1

Comrade Dan's declaration about factual inaccuracy is big news to me. Until now, there has been no official statement anywhere about the permissibility of "participation in the Duma"{93}. Neither Parvus nor Plekhanov has even said this until now. Furthermore, it would be narrow for us not to take into account how the conscious part of the proletariat views the question one way or another, and we do account for it—this is not an accidental fact. I am prepared to introduce an amendment: "the overwhelming majority" instead of "all."

2

Comrade Dan's official declaration is particularly valuable to me; I am hearing such a declaration for the first time in general. One can only wish that it appear in print, since until now nothing like it has appeared in the press. The Mensheviks have always protested if such an opinion was attributed to them. The bulletin of the United Central Committee asserts that both parts of the party agree that one cannot go into the Duma{94}. This is a document, and nothing in our resolution contradicts it on this point. Regarding Plekhanov, Dan's remark is incorrect. He simply said: "I am against the boycott," and placed a period at the most interesting point. We are sufficiently informed, and the reference to Poltava has not shaken our opinion about the majority of the proletariat's view on the question of participation in the Duma. Solidarity should be emphasized.

3

Dan thinks that once the Duma convenes, that will already be 1849. Untrue. The Duma is the United Landtag of 1847{95}, and we will not go into the United Landtag of 1847. I consider it necessary to take note of Lunacharsky's suggestions. I consider it necessary to answer three questions: 1) is it true that the majority is right?—it is true; no one has refuted us, everything that was said is mere assertion and cannot serve as sufficient grounds for striking out the reference to the fact; 2) should we take this fact into account?—it is necessary to take it into account; 3) what is the position of the Central Organ's editorial board on the question addressed by this point of the justification?—I assert that it recognized participation in the Duma as impossible. I did not think this would so wound our Menshevik comrades; until now no one has ever or anywhere said anything like what comrade Dan has said. Comrade Dan is wavering, and I am very displeased about this.

4

They say that everything that follows is filled with polemics. Untrue; we would not pursue such aims. Why cannot one go into the Duma? Because the people might think that it is worth voting independently of what our Menshevik comrades think about the people. We are not quarreling; we are analyzing the argument. We consider it necessary to send only dummies.