1. A. Liberal Narodism and Bernsteinism. Their fusion, marriage, or merely an engagement?

And the Socialist-Revolutionaries??

6. Fog. Are there remnants of serfdom?? Both yes and no. Is the new system bourgeois?

Yes – no.

Class struggle? Yes – no.

7. Lack of principles:

There are no dogmas.

They cannot vouch for history{153}.

8. Their (the Socialist-Revolutionaries') "critique"{154}:

careful attitude toward bourgeois domination

postponement of social revolution

for an even more complete domination of capitalism

active assistance to the main enemy of socialism

long live private landed property

are the cut-offs sufficient?

the countryside without socialist propaganda

encouragement of bourgeois instincts.

9. Socialist-Revolutionaries and Liberal-Narodniks:

social revolution only a means ("a conditional concept")

neither critics nor orthodox

fathers and children are not a principled opposition{155}

political freedom – an independent good

transformation of serf dependence into bourgeois dependence = socialism of "Iskra"

the bourgeoisie does not even think about political freedom here.

* See present volume, pp. 455, 461. Ed.

10. Program{156}:

1) freedom of movement

4) peasant-democratic agrarian policy

(α) Peasant Bank

(β) state and appanage lands (γ) creation of small-scale labour farms

Written between October 29 and November 5 (November 11 and 18), 1903.

First published in 1928 in Lenin Miscellany VII

Printed from the manuscript

2{157}

A. Liberal Narodism and Bernsteinism αβγδ

B. Their engagement: separate characterisation of Narodism and Bernsteinism.

C. The agrarian program of "Osvobozhdenie". 10.

D. Its characterisation in comparison with the Social-Democratic one. 2 agrarian programs (3). 5β: + ε + ζ + η + ι

Growth.{158}

E. The Socialist-Revolutionaries? Manilovism. Novobrantsev and his Narodnik slogans.

F. Attitude of the Socialist-Revolutionaries to the 3 moments of the program. 6.

G. Their lack of a program. Lack of principles. 7.

H. Their critique. 8.

I. Fathers and children. 9.

Written between October 29 and November 5 (November 11 and 18), 1903.

First published in 1928 in Lenin Miscellany VII

Printed from the manuscript

3. Narodising Bourgeoisie and Bewildered Narodism{159}

1. The Liberal-Narodnik trend in Russia.

Its origin from classical, revolutionary Narodism.

Its characteristic features.

Its decline.

2. Bernsteinism = a new phase of West European liberalism up to the date[190]. ("A prophet is not without honour save in his own country.")

3. Rapprochement of Liberal-Narodism and Bernsteinism. L. in No. 9 (33) of "Osvobozhdenie" = formation and consolidation of liberalism in Russia (idealism, economic reformism, political liberalism).

174 Reference is made to the Bernsteinist literature cited by the author of the article "On the Agrarian Question" to support his revisionist statements about the "unscientific nature of Marxism".

4. The agrarian program of "Osvobozhdenie". Solidarity of the editorial board with L. – Completeness of the program. – Its features (the commune: renunciation of illusions; the land question – creation of small farms. Cf. David.)

5. Comparison of the Social-Democratic and liberal agrarian program

* To kindle, to fan the flames. Ed.

6. Bewildered Narodism.

I. Novobrantsev – not one of the clever equilibriists. His Narodnik slogans

To what end these slogans?

II. And the Socialist-Revolutionaries? In between (cf. 5. α, β, γ): yes – no, but the essence is the same as that of the liberals (cooperation + socialisation).

7. Lack of a program among the Socialist-Revolutionaries. Lack of principles.

8. Critique of our program by the Socialist-Revolutionaries.

They do not understand the basics.

(β) are the cut-offs sufficient?

(γ) postponement of social revolution

(δ) the countryside without socialist propaganda.

9. Fathers and children. There is no principled opposition between fathers and children – the only time they told the truth!

α. social revolution – only a means, a "conditional concept"

β. neither critics nor orthodox γ. political freedom = an independent good δ. the bourgeoisie does not even think about political freedom here

ε. transformation of serf dependence into bourgeois dependence = socialism of "Iskra"

ζ. socio-economic democratism (of "Osvobozhdenie") and parallels among the Socialist-Revolutionaries.

Two factions of bourgeois democracy.

Written between October 29 and November 6 (November 11 and 18), 1903.

First published in 1930 in Lenin Miscellany XV

Printed from the manuscript