“A congress of workers or a congress of mutual aid societies?
A congress of representatives of the working class or a congress of
tradesmen?
To use — yes... But whom — the R. S.D. L. P. II.
In LEAF 11 of “Iskra” of October 7 (September 24), 1905, an article by L. Martov
(unsigned) “Liberal Treasons”.
The so-called “all-zemstvo” organization decided to conduct aid to the
starving jointly with the bureaucratic “Red Cross”.
3 See the Miscellany “Iskra for 2 years”, p. 613. Liberal professors
spoke out in favor of closing access for workers to meetings in university
buildings.
4 In Martov’s article “Liberal Treasons” we read: “Those who, like “Proletarii” or “Son of the Fatherland”, attempt to
depict the “Statute of August 6” as a victory of the moderate bourgeoisie over
the people, as the result of a deal between it and absolutism, are of course mistaken. In fact
, on August 6, it was precisely the moderate bourgeoisie that was defeated, to whom the autocracy
denied minimal political concessions. But it is true that
the decree of August 6, in connection with the cessation of the war, created a new political
situation, pushing the radical elements of society towards a more
active tactic, and its moderate elements – towards the realization of their innate
abilities for premature treasons.” “Iskra” No. 111. Miscellany
“Iskra for 2 years”, pp. 617 – 618.
5 “Social Democrat” No. 15 of October 13 (September 30), 1905. Note
“from the editors” to the article “Law of August 6, 1905.” “The editors
on the one hand, expresses solidarity with Axelrod’s tactical line
(“People’s Duma and Workers’ Congress”), on the other hand, stipulates its disagreement with the article by the Kharkov correspondent, who blurred the S.-D.
program and basically lapsed into a trade unionist understanding
of labor policy.
6 “The Workers’ Congress” is an editorial in the same No. 15 of “Social Democrat”.
At the beginning of the article, it is reported that “in December, at the initiative of the “Kharkov
Society for Mutual Assistance of Persons Engaged in Handicraft Labor,” a congress of representatives of various workers’ societies will be held.” The entire article
has a distinctly artisanal character.
In Lenin’s note “Liberal Hopes for the Duma” a correspondence from St. Petersburg of October 44 (4) is used, printed
in No. 295 of the “Frankfurter Zeitung” (4 morning edition)
of October 22 (9), 4905 under the title: “Die Wahlbewegung in
Russland” (“The Election Campaign in Russia”),

LIBERAL HOPES FOR THE DUMA
y«
LIBERAL HOPES FOR THE DUMA.
October, after 22, 1905. Geneva.]
Liberals are trying to instill optimism in the public about
the composition of the Duma. A correspondent of the Frankfurt
Gazette [(No. 293
1 Morgenblatt)] from St. Petersburg of October 14] o.s.: “Consideration
of the results of the preparatory meetings for the elections,
now taking place, leads to the conclusion that the composition of the Duma will be
far from as bad as it seemed at first. Already now it is possible
to predict with a certain probability that the actual conservative
element will hardly constitute half of the Duma. Moderate liberals and liberals have the most
chances of being elected, while the chances of radicals are much less favorable, although even they
can be called comparatively good from the point of view of the
pessimism with which the radicals viewed the future back in August.
It can hardly be doubted that the radicals will be represented in the Duma not too weakly. The only question is how
much they will succeed in leading along ([ins Schlepptau nehmen]) the
liberals and moderate liberals, for only if these three elements act cohesively against the conservative core, is a constituent assembly secured.)>
The radicals are undoubtedly the Constitutional Democrats. Their candidates in St. Petersburg are
Nabokov, Kedrin, Vinaver. The “moderate liberals” are not defined by the author of the
correspondence with any degree of precision, but among the
candidates are named Fedorov (actually a conservative, “but he
could also be supported by liberals”!) and Nikitin (a right-wing candidate,
at the same time a moderately liberal candidate).
Thus, a constituent assembly is “secured” if both liberals and moderate liberals are subordinated to the leadership of the “radical”
liberationists... [There’s nothing to say^ Truly, they are grasping “at a straw”.
More curious, however, is their blindness in the sense that even if
the majority of the State Duma votes for a constituent assembly, this latter is in fact not yet “secured”, but only a decisive revolutionary struggle for it is secured. The gentlemen of the Constitutional Democrats want to
[in advance] suck two mother cows: both autocratic (legal opposition in the legal Duma) and revolutionary (“we plowed” in favor of the constituent] assembly).