SPEECH AT A MEETING OF THE PETERBURG COMMITTEE OF THE RSDLP(b)1

1 (14) November 1917

I cannot give a full report, but I will acquaint you with one issue that is of great interest to everyone. The question of the party crisis, which has erupted at a time when the party is in power.

For those following the literature, it is no surprise that there was a polemic in *Rabochy Put'*2, and my attacks against Kamenev and Zinoviev3. In *Delo Naroda*4, it was said that the Bolsheviks would be afraid to take power. This compelled me to take up the pen to show the complete untenability and bottomless stupidity of the SRs ("Will the Bolsheviks Hold State Power?")5. The question of an uprising was raised at a meeting6. I was afraid of opportunists from the internationalist-unity side, but this dissipated, and members of our party did not agree.

This greatly saddened me. The question of the uprising had been raised long ago, and I never backed down, even despite Zinoviev's and Kamenev's disagreement. Once it was known that the uprising was necessary and inevitable, Comrades Zinoviev and Kamenev began to agitate against it. I started to regard them as strikebreakers. I even wrote to the Central Committee about their expulsion7.

I spoke out sharply in the press when Kamenev published in *Novaya Zhizn'*8. But then I fell silent on this matter, as I did not want to be too harsh with them. I view Kamenev's negotiations in the Central Executive Committee for an agreement favorably, for in principle we are not against it9.

After the SRs refused power, I understood that they1*, after Kerensky raised resistance10. After his defeat, after the Red Guards proved so well prepared and enthusiastic (this is no secret). The situation in Moscow dragged on11. Our people fell into pessimism. They said Moscow was being destroyed, we could not take power, etc. And here the question of an agreement arose.

The matter of the uprising is new, and different forces and qualities are needed here.

In Moscow, for example, many cases occurred where Junker cruelty was manifested. The shooting of captured soldiers, etc.12 The Junkers—bourgeois sons—understood that with the people's power, the power of the bourgeoisie ends. At the conference, we outlined a number of measures, a program, and the seizure of banks, etc.13

The Bolsheviks were often too good-natured. If the bourgeoisie had been victorious, they would have acted as in 1848 and 187114. Who thought that we would not face the sabotage of the bourgeoisie? It is clear even to a child. We must arrest directors, and their short-term arrests have yielded very good results.

This does not surprise me; I know how little capable they are of struggle, they just want to keep their cozy positions. In Paris, they were guillotined, but we will deprive them of ration cards, those who do not receive them from the trade unions, who are fulfilling their duty.

And now, at a time when we are in power, there is a split. Zinoviev and Kamenev say that we will not seize power, etc. I cannot calmly listen to these arguments as treachery.

What do they want? For a knife fight to start? Only the proletariat can lead the country. And what about an agreement? The SRs sympathize with us, if Dan sympathizes, but Dan is the bourgeoisie. A fairy tale—children will be killed, etc.

I cannot even speak seriously about this. Trotsky long ago said that unification is impossible. Trotsky understood this, and since then, there has been no better Bolshevik.

Zinoviev says that we are not the Soviet power, we are only the Bolsheviks. The SRs and Mensheviks left, but not because of us.

We were elected by the Congress of Soviets15. This is a new organization, into which those who want to fight go. This is not the people, but the vanguard, behind which the masses follow. We go with the active, not tired, masses. To refuse the uprising now is to retreat to the tired masses, while we are with the vanguard. The Soviets define themselves. The Soviets are the vanguard of the proletarian masses. There are no others—the entire bourgeoisie, etc. Now they propose that we marry the city duma—this is absurd.

They say that we want to introduce socialism—this is absurd. We do not want to create peasant socialism. When they say we must stop—it is impossible. Who says we are not the Soviet power? Who are we then? Not to unite with the duma. If they still proposed an agreement with the Rumcherod16, with Vikzhel17, etc. This is petty trading. Perhaps even agreeing with Kaledin, and then they will stick a spoke in the wheel. This is petty trading, not Soviet power. At the conference, we must put the question precisely: is it only for this, if we gave a piece of power to the dumas, and it stands only like that, 99% of the workers are with us.

If there is a split—let it be. If they are in the majority—take power in the Central Executive Committee and act, and we will go to the sailors.

We are in power. The bourgeoisie is beginning to realize that they need to be "swallowed." Do not go to *Novaya Zhizn'*, these are some spineless snails: now with us, now with the Mensheviks. They say that we alone cannot hold power, etc. But we are not alone2*. Before us is all of Europe. We must begin. Now only the socialist revolution. All these disagreements, doubts—this is absurd.

When I said: we will fight with bread ration cards—the soldiers' faces brightened. They say that the soldiers are incapable. But orators tell us that they have never seen such enthusiasm before.

Only we can create such revolutionary enthusiasm, only we are capable of fighting, etc. And the Mensheviks? No one will follow them. At the upcoming conference, we need to raise the question of further socialist revolution. Kaledin is before us, we have not yet won.

When they say that "there is no power."

When we need to arrest [someone] — we will. But if they tell us: horror and so on — that's the dictatorship of the proletariat. Arresting Vikzhel* — I understand that. When there were cries about arrests, a Tver peasant came and said: "arrest them all"18. That I understand. He has an understanding of what the dictatorship of the proletariat is.

No agreements!

Fund 2, op. 1, file 25833, p. 11-14 — secretary's record

1* The next word could not be deciphered, only clearly written: "po...nom".

2* There is a gap in the document, apparently left for a later insertion of a missing record.

1 In 1927, the Leningrad Istpart published a collection titled "The First Legal Petrograd Committee of the Bolsheviks in 1917," which included the minutes of the meetings of the Petrograd Committee of the RSDLP(b) for 1917, but the minutes from November 1 (14), 1917, were not included in the publication. In the preface, the editor of the collection, P. Kudelli, explains this by poor recording of the speeches. This argument is not very convincing, as almost all the minutes are in the same condition.

This speech by V.I. Lenin at this meeting was first published in "Bulletin of the Opposition" No. 7, pp. 31-37, which was likely published in November-December 1929. It was published again in L.D. Trotsky's book "The Stalin School of Falsification" (Berlin, 1932; see the edition — Moscow, 1990, pp. 117-121). Trotsky claimed that this document had not been published in the USSR because it contained a positive assessment by Lenin of his position in October 1917.

The meeting of the Petrograd Committee of the RSDLP(b) on November 1 (14) began around 8 PM, with one issue on the agenda — the inclusion of Mensheviks and SRs in the Soviet government.

2 "Rabochy Put" (Worker's Path) — a daily newspaper, the Central Organ of the RSDLP(b), published in Petrograd from September 3 (16) to October 26 (November 8), 1917, replacing the closed newspaper "Pravda."

3 V.I. Lenin refers to his speeches against G.E. Zinoviev and L.B. Kamenev, who disagreed with the decisions of the Central Committee of the RSDLP(b) on October 10 (23) and 16 (29), 1917, regarding the preparation for armed uprising.

In defense of this decision, in the newspaper "Rabochy Put" Nos. 40, 41, 42, dated October 19, 20, 21 (November 1, 2, 3), 1917, a letter from Lenin dated October 17 (30), 1917, "To Comrades" was printed (see: Lenin, V.I. Collected Works, Vol. 34, pp. 398-418).

4 "Delo Naroda" (People's Cause) — a daily newspaper of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party, published in Petrograd from March 1917 to June 1918. Lenin refers to the lead article in No. 160, September 21, 1917 (O.S.).

5 V.I. Lenin speaks about his article "Can the Bolsheviks Retain State Power?" (see: Lenin, V.I. Collected Works, Vol. 34, pp. 290-339).

6 V.I. Lenin refers to the meeting of the Central Committee of the RSDLP(b) on October 10 (23), 1917, where he gave a report on the current situation, and his resolution on armed uprising was adopted (see: Lenin, V.I. Collected Works, Vol. 34, pp. 391-393). The next day, L.B. Kamenev and G.E. Zinoviev sent a letter to the Central Committee, "On the Current Moment," protesting the resolution adopted by the Central Committee (see: Protocols of the Central Committee of the RSDLP(b). August 1917 - February 1918. Moscow, 1958, pp. 86-92).

7 This refers to V.I. Lenin's letter to party members dated October 18 (31), 1917, and his letter to the Central Committee of the RSDLP(b) dated October 19 (November 1), 1917 (see: Lenin, V.I. Collected Works, Vol. 34, pp. 419-427).

8 In the newspaper "Novaya Zhizn" (New Life) No. 156, dated October 18 (31), 1917, a note "Y. Kamenev on the 'Outbreak'" was published, which reported L.B. Kamenev's statement against the armed uprising (see: Protocols of the Central Committee of the RSDLP(b)..., pp. 115-116).

"Novaya Zhizn" — a daily newspaper of the Menshevik-Internationalists, published from April 18 (May 1) to July 2 (15), 1917, after which it was replaced by the newspaper "Svobodnaya Rossiya" (Free Russia) starting from September 8 (21), 1917.

9 V.I. Lenin speaks about the inclusion of L.B. Kamenev in the commission of the VTsIK (Kamenev, G.Ya. Sokolnikov, and D.B. Ryazanov), appointed to participate in the meeting called by Vikzhel (see also footnote 17) together with representatives of political parties on the question of the composition of the government. In the statement sent by Vikzhel to the VTsIK, it was asserted that a government relying on one party "cannot find recognition and support throughout the country" ("Izvestia of the VTsIK and the Petrograd Soviet" No. 212, October 31 (November 13), 1917). On November 1 (14), the VTsIK heard the report of the delegation on the negotiations and adopted a resolution on the conditions for an agreement with other parties (see: Decrees of the Soviet Government. Vol. 1. Moscow, 1957, p. 33). On the same day, the Central Committee of the RSDLP(b) condemned the position of the delegation, and the majority of the Central Committee members spoke in favor of ending the negotiations on a coalition government (see: Protocols of the Central Committee of the RSDLP(b)..., pp. 124-130).

Negotiations continued with the Left SRs and ended on November 17 (30) with their entry into the Council of People's Commissars.

10 A.F. Kerensky, from October 29 (November 11), 1917, tried to gather troops and launch an offensive on Petrograd, but on November 1 (14), the Cossack units loyal to him, led by General P.N. Krasnov, were defeated. Kerensky fled from Gatchina, and Krasnov and his staff were arrested.

11 In Moscow, the revolutionary forces won on November 2 (15), 1917.

12 In the Moscow Kremlin, soldiers of the 56th Regiment and the Arsenal, who had surrendered, were shot by cadets on October 28 (November 10), 1917.

13 V.I. Lenin refers to the resolution of the Seventh (April) Conference of the RSDLP(b) (April 24-29 (May 7-12), 1917) on the current moment (see: CPSU in Resolutions and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences, and Plenums of the Central Committee. 9th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 507-509).

Banks were nationalized by decree of the VTsIK on December 14 (27), 1917 (see: Decrees of the Soviet Government. Vol. I, p. 230).

14 This refers to the bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1848 and the Paris Commune of 1871 in France.

15 V.I. Lenin refers to the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, held in Petrograd on October 25-26, 1917, which proclaimed the transfer of power in the country to the Soviets. The Congress approved decrees on peace and land and a resolution on the Soviet government.

* Vikzhel: Executive Committee of the All-Russian Railwaymen's Union.

16 Rumcherod — The Executive Committee of the Soldiers', Sailors', Workers', and Peasants' Deputies of the Romanian Front, the Black Sea Fleet, and the Odessa Military District — was elected at the 1st Front and Regional Congress of Soviets from May 10-27 (May 23-June 9), 1917, in Odessa. The majority of its members were SRs and Mensheviks. It supported the Provisional Government. It was dissolved by order of the Military Revolutionary Committee at the General Headquarters and the Commander-in-Chief N.V. Krylenko on December 3 (16), 1917.

17 Vikzhel — The All-Russian Executive Committee of Railway Workers — was established at the 1st All-Russian Constituent Congress of Railway Workers (Moscow, July 15 (28) - August 23 (September 7), 1917). The committee included 14 SRs, 6 Mensheviks, and 3 Bolsheviks. On December 12 (25), 1917, the Extraordinary All-Russian Congress of Railway Workers and Artisans expressed no confidence in Vikzhel and elected the All-Russian Executive Committee of Railway Workers (Vikzhedor).

18 Apparently, V.I. Lenin is referring to the speech of a delegate from Tver Province at the session of the 2nd All-Russian Congress of Soviets on October 26 (November 9), 1917: "Then a peasant from Tver Province spoke, saying that he brought greetings and respect to this assembly, and on behalf of his electors, the peasants, he appealed to the assembly not to hesitate to arrest the entire Executive Committee of the Peasant Soviet, because it is not composed of peasant representatives but of Cadets who do not defend the people's interests but betray them, and their place is in prison" (The Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets of R. and S. D. M.-L., 1928, p. 74).