V. I. Lenin

Source: ru:PSS/v48;es:MT
Translated: machine translation (DeepSeek) from the Russian; AI-translated.

CONCERNING THE ARTICLE YOU RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION

Dear Colleague, Having received the article “For a Common Banner”*, I must say in all conscience
that it is absolutely no good. Frankness and straightforwardness above all—is that not so?

The author has absolutely failed to understand the state of affairs in Russia and has allowed himself to be carried away by... how shall I put it more mildly?..

* The article “For a Common Banner” was sent by Voitinsky for publication in the journal Prosveshcheniye. Ed.

...by “familiarity”, shall we say, with the Poshekhonye Mensheviks.

In Russia a process of restoring and strengthening the Marxist workers’ party is going on.

The discussions and resolutions, which evoke such short-sighted mockery in the author, are of enormous educational and organisational significance. “They shout hurrah”—the author sneers—a purely liberal sneer, the sneer of an intellectual completely divorced from the working-class movement. Why is it that in no other opposition party in Russia do local groups of party members openly discuss the party’s internal differences?? Eh??

The author takes some sort of sentimental-hysterical standpoint. In the resolutions there is a tremendous process of rallying the workers’ party—for no one in the world will make the workers choose between two hurrahs (the hurrah of the party members and the hurrah of the liquidators) except conscious sympathy and a sifting of trends. Not to see, behind the crude form of the proletarian

“scrap”, the gigantic ideological and organisational significance of the working class’s struggle over the two trends—that is phenomenal blindness. I can conceive of no better explanation for the author of this blindness than his isolation and his “capture” by the scoundrelly Menshevik
crowd.

The author absolutely failed to understand the reference to the workers’ curia. 47%—50%—67% in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Dumas*. Is that not a fact?? What has the “reactionary character of the curias” (which the rogues and Burenins in the columns of Novaya Rabochaya Gazeta shout about to throw dust in people’s eyes) got to do with it?? Was not the law equally reactionary, in the sense of being equally a curial law, for all three?? Even a babe in arms would understand that the reactionary character of the curias has nothing to do with it. But the fact remains: the intellectuals have gone away (good riddance to the bitch), the workers have stood on their own feet against the liquidators. A new historical phase. A new epoch. And the author invents a “middle line”—it would be laughable if it were not so sad. The author has not understood one hundredth part of the depth of the struggle

* The successive increase in the number of Bolsheviks in the workers’ curias of the Second, Third and Fourth State Dumas. Ed.

against the liquidators. The party cannot be restored except against the liquidators. The workers themselves have now understood this.

In the month from October 20 to November 2—4,800 signatures (N B) for the Six and 2,500 for the Seven (including 1,000 Bund signatures. NB! NB!). Is that not a fact?? That is a fact, not intellectual whining! This, if you please, is not a party, because there is no “common” element and no “congress”!!! Ha-ha!! There will be no common element with the liquidators and the Bundists—it is time to understand this and not to gaze at the irrevocably past old days. A congress is extremely difficult (that is why the wreckers of the party refer us “to a congress” as if ad kalendas graecas!*). These signatures are precisely the new form of the old party. And is that not to be understood??

The old national “federation of the worst type” has gone forever. The author does not understand that either.

The equal rights of the Six and the Seven (the author speaks wrongly of the Eight, for the party does not recognise the eighth as a Social-Democrat** at all) the author understands incorrectly. Why should the party not grant equal rights to a group of near-party people in the Duma?*** The author has not understood the very serious significance of the concept “near-party people”.

Our journal is not a miscellany but a militant organ. Therefore there can be no question of printing the article. But I should be very glad to see the author’s rejoinder to my criticism, just as I should be extremely glad of any exchange of views with old friends. If I have “overdone it” in this criticism and have sometimes expressed myself not too politely—I beg you to forgive me indulgently. I had no desire, upon my word, to offend, but in the name of old friendship I have blurted out “in all simplicity” everything I thought and think.

How splendidly the campaign for the Six against the Seven has developed! What a wonderful rallying and educating of the workers against the liberal working-class politicians! What an excellent, the first in Russia, example that the workers’ party really decides the fate of its

* — postpone to the Greek Kalends! Ed.

** Reference is to E. I. Yagello. Ed.

*** This does not in any way restrict the party; it may educate the near-party people.

NOTE TO THE EDITORIAL BOARD OF THE NEWSPAPER “PROLETARSKAYA PRAVDA”

Duma representation! This is no longer merely a “reading” crowd, this is an organised force. The conference decided—the Six acted—the organised thousands approved after discussing and signing—that is what is called a party as against that little newspaper, the new edition of the old Tovarishch, Novaya Rabochaya Gazeta, which befouls and poisons the working-class movement with intellectualist filth. And how splendidly the workers’ Duma group has developed its activity! At once a step forward not only in name but in all its work! How magnificent is Badayev’s speech on freedom of coalition compared with Tulyakov’s repetition of... liberal little ideas!

Good-bye, dear comrade, spit on the Mensheviks more often, study the facts of the present-day working-class movement, ponder over their significance, and your, excuse me, sourness will pass; you will not seek a “middle line” but will help to rally the workers against the gang of traitors.

Yours, V. I.

---

Sent from Cracow to Irkutsk

First published in 1938
in the magazine Bolshevik No. 2

Printed from the manuscript