## 1. Plan of the Report and Theses for a Resolution on Social-Democracy's Participation in a Temporary Revolutionary Government

Position of *Vperiod* in general:

1) Analysis of Plekhanov's objections. Marx 1848.

2) *Iskra* No. 93 and Bakuninists.

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

4) Resolution.

5) Conclusions.

___

Motives of the resolution:

1) The necessity of political freedom and a democratic republic.

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

3) The necessity of the proletariat's support for revolutionary democracy…][131]

4. The necessity of a temporary revolutionary government for the complete overthrow of autocracy and genuine assurance of the freedom of the Constituent Assembly.

[5) The recognition by revolutionary social-democracy of revolutionary action not only from below, but also from above.

6) The necessity of social-democracy's participation in a temporary revolutionary government in the event of the complete victory of the revolution, in the event of its leadership of the uprising.][132]

7) The bourgeois-democratic character of the transformation and the necessity of an independent position of the proletariat distinct from bourgeois democracy.

[8) The existence of an organized social-democratic workers' party, capable of open organization (with broad participation of workers), of control over the party's representatives][133]

## Resolutive Part of the Resolution

on Social-Democracy's Participation in a Temporary Revolutionary Government

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

2) To discuss in workers' assemblies our entire minimum program—not only from the general point of view, as we have discussed and should continue to discuss the maximum program, but also from the point of view of the possibility of its complete immediate implementation.

3) To recognize as possible, in the event of a victorious popular uprising, the participation of social-democracy in a temporary revolutionary government together with revolutionary bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeois democracy for the purpose of merciless struggle against all counter-revolutionary attempts, for the purpose of complete clearing of democratic ground in Russia, for the purpose of utilizing all means ensured by the government for broader organization of the working class.

## 2. Brief Outline of the Report on the Temporary Revolutionary Government

1. A strange question at first glance: the realization of a temporary revolutionary government is not so imminent. The question has been imposed upon us by literary polemics. Martyanov and his reasoning before January 9, 1905 ("Two Dictatorships," pp. 10–11). The tailism of this reasoning. The importance of clarity regarding social-democracy's aims.

2. Plekhanov's incorrect presentation of the beginning of the dispute (No. 96): he obscures Martyanovism{142}.

3. The general formulation of the question: socialist or democratic dictatorship? The absurdity of foisting the former upon us. The inevitability of the latter.

4. Plekhanov's arguments in No. 96.

See special sheets, pp. 1–6[134].

Then:

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

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

c) The resolution and its brief justification.

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

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

1) An exaggeration, that "*Vperiod* accuses *Iskra*" (column 1) in the sense that this distorts the formulation of the question. In fact, Martyanov, even before January 9, began frightening the *Vperiod* people with the necessity for them to participate in a revolutionary government in the event of a victorious uprising led by the proletariat (Martyanov, pp. 10–11). ((Martyanov and *Iskra*, NB cite NB from Engels.)) Ergo[135], it was not *Vperiod* that dragged out the question of "seizure of power" (this formulation is not ours, but *Iskra*'s. This formulation is narrow), but rather Martyanov and *Iskra*, as a way of frightening people away from a successful uprising.

2) The crudest exaggeration, that *Vperiod* called Marx and Engels "virtuosos of philistinism." Martyanov ≠ Marx!!

*Vperiod* said that the succession: autocracy – liberal constitution – democratic republic – socialist transformation – is "correct in general and on the whole," but philistinism is the limitation of oneself to the first assault [and] a secondary role, it is vulgarity. "To represent without leaps" is vulgarity. "To represent as a slowly and evenly ascending straight line" – vulgarity. Plekhanov substitutes the question.

3) In expounding the "Address"{144}, Plekhanov on this question makes a new distortion, leaving in shadow the fact that it was written precisely when the people's complete victory had already failed to materialize, when liberal bourgeoisie had already replaced autocracy, when, consequently, the revolution had already been curtailed and guillotined.

After the failure of the people's uprising, which did not bring complete victory, Marx and Engels advise the working class to organize itself and prepare. Is this perhaps an answer to the situation before the first uprising? Is this an answer to the assumption of a victorious uprising of the proletariat?? (it was precisely from such an assumption that *Iskra* and Martyanov proceeded).

4) In expounding the "Address," Plekhanov forgets to add the most important indication from Marx, that petty-bourgeois democracy in Germany in 1848 and 1848–1850 "was becoming increasingly organized," "whereas the workers' party was losing its only firm

support

foundation" ((p. 75 "Ansprache")).

Ergo: Marx establishes the greater organization of petty-bourgeois democracy, establishes that the workers' party was in 1848 in the tail of the bourgeoisie ((p. 76 "Ansprache")). Therefore, Marx directs all attention entirely to the necessity of independent organization of the proletariat, therefore he considers the predominance of the petty-bourgeois party as undoubted ((p. 78 "Ansprache")), therefore he does not see chances for the predominance of the workers' party and for its participation in a revolutionary government.

5) On the participation of the workers' party in a (temporary) revolutionary government Marx is altogether silent in the "Address" "Ansprache".

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

This is false. Marx does not touch upon this thought in its concrete formulation in relation to a temporary revolutionary government. Marx does not raise the question of the participation of social-democrats in a temporary revolutionary government, while Plekhanov depicts Marx as deciding this question with an unconditional negative.

Marx says: we, social-democrats, were all in the tail. We are organized worse; we must organize ourselves independently when petty-bourgeois democracy, in the event of the revolution's success, will be in power.

Martyanov draws the conclusion: we, social-democrats, now organized far better than revolutionary petty-bourgeois democracy in Russia and constituting unconditionally an independent party, must fear that in the event of the uprising's success we shall have to participate in a temporary revolutionary government.

Yes, comrade Plekhanov, it is one thing to be Marxist, another thing to be Martynovite.

6) Plekhanov says that the "proofs of *Vperiod* are limited to several continuously repeated words," while *Iskra* – "does not wish to criticize Marx."

Is this so?

Whose proofs are limited to "repeated words"? Is it not Plekhanov who compiled the entire baggage from "quotations"?? A pitiful baggage.

*Vperiod* does not "criticize" Marx. Mach and Avenarius – a cover for the poverty of Plekhanov's argumentation.

*Vperiod* analyzes concrete Russian conditions, of which Plekhanov said not a word: the correlation of the proletariat and the peasantry the organization of each to compare the force of petty-bourgeois democracy and social-democracy the moment before the first uprising the condition of the entire argument: a victorious uprising.

Is it not the reverse, comrade Plekhanov? Did you not limit yourselves to little words and quotations? Did not *Vperiod* give proofs of the analysis of a concrete – historical question?

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

"The political tasks of the proletariat would have been determined by them (upon correcting this error) already on the assumption that the democratic system would remain predominant during a fairly prolonged period. But precisely because of this would they have condemned even more decisively the participation of socialists in a petty-bourgeois government."

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

8) Engels to Turati.

a) There is no complete letter.

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

c) Engels proved to Turati that the transformation would be democratic, not socialist.

Nil[137] in essence!

9) "To participate in a temporary revolutionary government together with the petty bourgeoisie means to betray the proletariat…"

Yes? {1848, 1873 "Bakunisten an der Arbeit".}

From below?

From above?

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

Bakuninists.

11) *Iskra* No. 93 – if it falls to us spontaneously, we will not shy away.

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

First published in 1926 in *Leninski sbornik* V

Printed from the manuscript

## 4. Outline of a Speech on the Question of Relations between Workers and Intellectuals in Social-Democratic Organizations{145}

Outline of my speech May 3/15 (15th session).

I. It is incorrect that the bearers of revolutionary social-democratic ideas among us are predominantly intellectuals (as Vlasov said).

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

III. Vlasov said that at the head (of the splits and opposition) stand intellectuals. This is confirmed by Latvian, Lyadov, Kramarov, etc.

IV. Workers must be introduced into committees.

Written April 20 (May 3), 1905.

First published in 1926 in *Leninski sbornik* V

Printed from the manuscript

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

The resolution as a whole

a) To organize a literary-propaganda group for the elaboration of a general propaganda program and for the compilation in accordance with it of a series of popular brochures on the main questions of the party program, tactics, organization[138],

a) with particular attention to the publication of brochure literature for work among the peasantry,

b) to undertake the establishment of the publication of a popular organ in Russia,

c) to replace adopted

adopted

c) to adopt measures for the organization of mobile groups of agitators and propagandists to assist local centers{147}.

Written April 25 (May 8), 1905.

First published in 1905 in the book "Third Ordinary Congress of the RSDLP. Complete Text of the Protocols." Geneva, pub. of the CC

Printed from the manuscript