The most well-known of the Mensheviks, Plekhanov, who fought decisively against the destruction of the party by the liquidators, did not appear at the January party conference, despite being invited. In April 1912 he published his correspondence with a representative of the Organizational Committee (see his "Diary of a Social-Democrat" No. 16).

Plekhanov refused to participate in the so-called Organizational Committee, explaining this by the fact that the Bund is convening a conference not from existing party organizations, but a "constituent" one, i.e., one that is supposed to found a new party. The so-called initiative groups, which are actually the only ones truly supporting the Organizational Committee, are, according to Plekhanov's assertion, liquidationist groups that do not belong to the party and want to form a new party. "The new conference is being convened by liquidators," writes Plekhanov in April 1912.

And then in July came No. 3 of the "Leaflet" of this Organizational Committee. There is not a word, not a sound in response to Plekhanov. One can judge by this how the Latvians inform the Central Board—those very Latvians who complain that the "Leninist" Central Committee does not answer the letters of the Organizational Committee.

Is it really so strange that the Central Committee of the party, the old party, does not answer those who, according to the words of the hitherto neutral Plekhanov, are creating a new party?

The Organizational Committee must, first of all, prove to the neutral Plekhanov that it is not forming a new party and is not liquidating the old one.

The Latvians participating in the Organizational Committee, addressing themselves to the Central Board on June 24, after half a year of struggle by this Organizational Committee of liquidators against the party, ought to have shown by facts and documents the results of this struggle; instead, the Latvians show the Central Board the Potemkin villages of the liquidators.

The Latvians proposed to the Central Board to convene eleven "organizational" centers, organizations, and factions of Russian social-democracy. This is what was stated literally (see page 4 of the Latvians' letter to the Central Board of June 24).

Throughout the world, parties have hitherto been formed from local organizations, which are united by one central institution. But the Russian and Latvian liquidators made a great discovery in 1912. Henceforth one can create a party from "centers, organizations, and factions."

Among the 11 organizational centers, organizations, and factions, according to the newest Latvian-liquidationist electoral geometry, are included: first, the Organizational Committee itself, and second, 6 factions or organizations or centers, which form this Organizational Committee. In the letter of the Latvians it is stated thus: "Points 2 through 7 inclusive form the Organizational Committee."

Thus the groups of party-liquidating intelligentsia obtain triple voting rights, similar to the aristocracy in rotten small towns:

1) The Caucasian regional committee—a fictitious organization;

2) The same—in the person of the Paris "Voice," although the "Voice" does not have a permanent mandate from the Caucasus;

3) The same—in the person of the "Organizational Committee."

We assert that Russian workers will reject with indignation and contempt the idea of discussing the question of double candidacies, i.e., the attempt of the liquidators jointly with insignificant émigré groups to provoke a split, all the more so since these groups represent only disorganizing intellectuals.

We categorically assert that absolutely not a single émigré group from those conducting a struggle against the party has received in the course of the last half-year a mandate from any Russian organization for conducting its organ or publishing its leaflets. The Latvians want to prove the opposite to the Central Board; let them then point to in the Russian press at least one such mandate by July 22.

"Voice of the Social-Democrat" is not the organ of any Russian organization.

Trotsky's Viennese "Pravda" is likewise not the organ of any Russian organization. Three years ago "Pravda" was the organ of the Ukrainian "Spilka"{151} (Southern Russia), but "Spilka" annulled its mandate long ago.

Neither "Forward," nor Plekhanov, nor the "Bolsheviks-within-the-party" publish any organs that would be party organs of any organization in Russia.

It is very easy to refer to groups that do not actually exist. It is also not difficult to print "sympathetic" correspondence. But in order to conduct even for half a year an organ of an organization working in Russia, permanent connections are necessary, complete confidence of the working masses on the ground, unity of tactical views, which can only arise as a result of long joint work. All of this is lacking in the émigré grouplets, which are mobilized against the party by Latvian and Bundist disorganizers.

Regarding the P.P.S.,{151} we shall speak briefly. It is not a social-democratic organization. It has never belonged to the R.S.D.R.P. There is only one ground for drawing it in, namely: it "promises" to become social-democratic and to join the liquidators!—For disorganizers and lovers of split this is, of course, sufficient! If one must draw the P.P.S. into joint discussions, why should one not also draw in the Socialist-Revolutionaries participating in elections to the Duma, Socialist-Zionists, the Latvian esserist union, and similar "tendencies"?