V. I.

Lenin

The Social-Democrats and the Duma Elections

III

What is the Significance of the Menshevik Walk-Out at the Conference?

Somereaders may think that the conclusion we have drawn is too drastic. We,
however, think that it is unworthy of a socialist to conceal or blur the truth
concerning a serious political matter. We must call a spade a spade. We must expose all subterfuges
and pretences, so that the mass of the workers may clearly understand what is
going on. Only bourgeois parties regard elections as a game played behind the
scenes and a division of the spoils. A workers’ party, however, must first of
all help the people clearly to understand the relations between the parties, to
understand their own interests and the objects of the struggle, to understand
what is going on behind the scenes.

Wehave seen that the complaints about the composition of the conference of the
St. Petersburg organisation of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, about
its refusal to divide, were mere evasions. We know that the real issue is a
simple one. The Mensheviks wanted an agreement with the Cadets at all costs. The
Mensheviks knew that the majority of the members of the St. Petersburg
organisation did not share that view. At the All-Russian Conference the
Mensheviks decided to abide by the decision of the local organisation in each
locality. Now they have broken their promise and are trying to achieve
their objects by means of a split .

Today(January 13) the 31 Mensheviks who walked out of the conference have
already declared in the St. Petersburg newspapers that they have made proposals
for a bloc to the Cadets and to all the Trudovik parties; not only to the
Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Trudoviks (with whom the conference offered to
make an agreement), but also to the “Popular Socialists”.

Sothe matter is perfectly clear. The class-conscious proletariat has decided
to conduct an independent election campaign. The petty bourgeoisie (including
the Trudoviks) is vacillating, rushing from one side to another; it is quite
capable of preferring a deal with the Cadets to a struggle based on
principles. The Mensheviks are the petty-bourgeois section of the workers’
party. At the very last moment, on the flimsiest pretexts, they are abandoning
the revolutionary proletariat and going over to the Cadets.

Thatthis conclusion is right is best confirmed by the Cadet newspapers. No one
will suspect the Cadets of being in sympathy with the views of the
St. Petersburg, i.e., the Bolshevik Social-Democrats!

Lookat Rech , the central organ of the Cadet Party. Everybody knows
perfectly well that Rech , in unison with Tovarishch , has
been constantly egging the Mensheviks on to a split, and seeking every
opportunity to praise them, care fully distinguishing them from the
Bolsheviks. As soon as it became known that the Mensheviks had walked out of
the Social-Democratic conference, Rech (January 11) published an
editorial entitled: “The Social-Democratic Conference and
Agreements”. This article openly applauds the “determination” of the Mensheviks and welcomes the split which they have initiated. This article openly declares that
“ outside the bloc of the revolutionary parties in the narrow sense of the word ” (i.e., the St. Petersburg Social-Democrats and
those to whom they have made proposals for an agreement, the
Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Committee of the Trudovik Group) there
remain the Mensheviks and the Popular Socialists (the most moderate
and semi-Cadet of all the petty-bourgeois Trudovik parties).

Andthe Cadets say outright that they are prepared to “ resume ” negotiations with “both these moderate
socialist parties”. They say outright that “the differentiation
[division] which has taken place among the socialist parties promises to bring
the ideas of the moderate socialists on Duma tactics somewhat closer to our own
[i.e., Cadet] ideas on this subject”.

Comingfrom the leading Cadet newspaper, this statement is extremely
important. The Cadets not only appreciate the practical results of the Menshevik
change of front. They see clearly that the split engineered by the Mensheviks is
of fundamental significance, i.e., that this split in fact will change the
attitude of the Mensheviks towards the fundamental concepts of the political
struggle and the tasks of the working class. The Cadets understand perfectly
well that the Mensheviks have veered, not only towards accepting agreements in
practice, but also towards the fundamental views of the bourgeoisie; that they
have departed from the proletarian policy and have approached the bourgeois
policy. Rech plainly states that the moderate socialists (that
is to say, the Mensheviks) are approaching the Cadet tactics, are actually
recognising Cadet priority and leadership. Al though they do not yet know
whether the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Trudoviks will accept the proposal of the Social-Democratic
conference, the Cadets are already reckoning with a very definite
alignment of political forces: the liberal bourgeoisie will lead the moderate
petty bourgeoisie and the petty-bourgeois section of the proletariat; the
revolutionary proletariat will act independently, and draw with it, at best
(best for us, worst for the Cadets) only a part of the petty bourgeoisie.

Thisis how the Cadets depict the situation. And it cannot be denied that in
this respect the Cadets are quite right. As the sun is reflected in a drop of
water, so the small episode in St. Petersburg reflects the constant
relationship between the policies of the liberal bourgeoisie, the working class
and the petty bourgeoisie that inevitably characterises all capitalist
countries. Everywhere and at all times the liberal bourgeoisie tries to bribe
the uneducated masses with sops in order to divert them from revolutionary
Social- Democracy. The Cadets are beginning to apply in Russia the
“English” bourgeois method of fighting the proletariat, i. e., not
by violence, but by bribing, flattering, dividing and cajoling the
“moderates”, by making them Cabinet Ministers, Members of
Parliament, electors, etc.

Themeaning of the phrase in the Cadet Rech about “resumption” of negotiations is also clear enough. When the
Social-Democrats were united and the revolutionary Social-Democrats were predominant among them,
the negotiations were broken off. Now that “both the moderate socialist
par ties” have broken away from the revolution, the Cadets declare:
“negotiations may be resumed”.

Ifthe reader is not quite clear as to what these words mean in practice, we
will explain them to him. The Cadets offered two seats (out of six) to the
Lefts, namely: one seat to the workers’ curia and one to the socialists
generally. The negotiations were broken off. Now the Cadets are inviting the
“moderate socialists” again:

“Come back, Mr. Customer, perhaps we can come to terms. We will give one seat to the Mensheviks and
another to the ’Popular Socialists’, or, in a fit of generosity, we will even
give you three seats.”

Thatis what the Cadets mean by “resumption” of negotiations: we
made no concessions to the Lefts ; but we are willing to make
concessions to the moderate Lefts !

Personswho are naive or politically inexperienced may shake their heads,
express doubt, sympathise, etc., as much as they like; it will not alter
matters. After all, it is not how a certain result was obtained
that is important, it is the result itself that is important (i.e., for the
Cadets it is not important, but for the masses of the workers who wish to
adopt an intelligent attitude towards politics, it is very
important).

Wedo not know exactly how the negotiations between the Mensheviks and the
Cadets were conducted—whether in writing, or by word of mouth, or by mere
hints. It is possible that prominent moderate Mensheviks simply hinted
to the Cadet leaders that a split was likely among the Social-Democrats, hinted
that they would agree to agreements on a district basis . And the
Cadets, of course, were quick to take the hint: “they” will split
the St. Petersburg Social-Democrats, and we will include “them” in
the district election list! “They” will help us, and we will help
“them”. Is this deal less effective, business-like and definite than
if “they” had gone straight to Kutler, Milyukov or Nabokov and said
in plain words: We will split the St. Petersburg Conference of the
Social-Democratic Party for you, and you will help us to get elected on some
district list?

Itis a fact that this is precisely the policy that is pursued by the
bourgeois liberals and the opportunist Social-Democrats in all
constitutional countries. The Russian workers must learn to understand
this policy if they do not want to be led by the nose. Chernyshevsky said in his
day: “Those who are afraid of soiling their hands had better keep away
from politics.” [1]

Those who take part in the elections and are afraid of soiling their hands in turning up the muck of bourgeois politics
had better get out. Kid-gloved simpletons only do harm in politics by their
fear of facing facts.

Anotherstatement in the bourgeois press that fully con firms our
estimate of the split is that made by Madame Kuskova in Tovarishch
(January 10). She, too, welcomes the Mensheviks, incites them to bring about an
irrevocable split, advises them not to “compromise” with the
Bolsheviks, and promises them the assistance of the Rabocheye Dyelo
group.

Tounderstand Madame Kuskova’s article, one must know who she is. We will say who
she is, as the majority of the workers do not know her.

The Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party was founded in 1898. In 1899 Madame
Kuskova and M. Prokopovich were members of the Party, to be exact, members of
the section abroad, which was led by Plekhanov, at that time a
revolutionary Social-Democrat. Madame Kuskova, however, was then, as now, an
opportunist; she advocated petty-bourgeois views in the Social-Democratic
movement and championed Bernsteinism, which, in the final analysis, means
subordinating the working class to the policy of the liberals. Madame Kuskova
expressed her views most clearly in the celebrated Credo (which means a
symbol of faith, a programme, an ex position of world-outlook). This
Credo said the following:

“The workers must conduct the economic struggle, and the liberals the political struggle.” The Rabocheye Dyelo people (as the opportunists in the Social-Democratic movement were
then called) were substantially inclined to take the same view. Plekhanov
declared a war to the knife against these views (in which he was assisted by the
Russian revolutionary Social-Democrats), and on this issue split the
section of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party abroad. He wrote a
pamphlet entitled Vademecum (a Guide for the Rabocheye Dyelo people), in opposition to the opportunists, especially Madame
Kuskova.

Madame Kuskova was expelled from the Social-Democratic Party. With Prokopovich,
she went over to the liberals, the Cadets. Later on she left the Cadets as well,
and became a “non—party” writer for the “non—party”

Cadet newspaper Tovarishch .

Madame Kuskova is not an isolated case. She is a typical specimen of
the petty-bourgeois intellectual, who imports opportunism into the workers’
party and wanders from the Social-Democrats to the Cadets, from the Cadets to
the Mensheviks, and so forth.

Theseare the people who are beating the drum and cheering in honour of the
split that the Mensheviks are causing among the Social-Democrats in
St. Petersburg.

Theseare the people to whom the workers who follow the Mensheviks are handing
over the cause of the proletariat.

---
Notes:
[1]
Chernyshevsky, N. C. (1828-89)—the great
Russian revolutionary democrat, materialist philosopher and writer.

Leninis referring to Chernyshevsky’s work Carey’s Letters on Political Economy to the President of the United States of America .