1

Since we have proportional elections, consequently there is no need for a bloc; the minority is secured. I sharply protest against comrade Kalinin, because a bloc with the petty bourgeoisie, with chauvinists – is unthinkable. The slightest thought of a bloc with the petty bourgeoisie, supported by capitalists, is – a betrayal of socialism. Who will we bloc with, with the publishers of *Internatsional*?{125} But then this newspaper has not been published, consequently we do not know them. Chkheidze is the worst disguise for defensism. Trotsky, publishing a newspaper in Paris, did not say straight out whether he is for or against Chkheidze. We have always spoken against Chkheidze, since he represents a subtle disguise of chauvinism. Trotsky has not spoken clearly to the end. Why then do we know that Larin (publisher of *Internatsional*) is not employing the same tactics?

We must come forward with a definite program. Now there exists a struggle of three parties: the first – this is the party of robbers, murderers; the second – those who cover up these robbers with fine words, and, finally, the third party – no support whatsoever to the robbers, explanation of the errors of everyone, including the errors of the Executive Committee of the Soviet of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies.

The fault of the Soviet lies not in that they did not take power, but in that they teach the people badly, cry out about victory over the government.

2

I am decisively in favor of including in our lists candidates from among the Mensheviks who are breaking with chauvinism. This is not a bloc. Russia is remarkably well organized in terms of parties. Concerning the program: the question of a paid militia, the food question, the tax question – these questions are important.