Dear A. M., Regarding your statement, I will consult with A. A.: in my opinion, it is not worth publishing, since you personally did not know him*.

Which Bekov collection did you send the article on cynicism to? I am perplexed, because I am being assiduously written to about the Bekov collections, but have heard nothing of this one. I hope it is for the St. Petersburg one, No. 135.

Send me the letter to Senkevich, if you have a copy (with a note of when it was sent) — but Senkevich will surely publish it, since it is a questionnaire 136.

Your plans are very interesting, and I would gladly come. But you must agree, I cannot abandon party work, which must be set in order immediately. It is difficult to organize a new undertaking. I cannot abandon it. We will get it organized in a month or two, or something like that, and then I will freely tear myself away for a week or two.

* This refers to A. M. Gorky's statement in the press in connection with the arrest of N. A. Semashko (see this volume, pp. 129-131). — Editors.

I agree with you a thousand times about the necessity of a systematic struggle against political decadence, renegacy, whining, etc. As for "society" and "the youth," I do not think we have any disagreement. The significance of the intelligentsia public in our party is declining: news comes from everywhere that the intelligentsia is fleeing the party. Good riddance to that scum. The party is being cleansed of philistine trash. The workers are taking up the cause more and more. The role of worker professionals is increasing. This is all wonderful, and I am sure that your "kicks" are to be understood in the same sense.

Now — how to exert influence, what kind of "literature" precisely to "create"? Collections or "Proletary"? Of course, the easiest answer is: not "or" but "and" — the answer would be impeccable, but impractical. Legal collections, of course, must exist; our comrades in St. Petersburg are working on them in the sweat of their brow, and I worked on them too, after London, while sitting in Kvakala*.

If possible, every effort must be made to support them and continue these collections 137.

But my experience from London to November 1907 (six months!) has convinced me that systematic legal literature cannot be created now. I am convinced that the party now needs a properly appearing political organ, one that consistently and strongly pursues the line of struggle against disintegration and despondency — a party organ, a political newspaper. Many Russians do not believe in an organ abroad. But that is a mistake, and our editorial board did not decide in vain to transfer "Proletary" here. It is difficult to get it going, to establish it, to revive it — there is no denying that. But it must be done, and it will be done.

Why not include literary criticism in it? Too little space? I do not, of course, know your system of work. Unfortunately, during our meetings we had more occasion to chat than to talk properly. If you have no inclination for small, short, periodic (weekly, biweekly) articles, if you feel better working on a large work — then, of course, I

* — a jocular name for Kuokkala. — Editors.

would not advise interrupting it. It will bring more benefit!

But if you also have a desire for joint work in a political newspaper, why not continue, why not make a habit of the genre you began with "Notes on Philistinism" in *New Life* and began, in my opinion, well? I wrote to you about this with "deliberate intent" in one of my very first letters, thinking: if this attracts him, he will seize upon it. And it seems to me that in your last letter you are, as it were, seizing upon it. Or am I mistaken? How much more would party work gain through a newspaper, not so one-sided as before — and literary work, by becoming more closely linked with party work, with systematic, continuous influence on the party! So that there would be not "raids," but a continuous onslaught along the entire line, without pause, without gaps, so that the Social-Democratic Bolsheviks would not only attack various blockheads piecemeal, but conquer everything and everyone, as the Japanese conquered Manchuria from the Russians.

Of the three themes you outline for the collections (philosophy, literary criticism, and tactics of the moment), one and a half would go into the political newspaper, into "Proletary": tactics of the moment and a good half of literary criticism. Oh, there is no good in special, long literary-critical articles scattered among various semi-party and non-party journals! It would be better for us to try to take a step further away from this old, lordly intellectual habit, that is, to link literary criticism more closely with party work, with the leadership of the party. That is what the mature Social-Democratic parties in Europe do. That is what we must do, not fearing the difficulties of the first steps of collegial newspaper work in such a matter.

Large literary-critical works — into books, partly into journals.

Systematic articles, periodic, in concert with the political newspaper, in connection with party work, in the spirit of what was begun by *New Life* — tell me, do you have a desire for this or not?

The third subject is philosophy. I am very conscious of my unpreparedness in this field, which prevents me

from appearing publicly. But, as an ordinary Marxist, I read our party philosophers attentively, I read the empiriomonist Bogdanov and the empirio-criticists Bazarov, Lunacharsky, and others attentively — and they push all my sympathies toward Plekhanov! One must have physical strength not to let oneself be carried away by mood, as Plekhanov does! His tactics are the height of vulgarity and baseness. In philosophy he defends the right cause.

I am for materialism against "empirio-" etc.

Can and should philosophy be linked with the direction of party work? with Bolshevism? I think that this cannot be done now. Let our party philosophers work a while longer on theory, argue, and... come to an agreement. For the time being, I would stand for separating such philosophical disputes, as between materialists and "empirio-", from integral party work.

I will await your reply, but for now I must finish.

Yours, Lenin

---

Sent from Geneva

to the island of Capri (Italy)

First published in 1934

in the Lenin Miscellany XXVI

Printed from the manuscript