V. I. Lenin

Concerning our declaration {3} there are in existence lying rumours which are
deliberately being circulated by the Golosist liquidators and which we
consider it our duty to counter by a short account of the essentials of the
matter and our views.

The formal aspect of the matter is that an agreement between
the faction and the Party was concluded at the plenum of
January 1910. According to the agreement, our faction undertook to dissolve
itself if the other factions dissolved themselves. The condition
was not observed. We resume our freedom of struggle against the
liberals and anarchists, who are being encouraged by the leader of the
“conciliators”, Trotsky. The question of the money is for us a
secondary matter, although of course we do not intend to hand over
the money of the faction to the bloc of liquidators+anarchists+Trotsky, while in no way renouncing our right to
expose before the international Social-Democratic movement this bloc, its
financial “basis” (the notorious Vperyodist “funds” safeguarded from
exposure by Trotsky and the Golosists), etc . [1]

The essential fact is that we divest ourselves of responsibility for the assistance in demoralising the Party
rendered by the “conciliatory” policy (i. e., the policy indulgent to the
Golosist liberals and Vperyodist anarchists). We warned the Party officially and openly even before No. 12 of the Central
Organ by making a statement about the Conspiracy against the Party in the
leaflet “ Golos ( Voice ) of the Liquidators Against the

Party.” {2}

If these words may have seemed to anyone an exaggeration, events have
completely and literally confirmed what we said. The liberal liquidators
have consolidated themselves outside the Party, they have created
a faction altogether hostile ( Nasha Zarya , Vozrozhdeniye ,
Dyelo Zhizni ) to Social-Democracy and ready to disrupt
the Party’s cause in the elections to the Fourth Duma. The Golosists have
helped Potresov and Co. to demoralise the Party, spoiling and hindering its work from within the central bodies. The Central
Committee Bureau Abroad—the only permanent organ in practice—has fallen
into the hands of the liquidators , thanks in part to the impotence
of the Bund and the Letts, and in part to the direct help the Golosists
have been given by the liquidationist elements of these national
organisations. The C. C. Bureau Abroad not only did nothing to unite the
pro-Party elements abroad, and not only gave no help to the fight
against the Golosists and Vperyodists, but it concealed the
anti-Party “funds” of the anarchists and the steps taken by the liberals.

The Vperyodists, thanks to the “conciliatory” support of Trotsky and
Golos , have consolidated themselves as a faction with its own
transport, its own agency , and have grown many times stronger since the plenum of January 1910.

There has been a full development of what was already outlined quite
clearly at the plenum (for instance, the defence of the anarchist school,
by Trotsky + the Golosists). The bloc of the liberals and anarchists with
the aid of the conciliators is shamelessly destroying the remnants of the
Party from outside and helping to demoralise it from within. The
formalistic game of “inviting” the Golosists and Trotskyists on to the
central bodies is finally reducing to impotence the already weakened
pro-Party elements.

Divesting ourselves of responsibility for this game, we shall, while
keeping aloof from it , pursue our pro-Party policy of rapprochement with the Plekhanovites and ruthless struggle against the bloc. It stands to reason that we shall in every way support all steps of the Central Committee if it succeeds
in meeting in Russia, restoring the Central apparatus there, establishing a
Party organisational base abroad (instead of the liquidationist
C. C. Bureau Abroad) and beginning work against the liberals and
anarchists.

Finally, a few words about the split with which the “conciliators” are trying to frighten us. At present the split de facto is already complete, for the Potresovites and Vperyodists have
completely split off and no one will bring them back to
the Party line . If the Central Committee emphatically condemns
them as liberals and anarchists, there will be no split de jure ,
for they cannot defend their line. If the central bodies cease to
play at “inviting” the liberals who are servants of Potresov (the
Golosists) and the Vperyodists, there will be no split de jure ,
and the workers will definitely abandon both the Vperyodists and
the Potresovites. Any other policy will prolong the split by
encouraging the Potresovites and Vperyodists. As far as we are concerned,
we shall keep entirely aloof from any such “other” policy, as
authorised representatives of the Bolshevik trend , whose guiding
significance was recognised by the plenum of January 1910.

The representatives of the Bolshevik trend who signed the agreement
with the Central Committee at the plenum and who are authorised (by
Meshkovsky’s power of attorney) to cancel it.

---
Notes:
[1]
The right to represent the faction was given to our sextet at
the plenum. Of the six votes we have four : three in Paris and one
by Meshkovsky’s (written) power of attorney. If Meshkovsky were to take it
into his head to back out, we should interrogate the remaining
Bolshevik members of the Central Committee and candidate members
elected in London , and also interrogate the Bolsheviks who have
declared themselves by influential work. — Lenin

{2}
See pp. 156–64 of this volume.— Ed .

{3}
This refers to the declaration of the Bolsheviks in the Central
Committee Bureau Abroad on November 22 (December 5), 1910, demanding the
immediate convocation of the Central Committee to decide the question of
the return of the funds of the Bolshevik faction. The declaration was
signed by Lenin and other participants of the January plenary session of
the Central Committee in 1910.