Date: 1920-07-25
Source: ru:LS/v34

1920
2. From this arise, as an inevitable consequence, imperialist wars in general—and, in particular, the First Imperialist War of 1914–1918.
3. The outcomes of this war:
a) a decline in the number of globally powerful states, accompanied by a rise in the number of weak, plundered, partitioned, and dependent nations; b) a colossal intensification of all capitalist contradictions—both within individual capitalist countries and between them; c) above all, a worldwide sharpening of the two poles of capitalism: on the one hand, the ever‑growing opulence of a tiny handful of capitalist magnates; on the other, the deepening of need, poverty, destitution, famine, unemployment, and extreme insecurity of existence; d) a surge in militarism, an escalation and acceleration of preparations for new imperialist wars—wars that are economically unavoidable; an increase in the number of wars across the globe, especially revolutionary wars; e) the complete collapse of the League of Nations, the exposure of its mendacity; the downfall of “Wilsonism”—the collapse of bourgeois democracy.
4. A brief explanation, in the form of a characterization (cf. P. Levi’s report of April 14, 1920):
England and America
France
Japan, along with the remaining neutral nations of Europe and America, and the defeated powers—primarily Russia and Germany—
colonies and semi‑colonies (Persia, Turkey, China).
5. Raw materials—exhaustion of resources;
industry—its weakening (in terms of fuel and other inputs);
currency—its collapse; mounting debts; devaluation of money.
The “disintegration” and breakdown of the entire global economic system.
6. The outcome: a world‑wide revolutionary crisis—the communist movement and Soviet power.
G9G5
NOTES ON P. LEVI’S THESES
ON NATIONAL AND COLONIAL QUESTIONS
July 25, 1920
1)
Formulated in overly general terms, as if it applied to all peoples. But what of Persia today?
Excuse me, you are lapsing into “national Bolshevism” by regarding Germany as the sole nation in the world.
2)
And what if the bourgeoisie—in Bulgaria, in Germany, in other countries—should launch a war against England, France, or the like?
What then should workers do?
Boycott? That would be utterly misguided. Workers must participate—but they must preserve their own independence and exploit the common struggle precisely in order to overthrow the bourgeoisie.
HD = Either write exclusively against German national Bolshevism, or not at all.
28593
Translation
1) The formulation is far too broad, as though it were applicable to all peoples. But what of modern-day Persia?
Forgive me, but by viewing Germany as the sole nation in the world, you are succumbing to “national Bolshevism.”
2) And what if the bourgeoisie—in
Bulgaria, Germany, and other countries—were to initiate a war against England, France,
or some similar adversary?
What, then, ought workers to do?
Boycott? That would be entirely mistaken. Workers must take part—but they must safeguard their own autonomy and harness the shared struggle precisely so as to bring down the bourgeoisie.
NN* = Either write solely against German national Bolshevism, or refrain from writing altogether.
2016
LETTER TO THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF THE JEWISH SECTION
UNDER THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE RCP(b)
July 1920
It would be advisable—drawing on the data provided by Rafes and others—to formulate an additional point**, roughly as follows:
The experience of proletarian dictatorship in Ukraine, in those regions where a mixed population is particularly prevalent, equally
* SS—Summa summarum—overall conclusion.
** We are referring here to the additions to the theses on national and colonial questions adopted at the Second Congress of the Comintern, held in July–August 1920.