I want to dwell on the "idea of a centre." Maximov bungled things regarding the Kotka Conference.{5} Here's what actually happened: in the event that the Poles were for a boycott, and my vote would have been decisive, I stated that I would then prefer to vote with the Bolsheviks. This was my condition, made with respect to the Poles. At that time the entire Bolshevik centre was against the boycott. The Faction, however, was for the boycott, but there was no split, since there was no group that desired one. A year later the Faction came over to our side. There are "Bolsheviks" who fear hitting the Recallists and standing together with the Mensheviks. At the conference I spoke with the "Mensheviks" against the Recallists. That is what you think about the centre.

The history of the split as recounted by Maximov is curious. In Maximov's papers nothing is said about the centre, but Mikha's letter has now been proven. In that letter it was said that Lenin is pursuing a right-Bundist line. This is in the documents. Mikha wrote what Maximov is saying now. There is the idea of a centre. And this letter was sent to us by our Caucasian friends, who transmitted the mandate to the right-hand Ilyich. Mikha pursued this policy in July 1908 with the participation of a group. Maximov says that we will begin to sit with Plekhanov. Of course we will, just as with Dan, with Martov in the CO.{6} The loyalty of the Recallists at the conference{7} was achieved through fierce struggle. We set ultimatums for them. When Axelrod read the point about military-combat tasks, he said: "it is not difficult to work with such 'Bolsheviks'." We will not allow Recallists into the Duma commissions where we sat with Dan. Yes! We will sit with Plekhanov, just as with Dan and Martov. Say this in the press.

I sit in the CC with Marat. You, Marat, are a member of the faction of divine Recallists. I am speaking not of good intentions, but of political line. I ask you, comrades, to think about what is said about Plekhanov. When Plekhanov speaks of his error regarding trade unions, we are reproached for not pushing him away from us. When he is ready to sacrifice his error, the question is this: are we attracting him with an article against Lunacharsky, or are you repulsing the minority party members, the "meks," and the orthodox Marxist "meks," for the sake of the Bogdanov-Lunacharsky anti-Marxist propaganda? We have not entered into any deal with Plekhanov against Lunacharsky, but we will say who is flirting with whom. When Plekhanov knocks out Potresov, I am ready to extend my hand to him. Here it is not a new centre, but a new caricature Bolshevism. They repeat to us the old story with Rosa Luxemburg.{8} But here the repetition is caricature, and from this the "Bolshevism" must be saved.

"Bolshevism" must now become rigorously Marxist.

Published according to the text of the book, checked against the protocol record