V. I.

Lenin

On Convening an Extraordinary Party Congress [2]

Bothissues of the Central Committee’s Sotsial-Demokrat contain
articles by Plekhanov and Martov against the calling of an extraordinary
congress. These articles are written in such an angry and excited tone, are so
saturated with bitterness, irritation, personal insinuations and suspicion that
they immediately recall the atmosphere of the worst period of émigré
squabbles. By publishing these and only these articles on the Congress
in its own journal, the Central Committee of our Party puts itself in
a very unseemly position. Just imagine: the responsible ministry of a
democratically organised working-class party is absolutely beside itself and
loses all self-control because there is agitation for another congress! Why, it
is simply indecent, comrades. By raging and fuming against agitation for the
revision of your man dates and your tactics you are strongly
condemning your selves.

If any one in favour of a congress took pleasure in being malicious he could wish for nothing better than to have the articles of
Plekhanov and Martov reprinted and widely distributed!

Butwhy is opposition to a congress expressed in the name of the Central
Committee by people who can only talk in an injured, almost sobbing tone?
Because the two main facts which made agitation for another congress inevitable
are too clear and simple. One of these facts concerns the composition of the
Party, the other concerns its tactics.

Atthe time of the Unity Congress our Party membership consisted of 13,000
Bolsheviks and 18,000 Mensheviks. The Central Committee, and the Central Organ
even more so, express the opinion of the 18,000. Now 14,000 Letts, 26,000 Poles and 33,000 Bundists have joined the

Party. [1]

The leading article in
Sotsial-Demokrat , No. 1, unequivocally admits in two places that at
the present time both factions in the Party are about equal in size. This
opinion is evidently arrived at by classifying the Poles and Letts as Bolsheviks
and the Bundists as Mensheviks. Let us assume that it is correct to classify the
Bund as Menshevik. But even then it is an obvious and a crying anomaly that the
Menshevik Central Committee should represent the whole of our Party
(the Central Committee consists of seven Mensheviks, three Bolsheviks, one Lett
and two Bundists; one Pole has the rights of a member of the Central Organ;
moreover, on all political questions another five Mensheviks, the editors of the
Central Organ, have the right to speak and vote).

Asregards tactics—during the five or six months that have elapsed since
the last Congress the Party has passed through two important periods in our
revolution: the period of the Duma and the “Cabinet of the dissolution of
the Duma”. The Duma tactics of our Central Committee amounted to
supporting the (Cadet) Duma as a whole. These tactics reached their apogee in
the slogan supporting the demand for the appointment of a Duma (i.e., Cadet)
Cabinet. The majority of the Party rejected these tactics and this slogan; that
is a fact. During the Duma period the Social-Democratic Party combated
the tactics of its own Central Committee. Comment on this fact and
discussion of its implications are superfluous.

Further,after the dissolution of the Duma, the Central Committee declared in
favour of organising partial mass expressions of protest. The general tactical
slogan became:

for the Duma as an organ of power which will convene the constituent
assembly. Again, it is an indisputable historical fact that the vast majority of
the Party membership accept ed neither this particular slogan nor the general
tactics of the Central Committee. Yet anyone who carefully reads

No. 1 and No. 2 of Sotsial-Demokrat cannot fail to see that these general tactics are there defended, justified and
substantiated (for the Duma as a lever for convening a constituent assembly;
the Cadets as the urban bourgeoisie which is progressive in comparison
with the peasantry, and so forth).

Henceit is clear that if there is a new Duma campaign the Party will have to
fight against the Central Committee’s Duma slogans; and if revolutionary actions
take place in the near future, the forces will be split and the struggle will be
disorganised, because the Central Committee does not represent the will of the
majority of the Party membership. Hence, any delay in convening the next Party
Congress not only at present directly contravenes the whole spirit and meaning
of the democratic organisation of the Party, but will also prove a most
dangerous obstacle in the forthcoming Duma and general revolutionary struggle
of the proletariat.

P.S.
Nos. 3 to 5 of Sotsial-Demokrat , which have come out since this
article was written, confirm all that we say even more strongly. It transpires
that on the question of electoral agreements there is a complete split among the
Mensheviks, and their Central Committee is oscillating between Martov and
Cherevanin. Martov has publicly refuted Cherevanin. Plekhanov went off to write
for a Cadet newspaper in order to support Cherevanin. The leading article in
No. 4 of Sotsial-Demokrat proves that the Central Committee is already
preparing once again, in opposition to the Party, to advance its slogans of
supporting the Duma as a whole and of supporting the demand for the appointment
of a Duma Cabinet.

---
Notes:
[1]
Tovarishch of October 11 gives new figures alleged to have
been obtained from the Central Committee, but which, however, do not in the
main alter the relative proportions. According to these figures our Party
now has about 150,000 members: 33,000 of them are Bolsheviks; 43,000
Mensheviks; 13,000 Letts; 28,000 Poles, and 33,000 members of the Bund.— Lenin

[2]
In August 1906 after the failure of the strike decided on
by the Central Committee during the Sveaborg uprising, the St. Petersburg
Committee of the R.S.D.L.P. adopted a resolution on the need to convene an
extraordinary Party congress. The St. Petersburg Committee decided to inform the
local organisations of this resolution, asking them to express their opinion on
the matter.

Anumber of the largest organisations pronounced in favour of convening a
congress, including the Moscow and St. Petersburg committees, the Executive
Committees of the Polish and Lithuanian Social-Democrats, the Regional Bureau
of the Social-Democratic organisations of Central Russia, and the Central
Committee of the Lettish Social-Democrats. The Urals, Nizhny-Novgorod, Bryansk,
Minsk, Kurgan and other committees were also in favour of a congress. The
All-Russian Conference of the R.S.D.L.P. in November decided to convene the
congress on March 15 (28), 1907.