V. I.

Lenin

462

To:   G. Y. ZINOVIEV

I had a translation of the Dutch “Annullierung der
Staatsschulden”. [1]

State debts can be used instead of war debts:
I don’t see any great difference.

How to punish the “concierges”? Their share in the total
debt is insignificant, and they could be assigned a pension from the state treasury (if they served a long time as
concierges).

If you still “have doubts”, don’t insert it, or hold up the issue for a couple of days . I think this Dutch point, as an
exception, is suitable for a “peace programme” (we Could add) as
it contains the only positive demand in connection with the revolution or the mass struggle (did I insert this—I don’t
remember?)... should be....

It would be awkward if we inserted it afterwards and there
were no mention of it in the C.O.’s article on this subject . We
had better hold it over for a couple of days and discuss it by letter.

I shall fix things up about the Wiener Arbeiter-Zeitung and
make inquiries about Tyszka (maybe he is in Schriften des Vereins für Sozial-Politik ?).

Re arrangements with Alexander (he has gone to Norway, where A. K. is,
and now we must put the pressure on him as hard as we can ).

I simply cannot agree to I+II about Kommunist .

Your arguments are most inconsistent.

“ Only manoeuvre away”?... If so, why risk the business ?

“ We’re to blame for getting tied up with an old woman”...
Of course! But those who are to blame are the first to make amends. What
logic is it to say: I am to blame, therefore I do not make amends!!!

I don’t consider myself “to blame”: at that time a bloc was
useful. I made it. Today it is harmful . I shall be to blame if I don’t change it.

My business reasons you haven’t even touched on: squabbles
among the staff (on 3 points), complaints to the C. C.; letters to the
editors; letters to Nashe Slovo (Bronski’s, perhaps Radek’s, etc.)
σσ= squabbles instead of business.

And over what? Over the “name”?? It’s ridiculous.

I have received N. I. ’s answer to the theses: sheer piggery , not a single well-thought-out word.

With Alexander the matter must be put as a point of principle :
after No. 1–2 they came out with “differences”. Equality (or a place)in the Editorial Board
cannot be grant ed under such differences. It is inadmissible. N. I.’s old waverings on this question (of democracy) should
be collected and it should be demanded that they think every thing over,
digest it, and write giving the reasons for all their differences
for the C.C. (a small pamphlet). Not for publication, but for the C.C. We shall examine it and reject it,
meanwhile on with Sbornik Sotsial-Demokrata . [2]

Salut.

Answer.

---
Notes:
[1]

“ Cancellation of State Debts” (the heading to Point 1 of the draft
programme of the Revolutionary Socialist League and the Social-Democratic
Party of Holland published in the Bulletin of the I.S.C. No. 3 for
February 29, 1916).— Ed .

[2]
Sbornik Sotsial-Demokrata ( Sotsial-Demokrat
Collection) was founded by Lenin and published by the Editorial Board of
the newspaper Sotsial-Demokrat . Two numbers were published in
1916 , containing several articles by Lenin. Copy was prepared for
No. 3, which was to contain Lenin’s article “A Caricature of Marxism and
Imperialist Economism”, but owing to lack of funds this collection was not
put out.