to attract young forces: this will encourage them and make them look upon themselves as professional men of letters. And that we have a shortage of such, is clear (it is worth recalling 1) the difficulty of finding translators; 2) the shortage of internal review articles and 3) the shortage of popular literature). In the field of popular literature, "Pero" wanted to try his hand.

Possible arguments against: 1) youth; 2) the imminent (perhaps) departure to Russia; 3) a pen (without quotes) with


traces of feuilleton style, with excessive affectation, etc.

Re 1) – "Pero" is being proposed not for an independent post, but to a collegium. In it, he will become experienced. The "sense" of a party person, a faction person, he undoubtedly has, and knowledge and experience are acquired things. That he is engaged and working, this is also undoubtedly. Co-option is necessary in order to finally attach him and encourage him.

Re 2) If "Pero" gets acquainted with all the work, then maybe he won’t leave soon. If he leaves, then even then the organizational connection with the collegium, subordination to it, is not a minus, but a huge plus.

Re 3) Style deficiencies are not an important defect. It will even out. Now he accepts "amendments" silently (and not very willingly). In the collegium there will be disputes, votes, and "instructions" will take on a more formal and imperative form.

So, I propose

1) to vote for all six members of the editorial board on the issue of the full co-option of "Pero";

2) to then, if he is accepted, proceed to the final formalization of intra-editorial relations and voting, to the development of a precise charter. This is necessary for us and important for the congress.

P.S. I consider it extremely inconvenient and awkward to postpone the co-option, because it has become clear to me that there is already considerable dissatisfaction of "Pero" (of course, not expressed directly) with the fact that he is all "in the air", that he is still being treated (it seems to him) like a "youngster."

If we do not accept "Pero" immediately and he leaves, say, in a month to Russia, then I am convinced that he will understand this as our direct unwillingness to accept him into the editorial board. We can "miss out", and that would be very bad.

Sent from Paris to Geneva

First published in 1925 in Lenin Miscellany IV

Printed from the manuscript