V. I. LENIN—G. E. ZINOVIEV.
Tuesday [between July 24 and September 18, 1909]
Dear Grigory!
I have received your article on the Swedish strike. It is very good.
I sent it to Paris along with a copy of my own article on Bogdapov²
(roughly 100 lines—appearing on two pages of Pravda in the appendix). I no longer know whether you will approve the whole thing. I leave the final decision entirely to your discretion: I am so tired of writing this article,
*
There is no plan for revision available in the archives of the Lenin Institute. Ed.

LETTERS FROM THE SECOND PERIOD OF EMIGRATION

I now wonder whether it would not be better to scrap the entire piece altogether, responding to Bogdapov with just a few brief lines about his fabrications concerning “the property of the entire Fraction”?³ Decide for yourself!
O
I will write to Plekhanov. The lead article should be on the Swedish strike.
Shaking hands,
Lenin
1 Justification of the date: the letter was written on one of the Tuesdays falling between
July 24 (the day Lenin had earmarked for departure from Paris in his letter to M. A. Ulyanova dated July 19; see Proletarskaya Revolyutsiya, No. 11, 1929, p. 221) and September 18—the date of publication of Nos. 47–48 of Pravda, which featured G. Zinoviev’s leading article “Lessons of Class Struggle” on the Swedish strike.
2 We are talking about the article “On the Fraction of Supporters of Recallism and God-Building,” published in the appendix to Nos. 47–48 of Pravda.
3 Lenin had in mind the following passage from “Report of Comrade Bolsheviks Removed from the Expanded Editorial Board of Pravda”: “The majority of the board preferred to resolve the question of the split on their own, thereby, of course, sparing themselves the need in the future—at a conference or congress—to deal with the other faction of the Bolsheviks; moreover, the property of the entire Fraction was left at the disposal of this majority.”
V. I. LENIN—V. A. KARPINSKY
TO GENEVA.
[Before October 18, 1909, Paris.]¹
Dear Karpinsky!
Please let me know how things have turned out with the library.²
Is it true that negotiations with the student society are still ongoing?
Or is it true that you have finally decided not to go after all?
Was it Viktor who dissuaded you? I’m a bit annoyed with him for having moved away alone, depriving us here of the invaluable assistance of an administrator whom I regarded as indispensable. He is now “all in favor of Geneva.”
I think that’s a mistake: we’re not going to Geneva.
* — V. Taratuta. Ed.

Do you have a catalog of the Bekobskaya (Bonchevskaya) library?
If you do, please send it over.
I look forward to receiving more precise information about your move. In our editorial office, they’re talking about transferring one of Bonchev’s libraries. We need to clarify the matter once and for all—and as soon as possible.
Give my regards to Olga, Nikolai Ivanovich,* and other friends.
Shaking hands,
Your Lenin
1 The date of the letter is determined by V. Karpinsky’s reply, preserved in the Institute’s archives (No. 1893), dated October 18, 1909.
2 We are talking about the relocation of the “Kuklip Library” to Paris (see p. 168 of this collection, note 2), a move Lenin had been insisting upon. V. Karpinsky agreed to take charge of the library only on the condition that it retain its independence—and that it continue to exist not under the auspices of the Central Committee’s editorial board, as Lenin had proposed, but rather be merged with one of the Russian libraries already established in Geneva.
2Y536
V. II. LENIN—N. E. VILONOV
TO DAVOS (SWITZERLAND).
November 27/111. 10. [Paris.]
Dear Comrade Mikhail!
How are you doing? Are you recovering? Please write to me about it—tell me precisely how much weight you’ve gained, and by how much exactly.
The atmosphere of conciliation and unity is beginning to clear. I’m sending you a reprint from No. 12 of Sozial-Demokrat.¹
From it, you’ll see that the struggle with the Voitsevists has reached a full-blown clash.
Now the question has come down to this: are there any Plekhanovites left in the world? Are there any party-minded men left in the world—or are all the “men” merely Voitsevists, while Plekhanov himself is nothing more than a lone wolf?
We must launch an intensified campaign to persuade the Plekhanovites to withdraw from the Voitsevist groups, to replace the Voitsevist in the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee with a Plekhanovite, and so on—and through such agitation,
* — O. Ravich, N. I. Bukharin. Ed.
** — the Mensheviks. Ed.

LETTERS FROM THE SECOND PERIOD OF EMIGRATION

Let us put to the test whether, in fact, our efforts to forge a party-wide alliance—even if only with the Plekhanovites—will actually yield anything at all.²
Here, the Bekov group* is preparing to launch such an agitation; when they make their move, you will hear about it.
The “Forwardists” are holding something like a congress here: they say Bogdanov and Stanislav have arrived.** What they are planning remains unknown. They behave rather foolishly—and quite likely, the Central Committee will have to contend with them as well, starting from their very first public appearance in print. From Russia came a letter saying that Alexinsky, among the Moscow Forwardists, had written about their plan to establish a school for fifty people (had they somehow managed to raise the funds?), while the Forwardists in Moscow were leaning toward a unified, party-wide school.³
There has been no correspondence with Gorky. We’ve heard that he has grown disillusioned with Bogdanov and has come to see through the falsity of his conduct. Do you have any news from Capri?
Russia has few resources. Oh, if only we could send a capable worker from here to the Central Committee—or to help convene a conference! But here, everyone is just a “former” member!
Stay healthy and keep writing.
Shaking hands,
Your Lenin
1 A separate reprint from No. 12 of Sozial-Demokrat, the Central Organ of the RSDLP, contained Lenin’s article “‘The Voice’ of the Liquidators Against the Party” (see Collected Works, vol. XIV, p. 254). No. 12 of Sozial-Demokrat was published on March 23, 1910 (April 5).
2 We are talking about B. Gorev-Goldman, who joined the Central Committee of the Bolsheviks after the January Plenum of 1910. In the same convocation of the Central Committee, the Bolsheviks were represented by A. Lyubimov (later replaced by N. Semashko), the Polish Social Democrats by L. Tyshko (later Z. Leders), and the Latvian Social Democrats by V. Berzin (after Schwartz); the Bund was represented by F. Ionov (later M. Goldman-Liberman). Lenin’s plan to establish a stable party majority within the Central Committee ultimately failed. The Central Committee clearly emerged as a liquidationist center, and N. Semashko left it in May 1911. Gorev, however, remained in the Central Committee until its dissolution in January 1912, representing the Central Committee in its final days alongside M. Goldman-Liberman.
3 In No. 12 of Sozial-Demokrat, a short note titled “From a Comrade’s Letter” was published, in which the author reported on rumors circulating in Moscow regarding a school for fifty students being organized by the Forwardists.
In a footnote, the editors of Pravda expressed their satisfaction that
workers in Russia were speaking out in favor of a party-wide school.
* — the Bolsheviks. Ed.
** — S. Volsky. Ed.

LENIN’S LETTERS & COLLECTION
87”
V. I. LENIN—G. V. PLEKHANOV
IN SAN-REMO.*
March 29, 1910 [Paris.]
Dear and highly esteemed comrade! While fully sharing your view—expressed also in No. 11 of the Diary—regarding the necessity of forging close and sincere ties among all truly Social Democratic elements in the struggle against liquidationism and recallism,¹ I would very much like to speak with you personally about the current state of affairs within the Party. If you too find this useful, and if your health permits, please spare a few words—either by letter or by telegraph—to let me know when you might be able to arrange a meeting with me in San Remo. I am ready to travel for this purpose.
With comradely greetings,
N. Lenin
VI. Oulianoff. 4, rue Marie Bose. Paris. XIV.
1 This idea had been voiced by Plekhanov in his article “The Last Plenary Session of Our Central Committee” (“Diary of the Social Democrat,” No. 11, March 1910, p. 19).
G. V. PLEKHANOV—V. I. LENIN
IN PARIS.**
San Remo, April 2, 1910
Dear comrade, please forgive my delayed response—I was unwell. I too believe that the only way to resolve the crisis our Party is currently experiencing is through closer rapprochement between Marxist-Mensheviks and Marxist-Bolsheviks, and I feel that I must discuss this matter with you in person.
*
On the reverse side of the card, Lenin handwrote Plekhanov’s address:
“G. Plekhanoff. I. Villa Vittoria. II. San-Remo. Italy. Liguria.” In the upper left corner, an unknown hand had inscribed Lenin’s address. Ed.
** Plekhanov’s reply is printed from a typewritten copy handed over to the Lenin Institute by R. Plekhanova. In her accompanying letter, R. Plekhanova wrote that “the meeting did not take place, among other reasons, because he [Plekhanov, Ed.] fell ill very quickly and severely.” Ed.

LETTERS FROM THE SECOND PERIOD OF EMIGRATION

But I believe our meeting will be more fruitful if it takes place somewhat later, when the mood of both factions has become clearer. Events are unfolding rapidly, and time is a powerful educator of minds. The Mensheviks are increasingly inclined to resist liquidationism. I hope that the Bolsheviks, for their part, are not only growing more resistant to liquidationism—but also beginning to abandon that overly rigid approach to legal workers’ organizations that, to be honest, greatly contributed to the success of liquidationism.
For now, let us clear the ground for mutual rapprochement, each in our own sphere.
Devotedly yours, G. Plekhanov.