. 50 m. Protocol of the 1st session.

4 h. 5 m. – Martyn's statement: "The OC proposes to the congress

7 h. Voronezh request.

August 1.

Third day

Fourth session

9 h. 30 opening.

9 h. 55. Lipov's report{162}.

The concept of autonomy does not say anything yet: "independence" – in what?

* To point 2. Ed.

In what is autonomy? Can it be limited in anything, listed?

We are centralists.

Autonomy is decentralized.

"Charter" {163}.

§§ § 1. След[85].

2. Unlimited by the region – (the only representative of the Jewish proletariat)

3. The Bund elects its representation to the Central Committee, the Foreign Committee, and the congress.

4. Competence: the program – the same

II supplements for itself not contradicting{164}

5. Its own congresses, its own Central Committee

6. Its own resolutions before general congresses

7. Freedom in its affairs

8. Unhindered publication in Jewish[86] and in other languages

(without the consent of the Central Committee of the Bund, do not address the Jews)

9. (a) Temporary agreements with revolutionary organizations (if there is no special "prohibition")

– informs the Central Committee of the party.

((Only for practical enterprises.

(b) With the special permission of the Central Committee of the party and permanent agreements

10. The party congress has the right to cancel all decisions of the Bund congresses, with the exception of decisions made on the basis of this constitution

11. Relations between the Central Committee of the party and parts of the Bund only with the consent of the Central Committee of the Bund

12. All the listed points are basic.

They are changed only with the mutual consent of the parts of the party

(local and regional organizations are not considered parts).

(if congresses could cancel by a simple majority, then this charter could be canceled every time).

11 h. 15 m. Martov.

5th session.

Saturday, August 1. 3 h. 10 m.

Protocol of the 2nd session.

6th session.

9 h. 35 m. Isari

Rashid-Bek

Bergman

7th session.

9 h. 40 m.

12 h. Martov (after the break).

8th session.

3 h. 20 m.

4 h. 20 m. after the break for the Bundists, made at their request.

4 h. 45 the first item on the agenda is finished.

Program

5 h. – Martynov speaks about the program.

According to Lenin, there can be no question of the working class participating in the development of ideology; the proletariat spontaneously strives for bourgeois ideology (cites "What Is to Be Done?").

Antagonism between the spontaneous movement and the intelligentsia: the antagonism of this statement with the words of Marx and Engels.

The working class spontaneously strives for scientific socialism, and not for bourgeois ideology.

5 h. 52 m. Martynov continues to speak.

Lenin's exaggerated formulation opens the door to other mistakes.

"Interest in the economic struggle is weakening" (literally – about the current state).

The movement suffers from radicalism, detachment from the class struggle of the proletariat.

Martov. 6.–12.

Nikolai Nikolaevich.

9th session.

9 h. 40 m. The protocols of the 4th session are approved.

10 h. 10 m.

Nikolai Nikolaevich

+ of modern bourgeois society

(line 9 from the top){165}.

+ on the basis of the dominance of capitalist relations of production (line 12 from the top)

Paragraph 4: + inevitably growing improvement of technology

+ and at the same time the equally inevitable growth of social capital, making the former spheres of its application tight each time

the level of exploitation increases not only from the fall in demand.

+ in addition to the direct tendency to this, depending on the cheapening of the production of labor power.

10.23 Martynov answers Martov and Nikolai Nikolaevich.

... "Through the deck, gropingly"...

Lenin does not speak of opposing tendencies, there is no speech: "goes to bourgeois ideology" [the workers' movement]

does not go, but comes from.

Plekhanov: 10 h. 40 m.

... Lenin did not speak about the philosophical foundations of the theory, but polemicized against the "Economists" (bacillus)...