1905 – May 1917

III. The Attitude of Social-Democratic Circles and the Workers’ Press Toward the Revolutionary Strikes of 1912
The Liquidators at the Bund Conference

“Our Dawn”

5 etc.
The August Conference of Diplomats

“Luch” by V. A., in No. 56 of “Luch”
Fyodor Dan, in Nos. 66–73
No. 69

No. 77 Against the Petersburg Committee

“Long-Term Work Lies Ahead” (p.

§ 

of the resolution dated December 1, 1912). There is no party.
“The Emerging Mass Movement” (p. 18, § 3 ib.*)
 
9. 

9 months
700,000
 
1 (
The Moscow Center: 188 “Explanations”

December, around
30 za ** approximately 968
Compare with “Nevskaya Zvezda,” No. 14

-
1,842 thousand.

-

» 

-

» 

-

» 

-

» 

-

» 

• 

»
1912 – approx. 1,000 thousand.
Political Strikes by Participants
1 The materials published were prepared by
V. I. Lenin for the Central Committee meeting of the RSDLP with Party Workers and were used by him,
apparently, in his reports “The Revolutionary Upturn, the Strikes, and the Tasks of the Party,” and “On the Question of Liquidationism and Unity,” which he delivered at the meeting (the texts of these reports have not been preserved). For the Central Committee’s “Notice” regarding the meeting and its resolutions—see V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Volume 22, pp. 249–270.
* — ibidem — there as well.
** — zirka — about, approximately.
2*

The Meeting
of the Central Committee
of the RSDLP
with Party Workers, dubbed “February” for reasons of secrecy,
took place in
Kraków
from December 26, 1912, to January 1, 1913 (January 8–14, 1913).
2 This was, apparently, the preliminary agenda for the Kraków Meeting.
3 “Pravda” was a daily, legal Bolshevik newspaper; its first issue appeared in Petrograd on April 22 (May 5), 1912.
“Pravda” was subjected to constant police persecution.
On July 8 (21), 1914, the newspaper was shut down. Publication of “Pravda” resumed only after the February Bourgeois-Democratic Revolution of 1917. Starting on March 5 (18), 1917, “Pravda” began to appear as the organ of the Central Committee and the Petrograd Committee of the RSDLP.
4 We are referring to the 9th Bund Conference, held in Vienna in June
1912.
6 “Our Dawn” was a monthly, legal journal of the Menshevik-Liquidators; it was published in Petrograd from 1910 to 1914. Around “Our Dawn” a center of Liquidators had formed in Russia.
6 The reference is to the Liquidators’ Conference held in Vienna
in August 1912; it was at this conference that the anti‑party August Bloc took shape, organized by L. D. Trotsky.
7 In No. 56 of the Menshevik newspaper “Luch,” dated November 21 (December 4), 1912, an article titled “What Ails Us?” was printed under the signature “V. A.” In the remaining issues, cited by V. I. Lenin, “Tactical Notes” were published, signed “F. D.” In these articles, the authors attacked
the Bolshevik tactic of organizing mass revolutionary
strikes among workers, calling it “a game of strikes.” Lenin offered an analysis and critique of these attacks by the Liquidators in his articles: “The Disease of Reformism,” “The Development of the Revolutionary Strike and Street Demonstrations,” and in the initial postscript to the latter article (see V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Volume 22, pp. 218–220, 281–287, 396).
“V. A.” was V. M. Abrosimov, a secret agent of the Okhrana. During the years of reaction and the new revolutionary upsurge, he acted as an active Liquidator. In 1912, he took part in the anti‑party August Conference.
“F. D.” was F. I. Dan (Gurvich)—one of the leaders of the Mensheviks.
During the years of reaction and the new revolutionary upsurge, he headed, abroad,
a group of Liquidators.
8 In No. 77 of the newspaper “Luch,” dated December 16 (29), 1912, the lead article “On the Question of Workers’ Petitions” was printed. The newspaper condemned the Bolshevik Petrograd Committee of the RSDLP for organizing a strike in support of a petition concerning workers’ insurance, submitted by the Social-Democratic faction of the Fourth State Duma.
9 The following points are quoted from Resolution No. 1 and No. 3, “On the Current Moment and the Tasks of the Party,” adopted at the Sixth (Prague) All‑Russian Conference of the RSDLP in January 1912. The draft had been written by V. I. Lenin (see V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Volume 21, pp. 125–127); the final text of the resolution can be found in “The CPSU in Resolutions and Decisions of Party Congresses, Conferences, and Plenums of the Central Committee,” Part I, 1954, p. 273.
10 The numerical data cited here and below were used by
V. I. Lenin in his article “The Development of the Revolutionary Strike and Street Demonstrations” (see V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Volume 22, pp. 281–287).
11 In the Bolshevik, legal newspaper “Nevskaya Zvezda,”
on June 14 (July 7), 1912, data were presented on the number of participants in political strikes in Russia between 1905 and 1911.

1905 – May 1917


NOTES
AND ADDITIONS
TO I. F. ARMAND’S “NOTE”

[1913, no earlier than August]
Page 1 – 1st sentence
Develop Snowden’s perspective
 
2 from the standpoint of opportunism.
The beginning of the upswing (revolutionary)
among English workers
 
3. Opportunists, aligned with the liberals—acting as brakes.
Page 1.
(before the 2nd sentence)
Add an assessment of Larkin
 
4: elaborate further (drawing on K. Garey’s own words
 
5: we might reconstruct Larkin’s position not through direct quotation, but through a characterization).
And then.
Even
K. Garey rose up
(though gently)...
Page 3, near the end: elaborate further on syndicalism and opportunism—as mutually reinforcing forms of folly and bourgeois deviations.
Conclusion:
From the “Note,” we should craft an article with a clear beginning and end, narrating the story
of the matter (for Russian workers), fleshing it out with concrete details, and drawing firm conclusions.
1 It has not been possible to determine exactly which note
I. F. Armand is referring to.
I. F. Armand had been a member of the Bolshevik Party since 1904, a professional revolutionary, and an active participant in the international women’s labor
and communist movements. During the period of the World Imperialist War, she took part in the International Socialist Women’s Conference (1915), the International Youth Conference (1915), and the Zimmerwald and Kienthal Conferences of internationalists.
From August 1913 to January 1914, I. F. Armand lived in Kraków, where V. I. Lenin and N. K. Krupskaya were also residing at the time.
2 Philip Snowden was the chairman
of the Independent Labour Party of England, representing its right-wing, opportunistic faction—a staunch opponent of communism.
3 A powerful revolutionary upsurge in the English labor movement began in 1911 with a strike by railway workers and continued
right up until the outbreak of the First World War. Fearing the broad scope of this movement, the opportunists sought in every way to slow it down.
Snowden, for example, declared that strikes “demoralize” workers.
4 James Larkin was a leading figure in the Irish labor movement, one of the heads of the trade unions. He was the organizer of the Irish Union of Transport Workers and Laborers. Under Larkin’s leadership, this union carried out a port workers’ strike in 1911, and in 1913, it launched the Great Dublin General Strike. For his role in leading the Dublin Strike, Larkin was arrested and sentenced to seven months in prison.

6 James Keir Hardie was a prominent figure in the English labor movement, a reformist and leader of the Independent Labour Party. He was one of the founders of the Labour Party. He belonged to the right wing of the Second International.
During the Great Dublin General Strike of 1913, though hesitantly, he spoke out against the English government’s repressive measures against strike participants.

NOTE TO AN UNIDENTIFIED RECIPIENT

[Between December 14 and 26, 1913]
This draft is intended for the CZO
 
2 and for overseas groups.
Take it as a model.
Expand the campaign.
After making a copy, return it
NB))
Immediately.
What about the Central Office?
3 If you’re delayed for a long time, telegraph us—then we’ll include information about the MSB.
DRAFT RESOLUTION FOR THE COMMITTEE
OF THE FOREIGN ORGANIZATION AND FOREIGN GROUPS
Draft
Having reviewed the MSB resolution concerning Russian affairs…
we resolved to welcome the Bureau’s decision.
A thorough clarification of the serious disagreements existing within the Russian labor movement—which the Bureau had placed at the top of its priorities—and which, in our view, constitutes the most important and absolutely necessary prerequisite for further steps.
We
therefore resolved to do everything in our power to help our comrades become familiar with the current state of affairs in Russia.
On the other hand, we cannot remain silent about the lack of familiarity overseas among our comrades regarding the affairs of the RSDLP, which became evident during the discussion of this issue in the Bureau. We would have failed to fulfill our direct duty as members of the RSDLP if we had left unchallenged the statement made at the Bureau meeting by the representative of German Social Democracy, Kautsky, that “the party does not exist.” Believing that this statement stemmed from insufficient or one-sided knowledge of the Russian labor movement on the part of this comrade, we consider it our duty to point out that any socialist speaking on Russian matters who is required to be familiar with the basic facts of the movement—elections, the composition of parliamentary representation, party press, decisions of party bodies, the course of the strike movement, and so forth—would have led Comrade Kautsky to recognize that our party, having survived the era of counter‑revolutionary terror, is the guiding force of the entire labor movement in Russia, in all its diverse manifestations.

1905 – May 1917

We express the hope that the steps being taken by the Bureau to familiarize itself with the situation in Russia will not only clarify the true relationship between the RSDLP and the groups that had broken away from it, but will also make it impossible in the future for responsible figures within the national social democracy to make statements similar to those made by Comrade Kautsky.
1 The document was drafted as a resolution for the Committee of the Foreign Organization and Foreign Groups. The draft was penned by L. B. Kamenev.
2 The CZO—the Committee of Foreign Organizations—had been elected at the meeting of foreign groups of the RSDLP held in Paris in December
1911. During the war years, the CZO, based in Switzerland and operating under the direct guidance of V. I. Lenin, carried out extensive work coordinating the activities of the RSDLP’s foreign sections, fought against social‑shovinists, and worked to unite the left-wing internationalists of international social democracy.
3 We are referring to the Central Organ of the RSDLP, the illegal newspaper “Social-Democrat,” which was published from February 1908 to January 1917.

LETTER TO THE REGIONAL EXECUTIVE OF SDKP&L

To the Regional Executive of S.D.K.P.&L.
Dear Comrades!
As we have already informed Comrade Hanetsky in personal conversations, we will place your statement in the discussion appendix to the CO, which will be published no later than the next issue of the CO as an insert in that issue of the CO.
Edited by the CO of the Russian
S.D.R.P. “Social-Democrat” by N. Lenin
Kraków, April 29, 1914.
1 SDKP&L—the Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania—was a revolutionary party of the Polish working class; it emerged in 1893
initially as the Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland, and after merging with a portion of Lithuanian Social Democrats in August 1900, it came to be known as SDKP&L. At the IV (Unifying) Congress of the RSDLP in 1906, SDKP&L was admitted into the RSDLP as a territorial organization.
Following the defeat of the 1905–1907 revolution, divisions arose within SDKP&L, which in 1912 led Polish social democracy to split. Supporters of the Main Board of SDKP&L adopted an opportunistic stance, backing anti‑Bolshevik currents; supporters of the Regional Board of SDKP&L, meanwhile, maintained contact with the Bolsheviks and supported the line of the Central Committee of the RSDLP.
The document we are publishing was written in response to the following letter:
“To the Editorial Board of ‘Social-Democrat.’ Dear Comrades! We request that you

place the enclosed ‘Statement’ in the next issue of ‘Social-Democrat.’ With party greetings.
For the Regional Board
SDKP&L
Hanetsky. March 3, 1914.”
In the “Statement” of the Regional Board of SDKP&L, the discussion centered on the resolution regarding the national question, adopted at the Poronin (“summer”) meeting of the Central Committee of the RSDLP with party workers in the autumn of 1913. The Regional Board, citing the fact that delegates from SDKP&L who had participated in the meeting with advisory votes had spoken out against the resolution, disputed Lenin’s position on the right of nations to self‑determination—even to secession. The Regional Board of SDKP&L mistakenly believed that implementing the slogan of the right of nations to self‑determination—that is, to secede and form an independent state—would supposedly lead to the fragmentation of proletarian forces.
Since publication of “Social-Democrat” had been temporarily suspended and the next, 33rd, issue did not appear until November 1, 1914—already during the World Imperialist War—the “Statement” was never printed.
MATERIALS FOR THE REPORT OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE RSDLP
AT THE BRUSSELS MEETING

[Between September and June 13, 1914]


VARIANT OF THE REPORT’S INTRODUCTION
Two fundamental concepts, two primary perspectives that we have already outlined in the MSB report for its December 1913 session.
First perspective: in Russia there exists an illegal party
of Social Democrats in the form of cells—groups of Social Democratic workers—whose cells are surrounded by a network (more or less dense, depending on the city) of legal workers’ associations.
This party unites the overwhelming majority of conscious workers in Russia. The legal newspaper
of this fully organized party is “Pravda”; the illegal organization is represented by conferences and meetings held in January 1912, November 1913, and during the summer.

2. Against
this workers’ party, bourgeois-intellectual groups—such as the Liquidators and various factions seeking to aid them—strive to undermine and disrupt the labor movement. Only by ending the separate existence of these groups and subordinating them to the majority of conscious workers can we truly help the cause of unity.
Another perspective: within the Russian Social Democratic movement, fragmentation and chaos reign, with a multitude of factions and small groups locked in factional struggles—among them, the worst factionalism belongs to the “Leninists.” The only way to help the cause is through agreement or compromise among all currents and all factions.

Page of the manuscript outlining the plan and key points of the report to be delivered by the Central Committee of the RSDLP at the Brussels Meeting.
June 1914.

1905 – May 1917

64.ч
N18. 0
207., , 1391. 0 4 v * = 1 464. 9 7

60-00= 4.!%
13.ял
73. 93
600 900 /146 497
585 988 4.!%
G49 120


VARIANT OF THE REPORT’S CONCLUDING SECTION
(“Conditions”)
Based on the objective data set forth above and on the experience gained over 22 years of open, direct separation—
we,
the Central Committee
of the RSDLP,
are convinced that the Liquidators are an intellectual group that resists discipline and organization and has proven incapable of building a party
and of working in a party-oriented manner, of uniting workers within the party.
We know that all other groups, currents, factions, and the like do not share our view. All we can do in such a situation is to invite them to disprove us,
to show us, through experience, where we have erred.
Let them establish, from among all the groups that have defended compromise (or even unity) with the Liquidators in print—Trotsky,
the Bund,
Plekhanov
4 , “Forward”
 5 and others—let them form a joint commission (as they wish, with a decisive vote or an advisory vote) and let it
publish, within six months, its assessment of all party questions.
Then the workers of Russia will see whether we are mistaken in denying the possibility of working with the Liquidators.


PLAN AND KEY POINTS OF THE REPORT BY THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE RSDLP
Report of the Central Committee
Theoretical—
1 A))
The essence of the differences, namely n p m w (liquidationism)
Cultural J
* — Summa -- sum; total.