V. I.

Lenin

It is some considerable time now since the Social-Democrat
Petrovsky spoke in the State Duma on the question of the rules and was
deprived of the right to speak by the Chairman for “unparliamentary
language” addressed to the Minister, and so forth. As a “topic of the
day” in the narrow sense of the term this matter is perhaps out of
date. But the fact of the matter is that the speeches delivered by
Petrovsky and the Cadet Maklakov deserve more attention than ordinary
“news of the day”.

The Cadet Maklakov spoke in the State Duma on the question of the new
rules. This gentleman was the author of the rules and the spokesman for the
Rules Committee. On a number of questions the Cadet Maklakov spoke
against the Cadet group in the Duma, and with the aid of the
Octobrists and the Rights secured the adoption of most reactionary
rules directed against the opposition.

This is not new. It has long been common knowledge that V. Maklakov is
a favourite of the Octobrists and that he is an Octobrist at heart. But the
extremely important fact of our public life that is revealed by
this long-known circumstance deserves the closest attention.

Here we have one of the most prominent Cadets himself suppressing the freedom of the Duma with the aid of the Rights and Octobrists on a
question on which the Duma is relatively less impotent than on
other questions. The Social-Democrat Petrovsky was a thousand times right
in speaking sharply against such an old hand at shady politics.

But what is the main point here? Was V. Maklakov’s conduct crooked
because Mr. V. A. Maklakov is himself crooked ? Of course, not, and
that is not the point, anyway.

Just as the
Beilis case [1] was interesting and important because it very vividly
revealed what is behind our home politics, its behind-the-scenes
“machinery”, etc., so this minor (relatively) case of V. Maklakov’s
speech against die Cadets and against the freedom of the Duma
reveals for the hundredth and hundred-and-first time what is really behind
the policy of the party of our Russian liberal bourgeoisie.

The struggle between the Cadets and the Octobrists is a struggle
between competitors—that is why it is so sharp and unscrupulous. It was possible for V. Maklakov, favourite of the
Octobrists and suppressor of the freedom of the Duma, to become a “leading
light” among the Cadets because , and only because, the
Cadets have the same class basis as the Octobrists. They are two
different wings, or representatives of different trends, of the liberal
bourgeoisie, who are more afraid of democracy than they are of the
Purishkeviches.

This is material. This is important. This is the quintessence of
politics. This is the reason our bourgeoisie is astoundingly impotent
politically, its economic power not withstanding.

The Social-Democrat Petrovsky performed his duty as a democrat in
opposing V. Maklakov, the suppressor of the freedom of the Duma. There will
be no freedom in Russia until the democratic masses learn to despise the
Maklakovs as well as the parties that produce gentlemen of this type.

---
Notes:
[1]
The Beilis case —the trial of the Jew Beilis, organised for
provocative purposes by the tsarist government in 1913 in Kiev. Beilis was
falsely accused of the ritual murder of a Christian boy, Yushchinsky (the
murder was actually committed by the Black Hundreds). The tsarist
government staged this trial to stir up anti-Semitism and make use of
anti-Jewish pogroms to divert the attention of the masses from the
revolutionary movement that was growing through out the country. The trial
aroused public indignation; in a number of towns workers’ demonstrations of
protest were held. Beilis was acquitted.