In No. 1 of the Bund's "Byulleten'" {59} (September 1916) in a letter from a Bundist in Petersburg dated 26. II. 1916 we read:

"The difficulty of adopting the formula of defense is multiplied many times over for us precisely because we, in any case, cannot keep silent about the Polish question, as our Russian comrades are doing for now." (Let us not forget that the "comrades" of this gentleman are Potresov and Co.) "And the fact that even defenders of the war in our ranks do not wish to apply the formula 'without annexations' with respect to Russia — in the eyes of those who are psychologically unable to accept the defense of the war right now, is a strong argument against defense, because they ask with irony: what exactly are you defending? And the idea of Polish independence enjoys recognition among the leadership."

(It is unclear which leadership.)

When we declared in our 1915 resolution that Germano-phile chauvinism predominates in the Bund, {39} Messrs. Kosovsky and Co. could only respond with abuse. Now, in their very own organ, their very own party colleague confirms our declaration! For if the Bundist "defenders of the war" do not wish to apply the formula "without annexations" with respect to Russia (note that about Germany — not a word!), then how does this differ in essence from Germano-phile chauvinism?

If the Bundists wished and were able to think, they would see that they are lost in the question of annexations. There is only one way out of the confusion and muddle: to adopt our program, clarified as far back as 1913. {40} Namely: in order to conduct a sensible and honest policy of opposition to annexations, socialists and democrats of oppressed nations must, in all their propaganda and agitation, declare as scoundrels those socialists of oppressing nations (whether Great Russians or Germans, Poles with respect to Ukrainians, etc.) who do not stand consistently and unconditionally for the freedom of separation of nations oppressed (or forcibly held) by their own nation.

If the Bundists do not accept and will not accept this conclusion, it is only because of their unwillingness to quarrel with the Potresovs in Russia, with the Legines, Südekums and even Lederours (he is not for the freedom of separation of Alsace-Lorraine) in Germany, with the nationalists — or rather, social-chauvinists of Poland, etc.

A respectable reason, one must say!

Written in September–October 1916

First published in 1931 in Lenin Miscellany XVII

Printed from the manuscript