To the International Socialist Commission (I.S.C.){15}

Esteemed comrades!

Having received your letter of 25 September, we express our full sympathy with the plan to create a permanent international "expanded commission" (erweiterte Kommission) in Bern. Being confident that the other organizations affiliated with the I.S.C. will also share this plan, we appoint from the CC of the RSDLP Comrade Zinoviev as a member of this expanded commission, and as his deputies, candidates (suppléant, Stellvertreter) (1) Comrade Petrova and (2) Comrade Lenin. Address for communications: Herrn Radomislsky (bei Fr. Aschwanden), Hertenstein (Ks. Luzern). Schweiz.

Further. As regards the remaining questions raised in your letter of 25 September, we, for our part, hold the following opinion:

1. We fully agree with you that the "general points of view" ("allgemeine Gesichtspunkte") established by the conference of 5–8 September{16} are "insufficient" ("nicht genügen"). A further, much more detailed and thorough elaboration of these principles is urgently necessary. This is necessary both from a principled and from a narrowly practical point of view, for the realization of united action on an international scale requires both clarity of fundamental ideological views and precise definiteness of particular practical methods of action. There is no doubt that the great crisis now being experienced by Europe in general, and by the working-class movement of Europe in particular, can only slowly lead to the masses clarifying both sides of the question, but the task of the I.S.C., together with the parties affiliated to it, consists precisely in assisting such clarification. Without expecting the impossible – the rapid unification of all on solidary, precisely elaborated views – we must strive for a precise clarification of the basic currents and trends in contemporary internationalist socialism, and then for the working masses to become acquainted with these currents, to discuss them comprehensively, to verify them through the experience of their own practical movement. This task, in our opinion, the I.S.C. should consider its main task.

2. The letter of 25 September defines the tasks of the proletariat either as the struggle for peace (in the event of the war continuing) or as "a concrete and detailed formulation of the international standpoint of the proletariat in relation to the various peace proposals and programmes" ("den internationalen Standpunkt des Proletariats zu den verschiedenen Friedensvorschlägen und Programmen konkret und ins einzelne gehend zu umschreiben"). Particular emphasis is placed here on the national question (Alsace-Lorraine, Poland, Armenia, etc.).

We believe that in both documents unanimously adopted by the conference of 5–8 September, namely: in the manifesto and in the "resolution of sympathy" ("Sympathieerklärung"), the idea is expressed of the connection between the struggle for peace and the struggle for socialism ("the struggle for peace... is the struggle for socialism" – "dieser Kampf ist der Kampf... für den Sozialismus" – says the manifesto), with "irreconcilable proletarian class struggle" ("unversöhnlicher proletarischer Klassenkampf" – in the text of the resolution voted on by the conference, it was not "irreconcilable" but "revolutionary" class struggle, and if the substitution was made for reasons of legality, the meaning should not have changed thereby). The resolution of sympathy speaks directly of the necessity and the "solemn promise" of the conference "to awaken the revolutionary spirit in the masses of the international proletariat."

Without connection to the revolutionary class struggle of the proletariat, the struggle for peace is merely a pacifist phrase of sentimental bourgeois or those deceiving the people.

We cannot and must not assume the pose of "statesmen" and draw up "concrete" peace programmes. On the contrary, we must explain to the masses the deceptiveness of all hopes for a democratic (without annexations, violence, plunder) peace, without the development of revolutionary class struggle. We told the masses firmly, clearly, and definitely at the very beginning of the manifesto that the cause of the war is imperialism and that imperialism is the "enslavement" of nations, of all the nations of the world, by a handful of "great powers." We must, therefore, help the masses to overthrow imperialism, without the overthrow of which a peace without annexations is impossible. Of course, the struggle for the overthrow of imperialism is difficult, but the masses must know the truth about the difficult but necessary struggle. The masses must not be lulled by the hope of peace without the overthrow of imperialism.

3. Proceeding from these considerations, we submit a proposal:

to place on the agenda of the next sessions of the expanded commission (for the elaboration or compilation and publication of theses or draft resolutions), and then of the next international conference (for the final adoption of the resolution), the following questions:

a) the connection of the struggle for peace with mass revolutionary actions or with the revolutionary class struggle of the proletariat;

b) the self-determination of nations;

c) the connection of social-patriotism with opportunism.

We emphasize that in the manifesto adopted by the conference, all these questions are touched upon quite definitely, that their principled and practical significance is extremely urgent, that not a single practical step of the proletarian struggle is conceivable without socialists and syndicalists coming up against these questions.

The elaboration of these questions is necessary precisely to assist the mass struggle for peace, for the self-determination of nations, for socialism, against the "lies of the capitalists" (words of the manifesto) about the "defence of the fatherland" in the given war.

If the fault or misfortune of the Second International consists, as justly indicated in the letter of 25 September, in the vagueness and lack of elaboration of important questions, then our task is precisely to help the masses to pose them more clearly and resolve them more precisely.

4. Regarding the publication of a bulletin in three languages, experience shows, in our opinion, that this plan is inexpedient. Such a publication would cost, with monthly issuance, 2–3 thousand francs a year, and such a sum is not easy to find. Meanwhile, two newspapers in Switzerland, "Berner Tagwacht"{17} and "La Sentinelle"{18}, print almost everything that is in the bulletin. We submit a proposal to the I.S.C.:

to attempt to enter into an agreement with the editorial boards of the named newspapers and with one of the newspapers in America regarding the printing of both the bulletin and all communications and materials of the I.S.C. in these newspapers (either in the text on behalf of the I.S.C., or in separate supplements).

This will not only be cheaper but will also make it possible to inform the working class incomparably better, more fully, and more frequently about the activities of the I.S.C. It is in our interest that a larger number of workers read the communications of the I.S.C., that all draft resolutions be printed to inform the workers and help them to work out their own attitude towards the war.

We hope that there will be no objections to the necessity of printing both the draft resolution (for which 12 delegates voted, against 19, to take it as a basis, i.e., about 40% of the total number) and the letter of a prominent German socialist{19} (with the omission of the name and everything not relating to tactics).

We hope that the I.S.C. will receive systematic information from various countries about persecutions and arrests for the struggle against the war, about the course of the class struggle against the war, about fraternization in the trenches, about the closure of newspapers, about the prohibition of printing appeals for peace, etc. – and that all this information could, on behalf of the I.S.C., periodically appear in the named newspapers.

An agreement with one of the American daily or weekly newspapers could probably be concluded by Comrade Kollontai, a contributor to "Nashe Slovo"{20} and other Social-Democratic newspapers, who has just now left for America to tour it with lectures. We could communicate with Kollontai or provide her address.

5. On the question of the mode of representation of parts of parties (especially Germany and France, and also, probably, England), we submit a proposal:

let the I.S.C. propose to the comrades from these parties to discuss the question of whether it would not be expedient to form, under various names, groups whose appeals to the masses (in the form of proclamations, resolutions, etc.) will be printed by the I.S.C. with a note indicating their affiliation to such-and-such groups.

With this method, firstly, the masses would be informed about the tactics and views of the internationalists, despite the prohibitions of military censorship; secondly, it would be possible to see the development and success of the propaganda of internationalist views, as workers' meetings, their organizations, etc., adopted decisions expressing sympathy with the views of one or another group; thirdly, it would be possible to express various shades of views (for example, in England the B.S.P.{21}, its minority, and the I.L.P.{22}; in France – socialists, like Bourderon and others, syndicalists, like Merrheim and others; in Germany, as the conference showed, there are shades within the opposition).

It goes without saying that these groups, as indicated in the letter of 25 September, would not create separate organizational units, but would exist within the old organizations only for communications with the I.S.C. and for the propaganda of the struggle for peace.

Representation in the "expanded commission" and at conferences would be from these groups.

6. On the question of the number of members in the "expanded commission" and on voting, we propose:

not to limit the number of members to a maximum of 3, but to introduce, instead, for small groups, fractions in voting (1/2, 1/3, etc.).

This is more convenient, for to deprive groups having their own shade of representation is simply impossible and harmful to the development and propaganda among the masses of those principles which are established by the manifesto.

7. Regarding the danger of the "Russo-Polish character" of the expanded commission, we believe that this apprehension of the comrades (however offensive it may be to the Russians) is legitimate, insofar as the representation of émigré groups without serious ties to Russia is possible. Represented should be, in our opinion, only organizations or groups that have proven, by no less than 3 years of work, their ability to represent the movement in Russia itself. We propose that the I.S.C. discuss and establish such a principle, and also address all groups with a request to provide information and data about their work in Russia.

8. Finally, we take this opportunity to point out one inaccuracy in No. 1 of the "Bulletin"{23} and to request that it be corrected in No. 2 (or in "Berner Tagwacht" and in "La Sentinelle"). Namely, in "Bulletin" No. 1, p. 7, col. 1, at the beginning, it is stated that the draft resolution was signed by the CC of the Polish Social-Democrats (Landesvorstand[5]), the Latvians, the Swedes, and the Norwegians. Omitted from this list are:

one German delegate (whose name is not printed for understandable reasons) and one Swiss delegate, Platten.

Written in September, later than 12 (25), 1915.

First published on 6 September 1925 in the newspaper "Pravda" No. 203

Printed from the manuscript