V. I.

Lenin

The Congress resolution in today’s papers condemning our Party
will no doubt be compared by every class-conscious worker and
soldier with our Party’s statement addressed to the All-Russia
Congress of Soviets, a statement made public on the 11th, and
printed in today’s Pravda . [1]

The contradictory nature of the stand taken by the Congress
leaders has been revealed by their resolution and particularly
by our statement.

“ The basis for the success and strength of the Russian
revolution is the unity of all revolutionary democrats—the
workers, soldiers, and peasants," reads the first and cardinal
clause of the Congress resolution. And, of course, this point
would undoubtedly he correct if what it meant by “unity” were
unity in the struggle against the counter-revolution
. But what if through their leaders a certain number of the
"workers, soldiers and peasants" form a bloc and units with the
counter-revolution? Isn’t it clear that this section of the
“democrats” is in reality no longer “revolutionary”?

The Narodniks (Socialist-Revolutionaries) and the Mensheviks
mill probably be indignant at the mere fact that we think it
possible, that we think it conceivable, for any section of the
"workers, soldiers and peasants" to “unite” with the counter-revolution.

To those who attempted to obscure our arguments and hush up the
issue by indignation, we would reply by simply referring them to
the third clause of the same resolution: ”... the resistance of the counter-revolutionary groups of
the propertied classes is growing. " This is an important statement. It would have been perfectly correct if
it had said: the bourgeoisie, or capitalists, and landowners
(instead of the "propertied classes", which include the
well-to-do section of the petty bourgeoisie).

Unquestionably, the resistance of the bourgeoisie is growing.

But then it is the bourgeoisie that control the majority in the
Provisional Government with whom the Socialist- Revolutionary
and the Menshevik leaders have united, not only in general
political terms, but also organisationally, in one institution,
the Ministry!

This is the pivot of the contradictory stand taken by the
leaders of the Congress, this is the fundamental source of the
instability of their entire policy. They are allied with the
bourgeoisie via the government, where they are controlled by the
bourgeois Ministers forming the majority. At the same time, they
are forced to admit that "the resistance of the counter-revolutionary
groups of the propertied classes is growing"’

It is obvious that, under the circumstances, the party of the
revolutionary proletariat can accept “unity” with the “revolutionary” democrats (revolutionary in word but not deed)
only up to a certain point. We are for unity with them as long
as they fight against the counter-revolution. We are against
unity with them as long as they ally themselves with the
counter-revolution.

The "growing resistance" of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie is an urgent problem posed by reality. To evade this
main and fundamental issue through non-committal phrases about
"the unity and co-ordinated actions of the revolutionary
democrats", thereby glossing over the unity or co-ordination
between a section of the revolutionary democrats and the
counter-revolution, would be illogical and foolish.

Hence, all the arguments in the Congress resolution condemning
our demonstration as “clandestine” and maintaining that mass
actions and demonstrations are permissible only with the
knowledge or consent of the Soviets, fall to the ground as a
matter of principle. These arguments are of no consequence at
all. The workers’ party will never accept them, as we have
already said in our statement to the All-Russia Congress. For
every demonstration is merely a means of agitation as long as it is peaceful, and you can
neither ban agitation not impose uniformity on it.

On the formal side, the resolution is even weaker. To ban or
decree you must be vested with state power. First achieve that,
you gentlemen who now lead the Congress—we are in favour of
it, although you are our opponents—and then you will have
the right to ban or decree. At the moment you do not wield state
power, at the moment you allow your selves to be swayed by the
ten bourgeois Ministers—you are caught in the meshes of
your own weakness and indecision.

Phrases like a "clearly expressed will", and so on, will not
do. A will, if it is the will of the state, must be expressed in
the form of a law established by the state .
Otherwise the word “will” is an empty sound. The moment you
thought of law , gentlemen, you would have been certain to recall that the Constitution of a free republic cannot ban peaceful demonstrations or any mass actions by
any party or group.

A contradictory stand has bred very strange revolutionary
ideas—ideas as to the struggle against the counter-revolution, ideas about the state (Constitution), and
ideas of law in general. With the furious abuse against our
Party refuted, nothing is left, nothing whatsoever!

Despite the furious abuse against our proposed demonstration,
the demonstration is to be held a week later.

---
Notes:
[1]
Reference is to the statement which the Central Committee of the
R.S.D.L.P.(B.) and the Bureau of the Bolshevik group at the
First All-Russia Congress of Soviets made regarding the ban on
the peaceful demonstration appointed by the Bolshevik Party for
June 10 (23), 1917. The statement exposed the provocative conduct
of the Menshevik and S.R. loaders of the Congress of Soviets, who
banned the demonstration, and the counter-revolutionary policies
of the Provisional Government. It warned that the revolution was
in danger, and called oil the working class to be staunch and
vigilant.

The statement was road at the joint meeting of the Congress
Steering Committee, the Executive Committee of the Petrograd
Soviet, the Executive Committee of the Congress of Peasants’
Deputies, and the bureaus of all Congress parties on June 11 (24).
The Bolsheviks had wanted the statement to be read at the Congress
sitting on June 12 (25), but the chairman of the meeting denied
the Bolsheviks the floor. The statement was therefore handed to the
Congress Steering Committee. The same sitting passed a resolution
condemning the Bolshevik Party despite the fact that the
Bolsheviks had called off the demonstration.