1905 — MAY 1917

LETTER TO G. E. ZINOVIEV
[End of March 1916]
1) Turn in the Russian No. and send the proofs.
We'll put out immediately, all Russian. Send the distribution and size
of the articles.
2) About "Kommunist" now (I'm sending another letter to K°).
Return), I think, you will be convinced that you were wrong. Our
proposal to the Central Committee Alexander would have accepted, taken to Russia and
started a squabble. Now there is only one way out: to force and them to bear responsibility;
to show and prove that they came out as a faction.
3) Alexander's
letter is of paramount importance.
It is clear that the "old woman's" gossip is working in full swing and has
overpowered Alexander.
Is it worth writing him out? I hesitate. It's already late. It's already
hopeless (since even
Kollontai is against hm!
hm!
NB nota bene!!). Isn't it better to try to send someone
to Russia? But who? Lyudmila?
It would be good. Inessa?
It would be good too, but she won't go.
This needs to be considered more carefully.
4) "Not for a million" a bloc with "Nashe Slovo" and so on in the transport. I completely agree with you.
5) I don't want to let
my
answer to Bukharin beyond the circle you indicated.
I will only send it to Papa and Lyudmila.
6) Radek is liquidating the Bureau of the Left. If he goes to peace,
then let him send our theses to Knief and other leftists, or
better give us their addresses.
Formally, we have not violated the bloc in any way, either in form
or in substance.
The proposal from the Central Committee does not exclude
a compromise on the Zimmerwald Left bloc. If Radek gives the
theses on Saturday, send them immediately, so that
I
have them on
Sunday morning.
7) Shouldn't we give I.S.D.
more money for 1 delegate? Ask
Radek, wieviel* and then we'll discuss it.
8) I am returning
Alexander's letter.
What should we do with this letter? Should you alone answer it, or should I too?
Did he ask you not to show it to me?
If you are going to write, you need to think very carefully. I advise you to attack the "old woman"
with all your might:
all the gossip is from her.
That's the end of it; the matter is clear.

9) 5 secretaries are playing a double game. Here Martov
—|- K have left the group of Nashoslovtsy. Martov read in it his statement
about his departure from the editorial board of "Nashe Slovo"!!
In my opinion, tell Weiss (swindler!) at the discussion:
if
"Yours" actually break with both "Self-Defense" and with
Chkheidze, then we are happy to unite!!
10) No. on "self-determination"?
Isn't it better to wait for No. 2 of "Vorbote" in order
to
answer immediately the theses of
Radek and
Co.?
In my opinion, it is better. We will hand in the theses for typesetting, then we will wait for
Radek's theses (maybe you will get them in proof?)
and immediately after "Vorbote" our number. That's better.
Will Radek refuse to show you his counter-theses?
11)
Will
Radek agree to give us full pages in "Vorbote" (No. 2) for our theses? And what is the deadline?
I
will propose another 2-3 additions.
Salut. Lenin
P. S. Regarding the nerves, I apologize very much for causing
unpleasantness. My nerves are terribly bad *.
1 This refers to No. 53 of the newspaper "Sotsial-Demokrat," entirely devoted
to events in Russia (published on April 13, 1916).
2 V. I. Lenin refers to the members of the editorial board of the journal "Kommunist":
G. L. Pyatakov, E. B. Bosch and N. I. Bukharin.
3 Alexander is A. G. Shlyapnikov.
4 Refers to E. B. Bosch.
5 V. I. Lenin refers to A. M. Kollontai.
6 Lyudmila is L. N. Stal, a member of the RSDLP since 1897.
7 V. I. Lenin refers to I. F. Armand.
8 Papa is M. M. Litvinov, a party member since 1898, a Bolshevik.
9 Refers to the "Proposal of the Central Committee of the RSDLP
to the Second Socialist Conference" (see V. I. Lenin. Complete Collected Works,
volume 27, pp. 282-293).
Johann Knief is a German communist. During the period of the world imperialist
war, he was a member of the "International" group.
* Below, N. K. Krupskaya wrote the following text: "Alexander the 'practical' one did not send anything. Everything that was received was sent
to you. By the way, was that letter received where there was my letter to" (then the word
is illegible) "with the resolution of the KZO? Alexander has still not sent the composition of the bureau. I did not expect such disloyalty from him — instead of
corresponding, he immediately believed all the nonsense of N. Iv. about Malinovsky,
Kamenev, etc. Now we are guilty in the transport that we have not developed his
paths! Not a word about what he did in Russia (except for the squabble with the PC).
Who are these "Russians" who "want, demand, insist" - workers or
Avilov and Co.? It's terribly обидно (offensive/resentful).
Is Inessa writing when she will return. Another has been received from England
496 francs (a total of one thousand)."

1905 — MAY 1917

1 0 "I. S. D." — "Internationale Sozialisten Deutschlands" ("International
Socialists of Germany") — a group of German left-wing social democrats that arose during the First World War.
1 1 L. Martov (Yu. O. Tsederbaum) is one of the leaders of Menshevism.
During the period of the world imperialist war, he held
a centrist position.
1 2 F. Weiss (Menders) is one of the leaders of the Latvian Mensheviks.
1 3 Refers to the collection "Self-Defense" with articles by V. Zasulich,
A. Potresov, P. Maslov, Ana (N. Zhordania) and others, published in Petro
grad in 1916.
1 4 "Vorbote" ("Forerunner") is a journal, the theoretical organ of the Zimmerwald Left; published in German in Bern. Two issues were published: No. 1 - in January and No. 2 - in April 1916. V. I. Lenin took
an active part in the founding of the journal. The journal pages featured
a discussion of left-wing Zimmerwaldists on the question of the right of nations
to self-determination and on the slogan of "disarmament."
1 5 V. I. Lenin calls "Theses of Radek and Co." the "Theses on Imperialism and National Oppression," which were compiled by K. Radek
and printed under the signature of the editorial board of "Gazeta Robotnicza" in the journal
"Vorbote" No. 2 in April 1916 and then in Russian in the "Collection
of "Sotsial-Demokrat"" No. 1. The answer to them was the theses of the editorial board of the Central
Organ of the RSDLP newspaper "Sotsial-Demokrat" - "Socialist
Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination," also printed
in the journal "Vorbote" No. 2, and in Russian in the "Collection of "Sotsial-Demokrat"" L° 1 in October 1916 (see V. I. Lenin. Complete Collected Works, volume 27,
pp. 252-266).
THE SECOND INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST
CONFERENCE IN KIENTHAL

[Between April 24 and 30, 1916]

EXCHANGE OF NOTES WITH PIERRE BRISON

Ce n'est pas de la théorie parce que «le pacifisme» (représenté par Vandervelde et compagnie) sert en réalité,
en
pratique, à décliner les masses de la lutte révolutionnaire *.
La lutte révolutionnaire — sauf dans les Parlements et dans la
mesure ou le parlementarisme peut-être révolutionnaire — est impossible
dans les pays ou le prolétariat est sous les armes. N'oublions pas la
réalité.
=====

* Here and below underlined by P. Brison.

Nous sommes contre le «pacifisme», croyant que ce n'est
qu'une duperie bourgeoise et que c'est la lutte révolutionnaire,
et non pas les phrases sonores sur la paix, qui est le vrai moyen
d'atteindre le socialisme — seule garantie de la paix.
Oui — mais aujourd'hui c'est de la théorie. Parlons des moyens
de terminer cette guerre. Ce que vous dites est bon pour prévenir les
autres guerres — en accentuant la propagande socialiste.
TRANSLATION
This is not a question of theory, because "pacifism" (represented
by Vandervelde and company) actually serves, in practice,
to
distract the masses from revolutionary struggle *.
Я
§
Revolutionary struggle - except in parliaments and to the extent
j-j^ that parliamentarism can be revolutionary - is impossible
W
in countries where the proletariat is under arms. Let's not
н
forget the reality.
Ф
—
« н
О
We are against "pacifism," believing that it is only bourgeois
deception and that it is revolutionary struggle, and not loud phrases about peace, that is the real means
of achieving socialism — the only guarantee of peace.
Yes - but today this is a matter of theory. Let's talk about the means
to end this war. What you say is good for preventing new wars, - because it emphasizes the importance of socialist
propaganda.
403G
NOTES ON THE DRAFT THESES
"THE ATTITUDE OF THE PROLETARIAT TO THE QUESTION OF PEACE"
Lenin
Die Stellung des Proletariats zu den Friedensfragen.
Vorschlag für Thesen
I
[objectively]
Der gegenwärtige Krieg ist das Ergebnis der (essence)
durch die bürgerlichen Eigentumsverhältnisse erzeugten imperialistischen Gegensätze; sein Ziel —
Here and below underlined by P. Brison.

1905 — MAY 1917 die regrouping of power relations between
the capitalist classes on the world market, according to
the military successes achieved in the war.
In that the goal of the war is not the sublation of capitalist commodity production,
which brought it about, it is also not able to eliminate the causes of future wars. It leaves the
old problems unresolved, complicates them and creates new contradictions, which on the basis of unimpeded
imperialist development alongside an increased economic and military
pressure evoke new conflicts and thus the danger of further warlike entanglements.
Therefore, when the bourgeois governments and their agents claim that the
war has the purpose of creating a lasting peace, they are lying or
ignoring the conditions for the realization of such a goal. Just as little
annexations, that is, the oppression of foreign peoples, can be the means to
secure a peaceful development of humanity, just as little can
lasting peace be brought about by admittedly well-meant, but contradictory to the historical
conditions of capitalism, demands, such as restriction of
armaments, introduction of obligatory arbitration courts,
democratization of foreign policy, etc.
On
the ground of a class society, these demands remain a utopia. The restriction
of
armaments, which is itself only a means of armistice between the imperialist
states, is unable either to sublimate the causes of war or to mitigate them,
quite apart from the fact that in the age of imperialism there is no universally valid standard
by which the armaments should be restricted. The obligatory arbitration courts presuppose
a universally recognized law, which is neither created by the brutal force of an imperialist
war nor can it be realized in a class society whose legal morality
in each case flows from the material interests of its ruling class. The democratization
of foreign policy, in addition to political democracy, presupposes social democracy within the states, which in turn is impossible
as long as the capitalist form of property and thus the exploitation of man by man
exists.
incorrect!
Unrealizable with reformist means, unrealizable without revolutions, not without socialism
can be lasting, such as...
the emphasis does not lie therein.

completely incorrect!!
So against democracy
The same prerequisite applies to the so-called right of nations to self-determination.
As long as the peoples in their internal economic, political and social relations are dominated
by a possessing class, which has at its disposal all economic and state means of power with which they subject and exploit their own compatriots, the people cannot determine themselves.
reformist
~ \ / ~ reformist (opportunistic)
From these considerations, the proletariat must reject, as sharply as it rejects the imperialist war, the utopian demands of bourgeois pacifists and bourgeoisified socialists,
who are preparing to awaken new \/ in place of old illusions and to place the proletariat
in the service of these illusions, which ultimately only serve to confuse, incite and stir up
chauvinism, war enthusiasm and the policy of perseverance
in
the war.
II
If there is no possibility of establishing a lasting peace on the basis of capitalist
society, its prerequisites are created in the struggle for socialism.
In that socialism sublates capitalist private property, it eliminates, with the exploitation
of the masses by the possessing classes and thus national oppression, at the same time the
causes of war. The struggle for lasting peace can therefore only exist in the
Indeterminate: Reforms are also struggle for the realization of socialism.
that is the correct argument.
struggle for the realization of socialism.
Every proletarian action that abandons the class struggle and subordinates proletarian goals to
those of the bourgeois classes and their governments by solidarizing itself with the national exploiting class works against the conditions
of a lasting peace. Such an action not only ascribes a task to the capitalist classes and the bourgeois governments that they cannot fulfill, it also delivers
the best forces of the working class uselessly to the slaughterhouse and thus consecrates the strongest and
most capable part of the working class, which during the
war as well as in the following time of peace would be primarily called upon to lead the struggle

1905
—
MAY

YEAR

to lead for socialism, to demise and destruction.
The only possible solution from the standpoint of the proletarian Inte-
J_ rest towards the biir-j-
Disclosure of the gerliclien peace goals is therefore the call for ' predatory policy
5 in immediate armistice and immediate
,
.
*
..
establishment of peace negotiations, regardless of secret Treaties
mert of the given state of the military and strategic situation.
III
ONLY to the extent that this call finds ear in the \| ranks of the international proletariat and leads to vigorous actions in the sense of the
4Φ class struggle, with the overthrow of the capitalist class rule as the ultimate goal,
the working class will succeed in gaining influence on the content of the coming peace.
Every other stance excludes the influencing of the peace content
by
the proletariat and leaves the determination of its conditions to the dictate of the governments,
the diplomacy and the ruling classes.
In that the proletariat in the revolutionary mass struggle works for the ultimate goals of socialism and
thus for the liberation of mankind from the scourge of militarism and war,
it must at the same time turn against any annexationist desires of the belligerents. Not because
it regarded the world map, as it existed before the war,
as an immovable unit, not because it considered the future rearrangement of the country borders unnecessary and excluded, it must
wage the struggle against annexations. Social- ism itself strives for the sublation of all
national oppression through the economic and political unification of the peoples on a democratic basis, which cannot be realized within the framework of capitalist
state borders.
The attainment of this goal is however made more difficult
precisely by annexations, in whatever form they may appear,
because the violent dismemberment of the nations, their arbitrary division and
incorporation into foreign states worsen the conditions of the proletarian class struggle.
Just as incompatible as annexation is with the interests of the proletariat is the demand for
war indemnities. Just as the ruling classes seek to shift the costs of warfare in every country
onto the shoulders of the working class, so too would the costs of war entand Revolution
if one here the specific omits, that is the
Revolution, then this good sentence becomes a opportunistic commonplace.

schädigungen letzten Endes vom Proletariat des betreffenden Landes getragen werden. Diese Ueber
wälzung schädigt auch die Arbeiterklasse des siegreichen Landes, indem die Verschlechterung
der wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Lage des Proleta riats des einen Landes auf das Proletariat des andern
Landes zurückwirkt und so die Bedingungen des internationalen Klassenkampfes erschwert.
f Annullierung der
Weder Annexionen noch Kriegsentschädigun
^ t a a t G c p b i i l r l a n
£
e n » sondern gemeinsame Abwalzung der Kriegsla oidcUbbtnuiaen.
g
t
e
n
i
m
r
e
v
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
S
r
e
n
Kampf des Proletariates gegon die herrschenden Klassen in jedem Lande,
das ist die Losung der sozialistischen Arbeiter in ihrer Aktion fiir die sofortige
Herbeifiihrung des
Friedens.
Eben weil der heutige Krieg sehr tief in den Gesamtverhältnissen
der imperialistischen
Epoche wurzelt (competition over world dominance, finance capital, monopolies,
division of the world etc.), therefore benevolent phrases about a lasting
peace, about a democratic peace, etc., about a peace that supposedly is
possible under the present governments, with power remaining with the ruling class of the bourgeoisie, such phrases
deceive the masses, concealing from them the true, real
foundations of imperialist politics, instill false confidence
in the bourgeoisie, turning into reformism *.

TRANSLATION

The Proletariat’s Attitude Toward the Question of Peace
Draft Theses
I
The present war is the result of imperialist contradictions engendered by
bourgeois property relations; its goal is a regrouping of the balance of power between
capitalist classes on the world market according to the
military successes achieved in the war.
Since the aim of this war is not the destruction of capitalist commodity
production, which caused it, it is also unable to eliminate the causes of future
wars. It leaves the old problems unresolved, complicates them even further, and creates
new contradictions, which, on the basis of unhin- dered imperialist development, lead,
along with the intensification of economic
* This paragraph was written by V. I. Lenin on the back of
the first sheet of the theses.
Lenin
[objectively] (essence)

1905 — MAY 1917 p militarist oppression, to new conflicts,
and thus to the danger of further military clashes.
Therefore, when bourgeois governments and their agents assert
that the goal of the war is to establish a lasting peace, they are lying or ignoring
the conditions necessary to achieve such a goal. Just as annexations,
i.e., the oppression of foreign peoples, cannot be a means
that would ensure the peaceful development of mankind, it is equally
impossible to establish a lasting peace through such, admittedly well-intentioned,
but contradicting the historical conditions (of development) of capitalism, demands as
the limitation of armaments, the introduction of compulsory
arbitration courts, the democratization of foreign policy, etc.
On
the basis of
[capitalist] class society these demands remain a utopia.
The limitation of armaments, which in itself is only a means of establishing a truce
between imperialist states, cannot either destroy or soften
the causes of war, not to mention that in the era of imperialism there is no universally binding
scale on the basis of which one could limit armaments.
Compulsory arbitration courts presuppose the existence of a universally recognized
law, which cannot be either created by the brute force of
an imperialist war, nor implemented in such a class society, the legal consciousness of which at each given
stage stems from the material interests of its ruling class.
The democratization of foreign policy presupposes alongside political democracy also
social democracy in the internal life of states, the creation of which, in turn,
is impossible as long as the capitalist form of ownership exists, and thus also the exploitation
of man by man.
Incorrect!
Not achievable by reformist means, not re- alizable without
revolutions, not able to be lasting without socialism, like, for
example,...
The same preconditions are necessary for the so-called right of nations to self-determination.
As long as peoples in their internal economic, political and social relations are sub-
jected to the domination of the possessing classes, who dispose
of all economic and state means of power, with which they oppress and exploit their own
compatriots, the people cannot self-deter- mine.
The main thing is not this.
completely wrong!!
So against democracy.

#
reformist.
~ \ / ~ R e f ° R mist (opportunistic).
Based on these considerations, the proletariat must as resolutely as it rejects
the imperialist war, reject also the utopian demands of
bourgeois pacifists and bourgeoisified socialists, who intend
to awaken new ones instead of the old illusions
\/
and force the proletariat to serve these illusions, which in the
end only contribute to confusion, excitement and incitement to chauvinism, militarist
frenzy and a policy of war until victory.
II
If on the basis of capitalist society it is impossible to establish
a lasting peace, then its preconditions are created in the struggle for socialism.
Socialism, by destroying capitalist private property, eliminates simultaneously with the ex-
ploitation of the popular masses by the possessing classes,
and thus with national oppression, also the causes of war. Therefore, the struggle for a lasting peace
Indefinite: reforms are also the struggle for the implementation of socialism.
this is a correct argument.
can only consist in the struggle for the implementation
of socialism. Every proletarian action, which is a renunciation of the class struggle and
subordinates the goals of the proletariat to the goals of the bourgeois
classes and their governments, insofar as it sol- idarizes with the national class of exploiters,
prevents the creation of conditions for a lasting peace. Such actions only entrust
to the capitalist classes and bourgeois governments a task that they cannot fulfill, they moreover
throw into the slaughterhouse the best forces of the working class without any benefit, and thus
doom to destruction and annihilation the most energetic and capable part
of the working class, which is primarily called upon to wage the struggle for socialism both during
>; war and in the peaceful time following it.
+ exposure of predatory
politics formulated in secret treaties, etc.
+
The only possible solution to the question from the point of view of proletarian interests, compared to bourgeois aims of peace, is therefore the call for an immediate conclusion
of an armistice and an immediate start of peace negotiations, regardless of the military and strategic
situation at the given stage.

1905 — MAY 1917

III
Only to the extent that this call finds a response in the ranks of the international proletariat and
leads to energetic actions in the spirit of class struggle with the ultimate goal of overthrowing
capitalist class domination, will the working class succeed in
exerting influence on the nature of the future world. Any other position
precludes the influence of the proletariat on the nature
of the world and leaves the establishment of its conditions
to the arbitrariness of governments, diplomacy, and the ruling
classes.
Waging a revolutionary mass struggle for the realization of the ultimate goals of socialism, and thus
also for the deliverance of humanity from the scourge of militarism and war, the proletariat must at the same
time oppose all annexationist ambitions of the warring states. The
proletariat must fight against annexations not because it views the (political)
map of the world as it existed before the war as some immutable
quantity, not because it considers unnecessary and impossible the
future formation of new state borders. Socialism itself strives for the destruction
of all national oppression through the economic and political unification of peoples on
a democratic basis, which cannot be carried out within the framework of capitalist state
borders. But it is precisely annexations, in what- ever form they may appear, that hinder
the achievement of this goal, because the forcible dismemberment of nations, their arbitrary division
and inclusion into foreign states worsen the conditions of the proletarian class struggle.
Just as annexations are incompatible with the interests
of the proletariat, so too is the demand for contributions. Just as the ruling classes
in each country try to shift the costs of waging war onto the shoulders of the working class, so too
the burden of paying contributions will ultimately fall also on the proletariat of the respective
country. Such a shifting of the burden of expenses will also harm the working class
of the victorious country, since the deterioration of the economic
and social situation of the proletariat of one country has a reciprocal effect
on the proletariat of another country and thus complicates
the conditions of international class struggle.
Neither annexations nor contributions, but the general liberation
from the burden of war through the revolutionary struggle
of the proletariat against the ruling and revolution
# when here they omit
the specific, i.e., revolution, then this good proposal
turns into an opportunis- tic hackneyed phrase.
+
annulment of state debts.

classes in each country—such is the slogan of the socialist workers in their
call for the immediate establishment of peace.
Precisely because the present war is very deeply rooted in the totality of relations of the imperialist epoch
(competition for world domination, finance capital, monopolies, the division of the world, etc.), therefore benevolent phrases
about a lasting peace, about a democratic peace, etc., about a peace
that is supposedly possible under the present governments, with
the preservation of power for the ruling class of the bourgeoisie,
such phrases deceive the masses, concealing from them the real,
actual foundations of imperialist politics, instill false confidence in the bourgeoisie, turn into reformism*.

SKETCHES OF A SPEECH AT A MEETING OF THE COMMISSION ON
THE QUESTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST
BUREAU
[En deux mots je repondrai à Martoff. II m'accuse de tirer sur le dos
de la majorite de Zimmerwald, quand je dis qu'elle voulait se concilier
avec Vandervelde. Mais la majorite de Zimmervald ne devait pas dire et
n'avait...]**
In two words I will answer Martov. In reproaching me for my criticism of the Zimmerwald majority, he does not respond to what
I have already indicated once: that in the bulletin—not
N 2 as Grimm has