Date: 1905-02-10
Source: ru:PSS/v10

Plan of the Article "Social-Democracy and the Provisional Revolutionary Government"

A Sample of Confusion

On the Question of the Provisional Government

1. The revival of the revolutionary movement has been marked by a revival of the question of the provisional government (and the participation of Social-Democrats in it).

2. It would seem not so close – but the "danger" seemed so great to the tail-enders that Martynov dedicated a pamphlet to it.

Clarity is needed in such a question.

3. Martynov's thoughts and their vulgarity.

141 Refers to G. Gapon's "Open Letter to the Socialist Parties of Russia," published in No. 7 of "Vpered" on February 21 (8) and in No. 87 of "Iskra" on February 10, 1905. The letter spoke of the need for a militant agreement of all socialist parties of Russia against Tsarism. Lenin gave a response to this letter in the leading article of No. 7 of "Vpered" under the title "On a Militant Agreement for Insurrection" (see Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 9, pp. 274–282). "Iskra," however, limited itself to an editorial note to the "Open Letter...": "Our attitude to the questions raised in the letter is clarified in the leading article in the same issue." But the leading article "March Separately, Strike Together" also did not give an answer to the questions raised in the letter.

It later became known that Gapon was a provocateur, an agent of the Tsarist secret police.

4. Taedium vitae[112] of Parvus: in leaflets, in "Iskra," in the preface to Trotsky, he "rebels."

5. Precisely because he "rebels," he overdid it.

6. Results. Our organization is 1/1000. Even increased a hundredfold – it will not justify Martynov's reactionary fears. The program is a class position.

The Revolutionary Dictatorship in the Democratic Revolution.

Written in March, before March 23 (April 5), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

Materials for the Article "The Revolutionary Democratic Dictatorship of the Proletariat and the Peasantry"

1. Notes on the Feuilleton No. 93 of "Iskra"

Compare "Iskra" No. 93, feuilleton – we are only from below, not from above.

A separate article should be written on this topic. To show that a revolutionary who limits himself in a revolutionary epoch to activity only from below, who refuses pressure from above, eo ipso[113] renounces the revolution.

Two types of bourgeois development or revolutionary exit from the feudal ancien régime[114] are conceivable:

1) through concessions from above, through reductions, discounts, subtractions

2) through transformation from below, the positive introduction of a new order...

2. Article Plan

More on the Provisional Government

1. Clarity is needed in revolutionary goals. Obscuration was started by Martynov before January 9. Not an exaggeration of individual aspects of the movement (always possible), but dragging back.

2. Formulation of the question: (1) Is the participation of Social-Democrats in the provisional government permissible? Yes ("Vpered"), no ("Iskra"). (2) Is the participation of Social-Democrats together with the revolutionary democracy in the government of the revolutionary democratic dictatorship permissible? Yes ("Vpered"), no ("Iskra").

"Jauresism" – "Jacobinism" (tantum mutatus ab illo![115]).

Seriousness of the question.

3. Arguments of "Iskra":

the bourgeois order is sanctified: police, prisons, credit – unemployment etc.

(1) "to defile one's lips with the combination of words 'long live!' and the government."

{Phrase}

vulgar Jauresism.

to implement the program-maximum.

the consciousness of the bourgeoisie will not allow [contra Baku.]

it is more convenient to push from the side.

4. Its mistakes:

misunderstanding of the military conditions of the task and the moment. Kurz[116] = the struggle for a republic.

For or against? Do you "sanctify"?

a non-dialectical understanding of the "sanctification" of the bourgeois order, prisons, the army etc. Ich stimme rückwärts, nicht vorwärts zu…[117]

"Strike together" – and kill together? Finish off? Fight off? Peripeteia of the struggle: "the run of the true love is never smooth…" [118]

"Jauresism": learned, but did not understand. Memorized, but did not think through.

The letter, but not the meaning, was assimilated. Is it a principle? (Cf. Paris. 1900){138}.

Program-minimum and maximum. Is the proletariat sober?

5. The real danger: forgetting the tasks of the independent organization and independent struggle of the proletariat.

This is absolutely certain.

Will participation in the provisional government hinder this? Freedom of association? Means of agitation? The press? The convenience of resigning under certain conditions.

(2) The difference between (α) the provisional revolutionary government and (β) the revolutionary dictatorship (created by "Iskra") = scholasticism, α = legal form, β = class essence. On the one hand, α is impossible without β. On the other hand, β is inevitably temporary (either a transition to a bourgeois dictatorship, to the defeat of the proletariat, or to a socialist dictatorship).

Tactical caution. To prepare, to unite ranks, not losschlagen gedankenlos (Draufgänger)[119], not "more revolutionary than everyone else"...

Is there a revolutionary democracy? Of course, yes (L. Martov is right contra Trotsky and Parvus and Trotsky). L. Martov even believes in vain Trotsky that the revolutionary democracy is only "growing up," and the proletariat is growing. Rather vice versa[120] (the legal press, the broad intelligentsia, its connection with the peasantry etc. will be restored sehr bald[121]).

"Abnormal people" ("Frankfurter Zeitung"). Baku. All legal liberals who are only honest – ready revolutionary democrats, all the influence of honest writers, conscientious lawyers, decent teachers, doctors, etc. and etc...

Bessere Einsicht[122] of "Iskra": Revolution in Permanenz, this is the revolutionary dictatorship.

"More revolutionary than everyone else." And the Socialist-Revolutionaries? The struggle of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Social-Democrats. It may very well be that the Social-Democrats will have to leave the revolutionary government of the Socialist-Revolutionaries and stand in opposition to "revolutionary adventurism," waiting for their Abwirtschaften[123]... (The inevitability of the revolutionary democrats being colored as Socialist-Revolutionaries, taking the Socialist-Revolutionaries as a type.) Here, do not tie your hands in any case. The organization and discipline of the proletariat, the "adventurism" and inconstancy of the revolutionary intelligentsia and the revolutionary petty bourgeoisie...

Written in March, before March 30 (April 12), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

Plans for the Article "The Agrarian Program of the Liberals"

1

2 main questions about the agrarian program of the liberals:

I. analysis of individual points – — —

II. general conclusions. Meaning. The peculiarity of Russia is clear (landowners for agrarian reform).

What is this peculiarity?

(α) in the socialist nature of Russian agrarian life?

(β) in the bourgeois-democratic essence of agrarian transformation.

That is the question[124].

Now it is becoming clearer that the Social-Democrats were right in asserting (5). (Contra Narodniks and Socialist-Revolutionaries.)

Nil[125] about rural workers.

Nil transforming the rural system: only the movement of a small layer of petty-bourgeois farms upward to "interest" them in the social order.

Entirely within the framework of "benevolent guardianship," "wise concessions," Shidlovsky commissions, enticements, etc.

The crux: peasant committees and the revolutionary dictatorship...

Results:

they want to sell what they threaten to take.

Nil definite

the bureaucratic nature of all reforms, fear of the revolutionary initiative of the peasantry.

2

The Agrarian Program of the Liberals

1. L.'s article in "Osvobozhdeniye." Now the program of the Zemstvo congress in Moscow.

2. "Fundamental transformation"... Quoad[126] fundamental?

Not so much consciousness as instinct. What is the essence of the contradiction? – in estate, serfdom, labor service, bondage. Introduction of the village into the conditions of bourgeois economy (wails of the Socialist-Revolutionaries etc. on this score).

3. Allotments from privately owned lands and redemption.

(Comes from the landowners! Good for nothing. It is better to sell when they threaten to take. Awareness of the economic groundlessness of many privately owned estates. Culture in the hands of the "muzhik."

To save the essential in the power of the landowners by concessions – their program.

– to finish off the power of the landowners – the "program" of the peasants)...

Cut-offs, expropriation...

4. State and appanage lands. Part of the appanage (NB) (they are afraid!).

And the church lands?

"Exploitation of it in the interests of the working population"...

("Narodnik-leaning bourgeoisie.")

5. "Regulation of rent." Cf. with our agrarian program...

6. "Public-state intermediary commissions."

The crux! Why state? Cf. peasant committees.

What does "public" mean?

7. Resettlement, dispersal, banks, cooperation {liberals and Socialist-Revolutionaries – comparison...}

8. Land surveying legislation. Businesslike. Quid est re vera?[127] = Development of private property and farming, capitalist economy (against strip farming etc.). Arrondirung…[128]

9. Summa summarum[129]: completion, finalization of the bourgeois democratization of the village with the preservation of everything possible from the landowners' power.

10. Cf. "Iskra" No. 3 {the agrarian question will come forward}

|| on the agenda ||{139}

11. Cf. Marx über Kriege. Our line = support, hand in hand, development, pushing, introducing political consciousness, emphasizing the revolutionary-democratic character, preserving class distinctiveness, organizing and educating the rural proletariat...

Written in April, before April 7 (20), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

Plan of the May Day Leaflet

1. "Spring" of words and the abomination of deeds.

2. Bulygin's deception.

3. War and the collapse of the government system.

4. Ruin, hunger, cholera...

5. St. Petersburg, Riga, Warsaw etc. 9.1.

6. Baku and the formidable anti-Jewish movement.

7. Revolutionary strike and revolutionary movement 9.1. and after. Revolution!

8. Peasant movement. Its suppression and its goals.

9. Constituent Assembly and Provisional Revolutionary Government.

10. Struggle for a republic and all democratic freedoms.

11. Proletarian struggle for a republic and for socialism.

12. The revolutionary Russian proletariat at the head of the world revolutionary proletariat.

1. V. in general.

What have they brought it to? 1–4.

Revolutionary movement. 5 and 7.

Government persecution. 6.

Peasant movement.

8. Armed uprising.

Goals of the struggle. 9–11.

0. May Day in general.

A. Beginning of the revolution 1–6.

B. Struggle of workers and peasants 7–8.

C. Goals of the struggle 9–11.

D. World-historical significance of the Russian revolution 12.

Written in April, before April 12 (25), 1905.

First published in 1931 in Lenin Miscellany XVI.

Printed from the manuscript.

Materials for the Third Congress of the RSDLP

1. On the Draft Agenda of the Congress

1. Initial Draft Agenda of the Congress

144 The numbers refer to the total number of possible votes at the congress. According to the list published in No. 89 of "Iskra" on February 24, 1905, there were 33 full-fledged committees of the RSDLP. Each of them had 2 votes, for a total of 66 votes. According to the organizational charter of the RSDLP, adopted at the Second Congress of the party, the central institutions (the Party Council, the Central Organ, and the Central Committee) had 9 votes. Thus, the committees and central institutions had 75 votes. Based on later data, the total number of votes was determined by the congress to be 71: 62 votes for 31 full-fledged organizations and 9 votes for the central institutions of the party. Hence the figures given by Lenin: 75 – the expected number and 71 – the final number of full-fledged votes.

2. GROUPING OF AGENDA ITEMS OF THE CONGRESS

145 During the discussion of the agenda, 7 items were outlined for rubric I (Tactical Issues) and 3, and then 4 items, for rubric II (Organizational Issues). – 376.

* The text typed in small print in square brackets is crossed out in the manuscript. Ed.

146 The calculation "21" means the number of items in the detailed agenda.

3. Draft Agenda of the Congress with Indication of Speakers

Draft Agenda of the Third Party Congress

A) Tactical Issues.

1. Armed Uprising.

Werner, Voinov{140}.

2. Preparation for the Open Political Action of the Social-Democrats.

Schmidt.

3. The Attitude of the Social-Democrats to the Policy of the Government on the Eve of the Coup and at the Very Moment of It.

Schmidt, Lenin.

4. Support for the Peasant Movement.

Lenin, Schmidt.

B) Attitude to Other Parties and Currents.

5. Attitude to the Seceded Part of the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party.

6. Attitude to the National Social-Democratic Parties and Organizations of Russia.

[7] 6. Attitude to the Liberals.

[8] 7. Attitude to the Socialist-Revolutionaries.

Lenin, Werner.

C) Organization of the Party.

[9] 8. Party Charter.

Werner.

[10] 9. The Relationship of Workers and Intellectuals in Party Organizations.

Werner.

D) Internal Party Work.

[11] 10. Reports of Delegates.

[12] 11. Improvement of Agitation and Propaganda.

13. May Day.

[14] 12. Election of Officials.

[15] 13. Procedure for Announcing Protocols and Assuming Office by New Institutions.

Written on April 13 (26), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

2. Remarks on Rumyantsev's Draft Resolution on the Question of the Open Political Action of the RSDLP

In my opinion, the resolution should be redone as follows:

Motives:

(1) to state that the open action of political parties etc. is actually beginning under the pressure of the revolutionary movement.

(2) that the liberals are going especially far in this, their actual privilege (Schmidt's point 1).

(3) that the workers have a tremendous desire for the same (Schmidt's point 2).

– conclusions:

(1) not to miss a single opportunity for open action, organizing the workers in the action itself into an independent force;

(2) to utilize even the slightest legal forms, trying to subordinate legal workers' organizations to the influence of the Social-Democrats.

(3) to propagate in all workers' organizations and among the widest possible masses the need to take practical measures to create, along with our conspiratorial apparatus, an apparatus for open political action.

[+ 0) The beginning of the actual conquest of freedom of activity.

3) The need to prepare for a possible transition in the near future from the usual exclusively conspiratorial forms of activity to open forms.

___

Resolves:

(1) not to miss an opportunity... open actions – individual organizations are developed on the spot

(2) utilization of even partial legal forms of organization, trying to subordinate them to the influence of the Social-Democrats.][130]

Written between April 16 and 19 (April 20 and May 2), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

3. Materials for the Report on the Participation of Social-Democracy in the Provisional Revolutionary Government{141}

1. Plan of the Report and Theses for the Resolution on the Participation of Social-Democracy in the Provisional Revolutionary Government

The position of "Vpered" in general:

1) Analysis of Plekhanov's objections.}

Marx 1848.

2) "Iskra" No. 93 and the Bakuninists.

3) "Iskra" No. 93 ("Revolution in Permanenz").???

4) Resolution.

5) Results.

___

Motives of the resolution:

1) The need for political freedom and a democratic republic.

[2) The presence of a revolutionary bourgeois and petty-bourgeois democracy, capable of and beginning to fight for it.

3) The need for the proletariat to support the revolutionary democracy...][131]

4. The need for a provisional revolutionary government for the complete overthrow of the autocracy and the actual guarantee of the freedom of the constituent assembly.

[5) Recognition by the revolutionary Social-Democracy of revolutionary action not only from below, but also from above.

6) The need for the participation of the Social-Democracy in the provisional revolutionary government in the event of a complete victory of the revolution, in the event of its leadership of the uprising.][132]

7) The bourgeois-democratic character of the revolution and the need for an independent position of the proletariat as opposed to the bourgeois democracy.

[8) The presence of an organized Social-Democratic workers' party, capable of open organization (with the broad participation of workers), of control over the representatives of the party][133]

Resolutive Part of the Resolution

on the Participation of Social-Democracy in the Provisional Revolutionary Government

1) Propaganda and agitation of the idea of a provisional revolutionary government as a necessary component of a victorious revolution.

2) To discuss in workers' meetings our entire program-minimum not only from a general point of view, as we have discussed and should discuss the program-maximum, but also from the point of view of the possibility of its immediate full implementation.

3) To recognize as possible, in the event of a victorious popular uprising, the participation of the Social-Democracy in the provisional revolutionary government together with the revolutionary bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeois democracy for the purpose of a ruthless struggle against all counter-revolutionary attempts, for the purpose of completely clearing the democratic soil in Russia, for the purpose of using all the means provided by the government for a broader organization of the working class.

2. Brief Synopsis of the Report on the Provisional Revolutionary Government

1. A strange formulation of the question at first glance: the implementation of the provisional revolutionary government is not so close. The question was imposed on us by literary polemics. Martynov and his reasoning before January 9, 1905 ("Two Dictatorships," pp. 10–11).

The tail-endism of this reasoning.

The importance of clarity of the goals of the Social-Democracy.

2. Incorrect depiction of the beginning of the dispute by Plekhanov (No. 96): obscures the Martynovism{142}.

3. General formulation of the question: socialist or democratic dictatorship? The absurdity of substituting the first.

The inevitability of the second.

4. Plekhanov's arguments in No. 96.

See special leaflets pp. 1–6[134].

Then.

a) Two forces: revolution and counter-revolution. Their armed struggle, the changing fate of the struggle, the inevitability of the struggle both from below and from above.

b) Engels in 1849, quotes from the description of the Reichsverfassungskampagne{143}.

c) Resolution and its brief motivation.

3. Remarks on Plekhanov's Article "On the Question of the Seizure of Power"

From Plekhanov's article in No. 96, note:

1) The distortion that "'Vpered' accuses 'Iskra'" (column 1) in the sense that this distorts the formulation of the question.

In fact, Martynov, even before January 9, began to frighten the Vperedovites with the need for them to participate in the revolutionary government in the event of a victorious uprising led by the proletariat (Martynov, pp. 10–11). ((Martynov and "Iskra," NB to quote NB from Engels.))

Ergo[135], it was not "Vpered" that began to drag out the question of the "seizure of power" (this formulation is not ours, but "Iskra's." This formulation is narrow), but Martynov and "Iskra" as a deterrent to a successful uprising.

2) The crudest distortion that "Vpered" called Marx and Engels "virtuosos of philistinism." Martynov is not = Marx!!

"Vpered" said that the change: autocracy – liberal constitution – democratic republic – socialist revolution – is "true in general," but philistinism is limiting oneself to the first attack by a secondary role, is vulgarity. "To imagine without leaps" is vulgarity. "To imagine in the form of a slowly and evenly ascending straight line" is vulgarity. Plekhanov substitutes the question.

3) In presenting the "Address"{144}, Plekhanov makes a new distortion on this issue, leaving in the shadows that it was written precisely when the complete victory of the people had already failed, when the liberal bourgeoisie had already replaced the autocracy, when, consequently, the revolution had already been curtailed and evaded.

After the failure of the popular uprising, which did not give a complete victory, Marx and Engels advise the working class to organize and prepare. Is this really an answer to the situation before the first uprising? Is this really an answer to the assumption of a victorious uprising of the proletariat?? (and it was from such an assumption that "Iskra" and Martynov proceeded).

4) In presenting the "Address," Plekhanov forgets to add Marx's most important indication that the petty-bourgeois democracy in Germany in 1848 and 1848–1850 "was increasingly organized," "while the workers' party was losing its only solid

support

basis" ((S. 75 "Ansprache")).

Ergo: Marx states the greater organization of the petty-bourgeois democracy, states that the workers' party was in the tail of the bourgeoisie in 1848 ((S. 76 "Ansprache")). Therefore, Marx pays all attention entirely to the need for the independent organization of the proletariat, therefore he considers the predominance of the petty-bourgeois party to be undoubted ((S. 78 "Ansprache")), therefore he sees no chances for the predominance of the workers' party and for its participation in the revolutionary government.

5) Marx is generally silent about the participation of the workers' party in the (provisional) revolutionary government

in the "Address"

in the "Ansprache."

Therefore, Plekhanov is completely wrong when he asserts that Marx "did not even allow the thought that the political representatives of the proletariat could work together with the representatives of the petty bourgeoisie to create a new social order."

This is incorrect. Marx does not touch on this thought in its concrete formulation in relation to the provisional revolutionary government. Marx does not raise the question of the participation of Social-Democrats in the provisional revolutionary government, but Plekhanov depicts that Marx resolves this question unconditionally negatively.

Marx says: we, the Social-Democrats, were all in the tail. We are organized worse, we need to organize independently, when the petty-bourgeois democracy will be in power in the event of the success of the revolution.

Martynov concludes: we, the Social-Democrats, who are now organized much better than the revolutionary petty-bourgeois democracy in Russia and who constitute an absolutely independent party, should be afraid that in the event of the success of the uprising we will have to participate in the provisional revolutionary government.

Yes, Comrade Plekhanov, Marxism is one thing, Martynovism is another.

6) Plekhanov says that "'Vpered's' evidence is limited to a few constantly repeated words," and "Iskra" – "does not want to criticize Marx."

Is this so?

Whose evidence is limited to "repeated words"? Hasn't Plekhanov made up his entire baggage from "quotes"?? A miserable baggage.

"Vpered" does not "criticize" Marx. Mach and Avenarius are a cover for the poverty of Plekhanov's argumentation.

"Vpered" analyzes the specific Russian conditions, about which Plekhanov did not say a word: the ratio of the proletariat and the peasantry

the organization of both

compare the strength of the petty-bourgeois democracy and the Social-Democracy

the moment before the first uprising

the condition of the entire reasoning: a victorious uprising.

Isn't it the other way around, Comrade Plekhanov? Haven't you limited yourself to words and quotes? Hasn't "Vpered" given evidence of the analysis of a concrete – historical question?

7) Plekhanov says that Marx and Engels changed their views only in that the socialist revolution is not yet close.

"The political tasks of the proletariat would have been determined by them (when correcting this mistake) already on the assumption that the democratic system would remain dominant for a rather long period. But precisely because of this, they would have condemned even more decisively the participation of socialists in the petty-bourgeois government."

Cur?[136] Plekhanov confuses here the democratic and socialist dictatorship!!

8) Engels to Turati.

a) There is no entire letter.

b) Turati = Millerand. Portfolio. Is the situation the same?

c) Engels proved to Turati that the revolution will be democratic, not socialist.

Nil[137] in essence!

9) "To participate in the provisional revolutionary government together with the petty bourgeoisie means betraying the proletariat...".

Really? {1848, 1873 "Bakuninists at Work".}

From below?

From above?

10) "Iskra" No. 93 (from below).

Bakuninists.

11) "Iskra" No. 93 – if it is spontaneously obtained, then we will not back down.

Written in April, before April 18 (May 1), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

4. Synopsis of the Speech on the Question of the Relations of Workers and Intellectuals in Social-Democratic Organizations{145}

Synopsis of my speech 3/V (15th session).

I. It is incorrect that the bearers of revolutionary Social-Democratic ideas in our country are predominantly intellectuals (as Vlasov said).

II. It is incorrect that the elective principle will not give greater awareness to the periphery etc. (as Vlasov said).

III. Vlasov said that intellectuals are at the head (of splits and opposition). Latyshev, Lyadov, Kramolnikov etc. confirm.

IV. Workers must be introduced into the committees.

Written on April 20 (May 3), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

5. Amendments to the Draft Resolution on Propaganda and Agitation{146}

Resolution as a whole

a) To organize a literary and propaganda group to develop a general propaganda program and to compile, in relation to it, a series of popular brochures on the main issues of the party program, tactics, organization[138],

a) while paying special attention to the publication of brochure literature for work among the peasantry,

b) to take care of setting up the publication of a popular organ in Russia,

point c) to replace adopted

adopted

c) to take measures to organize traveling groups of agitators and propagandists to assist local centers{147}.

Written on April 25 (May 8), 1905.

First published in 1905 in the book "The Third Regular Congress of the RSDLP. Complete Text of the Protocols." Geneva, published by the Central Committee.

Printed from the manuscript.

Plan of the Report on the Third Congress of the RSDLP and Its Decisions{148}

The Third Congress and Its Decisions

A) Why did the Congress and the Conference happen?

B) The organizational question at the Congress and at the Conference.

C) Tactical questions "~" ~ "~" ~ "~" ~ "~" ~ "~" ~ "~"

B) Three main points of the organizational work of the Third Congress:

Bb)

1) § 1.

2) "Unity of Command."

3) "Guarantee of the Rights of the Minority."

Bv) Organizational Charter of the Conference.

(1) "collectives" leading (?).

(2) "local organization" (? and § 1?).

(3) CC and EC – and OC

(4) Conditions of agreement?

C)

4 1. Provisional Revolutionary Government.

3 2. Armed Uprising.

2 3. The Current Political Situation.

1 4. Attitude to Other Revolutionary and Opposition Parties.

5. 5. Executive Commission.

4. 4. CC = PC + representatives of regional committees = conference.

3. 3. regional committees = elected by regional congresses.

2. 2. regional congresses = delegates of leading collectives.

Conditions of the Mensheviks

"the entire party must be represented, i.e., the mass of its actual members"

"is it possible to decide tactical issues without prior discussion by the entire party? Isn't it frivolous... armed uprising... even in the literature, disputes have only just begun" (p. 10)

"we have heard" (pp. 10–11).

Written in May, later than May 15 (28), 1905.

First published in 1931 in Lenin Miscellany XVI.

Printed from the manuscript.

Notes for the Article "On the Provisional Revolutionary Government"

1. Does it follow from Marx's "Address" to the Communists in March 1850 that Marx did not allow the thought of the participation of communists in the provisional revolutionary government, the era of the democratic revolution, together with the bourgeoisie?

2. Is it true that Marx in the indicated "Address" did not even raise the question of the participation of Social-Democrats in the provisional revolutionary government at all?

3. Is there a difference between: "not allowing the thought of participation" and "not raising the question of participation"?

4. Is it true that in the indicated "Address" Marx himself noted the strengthening of the petty-bourgeois democratic party and the weakening of the workers' communist party in recent times?

5…[139]

Written in May, before May 21 (June 3), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

Notes for the Article "Revolutionary Struggle and Liberal Brokerage"

1

"Constitutional-Democratic" Party... Hmm! Quid est? What does this combination of words mean? Can there be a democratic system of government without a constitution?? From whom do they separate themselves? From Shilov and Co. – those are against the constitution. But are those democrats??

The Constitutional-Democratic also separates itself from the Republican-Democratic. Constitutional-Democratic means monarchically-democratic or monarchically-constitutional.

But both sound bad, inde[140] description... Euphemism!

Freedom of language – freedom of groupings – substantiation on social force kommt später[141]...

2. Honeyed Speeches

Program of Organized Liberals

"The people must take the resolution of the crisis into their own hands..."

The people "together with other social groups" (NB)

Convocation of the Constituent Assembly (by whom?)

Monarchy – [not a peep neither for nor against]

Separation of church from state (nil[142])

"Liberation of church societies from state guardianship"

[and from state financial assistance?]

"People's Representation"

One chamber? Nil.

"Cultural self-determination of nationalities" [but not political!]

Financial reform: "gradually...":

!! "Rejection of patronage of individual enterprises and entrepreneurs and increased patronage of the development of the productive forces of the people...

Flourishing of industry."

Agrarian program by whom?

"endowment..." with compensation to owners.

Rental law... "in the interests of the working people"

the right to strike etc. for workers.

Labor legislation...

"These decisions are binding only insofar as political conditions are unchanged."

– — – "temporary and conditional element"

– — – "real politics."

"...More than sufficient...".

Written in May, before May 27 (June 9), 1905.

First published in 1926 in Lenin Miscellany V.

Printed from the manuscript.

Outline of the Party Split{149}

157 Refers to the resolutions of the "Unification" Congress of Foreign Organizations of the RSDLP, which took place in September 1901. The congress was attended by 6 members of the foreign organization of "Iskra" and "Zarya" (V. I. Lenin, N. K. Krupskaya, L. Martov, and others), 8 members of the "Social-Democrat" organization (including 3 members of the "Emancipation of Labor" group: G. V. Plekhanov, P. B. Axelrod, V. I. Zasulich), 16 members of the "Union of Russian Social-Democrats" (including 5 members of the foreign committee of the Bund), and 3 members of the "Struggle" group. V. I. Lenin, who was present under the pseudonym "Frey," gave a vivid speech at the congress, denouncing the opportunistic actions of the "Union." After the opportunistic amendments and additions of the "Union of Russian Social-Democrats" to the resolution condemning opportunism and recognizing the need to unite all Social-Democratic forces in Russia on the basis of the revolutionary principles of "Iskra" were announced at the congress, the revolutionary part of the congress (members of the organizations "Iskra" and "Zarya," "Social-Democrat") announced a statement on the impossibility of unification and left the congress. On the initiative of V. I. Lenin, these organizations united in October 1901 into the "Foreign League of Russian Revolutionary Social-Democracy."

158 Refers to the grouping of votes at the Second Congress of the RSDLP, which took place from July 17 (30) to August 10 (23), 1903. There were a total of 43 delegates at the congress, with 51 votes. Of these: 24 votes – Iskraites of the majority, 9 – Iskraites of the minority, 10 – "swamp," and 8 – anti-Iskraites (3 Economists and 5 Bundists). For a more detailed account of the overall picture of the struggle at the congress, see V. I. Lenin. Collected Works, 5th ed., vol. 8, pp. 321–335.

159 August 10 (23), 1903, the Second Congress of the RSDLP ended. August 15 (28), No. 46 of the newspaper "Iskra" was published, in the editing of which V. I. Lenin and G. V. Plekhanov took part. It has not been possible to establish exactly what fact V. I. Lenin meant when indicating the date August 13 (26). On November 13 (26), Plekhanov co-opted the Mensheviks Axelrod, Martov, Zasulich, and Potresov into the editorial