V. I.

Lenin

471

To:   G. L. PYATAKOV, YEVGENIA BOSH, N. I. BUKHARIN [1]

It is no use your trying, in your letter, to ignore the main thing, not
daring to deny a fact of which you are only too well aware. Namely, that
the organisation was based (provisionally) on the principle of
federation—this was reiterated by us in every possible way as
clear as clear can be. Your long speeches do not alter this a whit. And
further, that this principle was abnormal, anti-Party. This, too, was stated. And this is the
crux of the matter.

Abnormality was tolerable as a temporary measure in the interests of
agreement. After your removal it appears that you came to an agreement, all
three, on the “theses”, [2] for which we can bear no responsibility either directly
or indirectly, not even recognise any proximity to them, leave alone
equality, in our Party.

If you wish to persist in them and in such an “agreement” and in
federation, we can only regret it.

You ask about contributions—to what journal? Kommunist has
been suspended owing to breach of the temporary agreement. That means to a
new journal? That is, to yours, on the basis of the “theses”? We
cannot contribute and shall be compelled to fight it, since we find your
attitude to the Party’s Programme (§ 9) to be not only wrong and
harmful, but frivolous. Really, during 8 months of agreement and life
together you three never once drew a pen on this question, which
has a 12–year history within the Party, never once made a statement in the Editorial Board of the C.O., never once attempted to refer back to Party literature, etc.

Your arguments for a “free” journal (free from the Party Programme?
from the central bodies of the Party?) are just as frivolous, if not
worse—anti-Party.

If you wish to persist in the theses, we (1) are prepared to publish
them and (2) we are bound to give our opinion:
publish them yourselves (if you do not want us to do it) and furnish them
with a discussion pamphlet in which all three of you could make clear to
the Party your motives.

P.S. You write that the question of money is “unpleasant”. Not
always. When money is treated in a true Party manner, it is a pleasant
thing to the Party. When money is used as a weapon against the
Party, it is indeed “unpleasant”, even worse than unpleasant.

---
Notes:
[1]
This letter was written in reply to that of Pyatakov, Bosh and Bukharin
to the editors of Sotsial-Demokrat concerning the disagreements on
the Editorial Board of the journal Kommunist .

[2]
This refers to the removal to Christiania (Oslo) of Pyatakov, Bosh and
Bukharin, and to their theses “On the Slogan of the Right of Nations to
Self-Determination” sent in to the editors of Sotsial Demokrat in
November 1915.

The writers of the “theses” were opposed to Clause 9 of the
R.S.D.L.P. Programme dealing with the right of nations to
self-determination.