V. I. Lenin

Source: ru:PSS/v46;es:MT
Translated: machine translation (DeepSeek) from the Russian; AI-translated.

TO THE MEMBERS OF THE LEAGUE OF RUSSIAN REVOLUTIONARY SOCIAL-DEMOCRATS ABROAD

Dear Comrades,

We have received Comrade Deutsch’s “Open Letter” addressed to the members of the League of Russian Revolutionary Social-Democrats Abroad. Comrade Deutsch addresses us as a member of the League Administration; but on matters concerning the League the Administration can only act collectively; therefore, while not regarding Comrade Deutsch’s communication as having any official character and treating it as a private letter from a fellow-member of the League, we nevertheless consider it necessary to express our opinion on the questions it raises. This is all the more necessary because Comrade Deutsch, in his desire to defend the wrongly conceived interests of the League, misrepresents its past and present position.

Objecting to the C.C. circular, Comrade Deutsch declares that “it can hardly be admitted that the change (which the Congress introduced in the League’s relations with Russia) is very substantial, and it is therefore difficult to agree with the C.C. when it declares that this ‘change is very great’.”

To this unsubstantiated assertion of Comrade Deutsch we will oppose the conclusions that logically follow from a comparison of Article 13 of the Party Rules with the old Rules of the League.

According to the latter, the League, which consists “of the editorial board of *Zarya* and persons adhering to it” (Article 1), constitutes an independent “foreign” section of the general organisation of *Iskra*. Its aims are “to spread the ideas of revolutionary Social-Democracy and to assist in building up a militant Social-Democratic organisation by uniting the revolutionary forces”; it not only carries on all work abroad, including independent relations with other foreign organisations (Editorial Board of *Zarya*, § IV) and even independent decisions “on important questions (Editorial Board of *Zarya* and League Administration, § IV), but it also has in its hands “the general management of the transport, publishing and funds of the organisation”, which it exercises “through the medium of the Russian organisation of *Iskra* and those members of the League who are in charge of the various administrative and transport functions (§ IV).” Thus, according to the Rules, the Russian organisation of *Iskra* appears to occupy a place on a par with the members of the League who are in charge of the various functions, i.e., a place subordinate to the League itself. Even the duties of the special organ of the League—its Administration—include participation in Russian affairs, such as “assisting the Editorial Board in carrying out transport undertakings” (§ VIII, 1) and “concern for the establishment of conspiratorial tactics”* (§ VIII, m). It is perfectly clear from the Rules of the League that, by virtue of the functions and rights conferred upon it, it occupied the principal place in the *Iskra* organisation, and that this supremacy was entirely due to its participation in Russian affairs.

Article 13 of the Party Rules deprives the League of this entire sphere of participation in Russian affairs, as Comrade Deutsch himself admits. All official relations of the League with Russian committees are now conducted through the C.C.; all the principal functions of the League that had a bearing on Russian affairs (such as transport, publishing, funds, conspiratorial tactics) fall away, and the League is reduced to the position of a foreign committee with the rights of Russian committees, and, moreover, with rights limited in the sphere of relations with Russia.

Yes, this transition from the position of an independent central organisation to that of a local Party body is indeed “very great”. To illustrate this we append the old Rules of the League, with notes of the articles that fall away or are altered as a result of the abolition of the *Iskra* organisation and the separation of *Zarya* and *Iskra* as Party organs.

From these notes it will be seen that of the first eight—the fundamental—articles of the Rules, which constitute their basis (the other articles, being organisational, are common to all rules), the greater part are completely abolished, while of the remainder a considerable majority of the clauses, and the most important ones at that, fall away. Thus, in effect, the entire former Rules of the League lose their meaning and force.

Further, objecting to the statement in the C.C. circular that “every comrade knows how much confusion, and often even grave misfortunes, were caused by the former disorganisation of relations between the foreign section and Russia”, Comrade Deutsch exclaims: “this assertion is utterly wrong. I believe that the C.C. will be unable to confirm it and that it will not be able to cite a single example of the frequently occurring—as it says—grave misfortunes due to the alleged former ‘confusion’ in the League’s relations with Russia.” A little later, interpreting Article 6 of the Party Rules, Comrade Deutsch asserts that under this article the C.C. “organises committees”, etc., “of course, only in localities where such institutions are absent or are in a disorganised state”. As members of the League, we find it at least strange that Comrade Deutsch, who is a member of the Administration, knows nothing about the “confusion”, “grave misfortunes” and “disorganisation of the League”. In speaking of the League, we, of course, do not mean the dozen or so members who did the special work entrusted to them, or worked for the League just as they worked in the interests of the Social-Democratic movement before the League came into existence and would have worked if it had completely dissolved—we mean here, and indeed anyone who speaks seriously about the matter and does not play with words must mean, the activity of the entire organisation, of all its members, the activity conditioned by the very structure and rules of that organisation. And of this activity in the past of the League there is almost no trace. One of the major tasks—assistance to the Russian movement—was performed exclusively by the Editorial Board, the Administration and a few individual members.

All these persons know very well from experience that a great deal of “confusion” was introduced into the work, which resulted in “grave misfortunes”*.

The second major task—publishing—was carried on exclusively by the *Iskra* Editorial Board: the two special editors elected by the League made their existence known only by editing half of Thun’s book, an editing that, moreover, dragged on for many months; acquainting the public abroad with the course of development of the Russian revolutionary movement (§ III, 5) resulted in two or three bulletins, and very unsuccessful ones at that; the distribution of League bulletins (§ VIII, e), the communication to League members of reports on the progress of affairs in Russia (§ VIII, g)—remained on paper; the drawing up of quarterly reports (§ VIII, f) resulted in a single report for the whole period; the organisation of support groups among the student youth (§ VIII, d) was reduced mainly to mediation between independently arising groups and the League; the project announced in the circulars of the League Administration for enlisting the workers of local groups in joint discussion of various questions, as well as the project for arranging regular contributions, remained on the pages of the circulars. It is characteristic, incidentally, that there was no intercourse whatever among members living in the same town on League affairs, not to speak of intercourse between towns; a considerable part of the League’s work was done by persons not belonging to the League, for example, comrades arriving from Russia. All this Comrade Deutsch has apparently forgotten**. Who, then, is displaying “obvious ignorance of the League’s past”—the C.C. or a member of the League Administration, Comrade Deutsch? Comrade Deutsch’s appeal that “all members of the League should assemble in congress as soon as possible” surprises us by its restless haste. For every member of the League who submits to the decisions of the Second Party Congress, his attitude to the C.C. circular and to the future League congress is quite definite. The Party Rules have changed the role of the League; its old Rules lose their force; it is desirable and possible to reorganise the League with the aim of making it viable only on the general organisational principles adopted in the Party; and since these principles and the entire plan of Party organisation are best known to the C.C., it is quite natural that it should submit the fundamental provisions of the new League Rules for our consideration. Rules drawn up on the basis of these fundamental provisions will, at last, enable the League to enter into the general Party life and activity.

In conclusion, we cannot but express our protest against the gross violations of Party discipline by means of which an official of the League permits himself to hamper the organisational activity of a Party institution and calls upon other comrades to commit similar violations of discipline and of the Rules. Phrases such as “I consider I have no right to take part in such work at the invitation of the C.C.”, or “Comrades! ... we must on no account allow it (the C.C.) to draw up the new Rules for the League”, etc., belong to that sort of agitational methods which can only arouse indignation in anyone who has even the slightest understanding of what is meant by the concepts: Party, organisation, Party discipline. Methods of this sort are all the more revolting because they are employed in relation to a newly-created Party institution, thus constituting an undoubted attempt to undermine confidence in it among Party comrades, and, moreover, are put into circulation under the guise of “member of the League Administration” and behind the back of the C.C.

*Orthodox*, Bonch-Bruyevich, Perova, Insarova, Insarov, Konyagin, Lenin, Litvinov, Petrov, Plekhanov, S. Sarafsky, Sharko.

Geneva.

Written in October 1903

First published in 1904 in the book *Minutes of the Second Congress of the League of Russian Revolutionary Social-Democrats Abroad*

Printed from the text of the book