2 2 8
LENIN MISCELLANY.
*) This refers to the trip by two inter-district members—Plekhanovites through all the émigré centers: A. Popov (N. Vorobyev)—the fair-haired one and N. Stoynov—the dark-haired one. See "Proletarskaya Revolyutsiya," No. 10 (22), pp. 105–107.
2) De la triple Entente—of the triple accord—the Entente.
3) Huysmans—secretary of the International Socialist Bureau of the Second International.
4) This draft declaration is not in the Institute's possession.
5) More precisely.
6) Mayevsky (Evg. Gutovsky)—one of the prominent literary figures of Menshevism, a defensist—edited "Nasha Zarya"—the legal organ of the Mensheviks, published in 1910–1915 in Petersburg.
7) See note 1 to this same letter.

17.
Dear comrade!
Thank you very much for all your efforts and assistance, which you write about in your last letter.
Your articles in "Nashe Slovo" and for "Communist"¹) on Scandinavian affairs raised the following question in my mind:
Is it possible to praise and consider correct the position of the left Scandinavian social-democrats who deny the arming of the people? I disputed this with Hoglund in 1910²) and proved to him that this is not leftism, not revolutionaryness, but simply the philistinism of provincial philistines. These Scandinavian philistines have ensconced themselves in their little states almost at the North Pole and are proud that it takes three years of riding to traverse them! How can one allow that a revolutionary class, on the eve of social revolution, be *against* the arming of the people? This is not a struggle against militarism, but a cowardly endeavor to shy away from the great questions of the capitalist world. How can one "recognize" class struggle without understanding the inevitability of its transformation at certain moments into civil war?
It seems to me that one ought to gather material on this and come out decisively *against* this in "Communist," and for the instruction of the Scandinavians, you could then have this printed in Swedish, etc.
I would like to know your opinion on this in more detail.
*) Glasier, in my view, is a worthless contributor: although he has some proletarian fiber, he is nonetheless an insufferable opportunist. It is hardly possible to go forward with him: he will weep within two days and say that he was "drawn in," that he desires nothing of the sort and does not recognize it.
A. Kollontai.
[Spring 1915]
*) One French word is illegible.
Ed.