15 lines
31 KiB
Plaintext
15 lines
31 KiB
Plaintext
|
J. V. Stalin
|
|||
|
|
Source : Works, Vol. 13, 1930 - January 1934
|
|||
|
|
Publisher : Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1954
|
|||
|
|
Transcription/HTML Markup : Salil Sen for MIA, 2008
|
|||
|
|
Public Domain : Marxists Internet Archive (2008). You may freely copy,
|
|||
|
|
distribute, display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit
|
|||
|
|
"Marxists Internet Archive" as your source.Dear Comrades,I emphatically protest against the publication in the magazine Proletarskaya Revolutsia 1 (No. 6, 1930) of Slutsky's anti-Party and semi-Trotskyist article, "The Bolsheviks on German Social-Democracy in the Period of Its Pre-War Crisis," as an article for discussion.Slutsky asserts that Lenin (the Bolsheviks) underestimated the danger of Centrism in German Social-Democracy and in pre-war Social-Democracy in general; that is, he underestimated the danger of camouflaged opportunism, the danger of conciliation towards opportunism. In other words, according to Slutsky, Lenin (the Bolsheviks) did not wage an irreconcilable struggle against opportunism, for, in essence, underestimation of Centrism is tantamount to refraining from a thoroughgoing struggle against opportunism. It follows, therefore, that in the period before the war Lenin was not yet a real Bolshevik; that it was only in the period of the imperialist war, or even at the close of the war, that Lenin became a real Bolshevik.Such is the tale Slutsky tells in his article. And you, instead of branding this new-found "historian" as a slanderer and falsifier, enter into discussion with him, provide him with a forum. I cannot refrain from protesting against the publication of Slutsky's article in your magazine as an article for discussion, for the question of Lenin's Bolshevism, the question whether Lenin did or did not wage an irreconcilable struggle, based on principle, against Centrism as a certain form of opportunism, the question whether Lenin was or was not a real Bolshevik, cannot be made into a subject of discussion.In your statement entitled "From the Editorial Board," sent to the Central Committee on October 20, you admit that the editorial board made a mistake in publishing Slutsky's article as a discussion article. That is all to the good, of course, despite the fact that the statement of the editorial board is very belated. But in your statement you commit a fresh mistake by declaring that "the editorial board consider it to be politically extremely urgent and necessary that the entire complex of problems pertaining to the relations between the Bolsheviks and the pre-war Second International be further analysed in the pages of Proletarskaya Revolutsia." That means that you intend once again to draw people into a discussion on questions which are axioms of Bolshevism. It means that you are again thinking of converting the subject of Lenin's Bolshevism from an axiom into a problem requiring "further analysis." Why? On what grounds?Everyone knows that Leninism was born, grew up and became strong in relentless struggle against opportunism of every brand, including Centrism in the West (Kautsky) and Centrism in our country (Trotsky, etc.). This cannot be denied even by the downright enemies of Bolshevism, It is an axiom. But you are dragging us back by trying to turn an axiom into a problem requiring "further analysis." Why? On what grounds? Perhaps through ignorance of the history of Bolshevism? Perhaps for the sake of a rotten liberalism, so that the Slutskys and other disciples of Trotsky may not be able to say that they are being gagged? A rather strange sort of liberalism, this, exercised at the expense of the vital interests of Bolshevism. . . .What, exactly, is there in Slutsky's article that the editorial board regard as worthy of discussion?1) Slutsky asserts that Lenin (the Bolsheviks) did not pursue a line directed towards a rupture, towards a split with the opportunists in German Social-Democracy, with the opportunists in the Second International of the pre-war period. You want to open a discussion on this Trotskyist thesis of Slutsky's. But what is there to discuss? Is it not obvious that Slutsky is simply slandering Lenin, slandering the Bolsheviks? Slander must be branded as such and not made the subject of discussion.Every Bolshevik, if he really is a Bolshevik, knows that long before the war, approximately since 1903-04, when the Bolshevik group in Russia took shape and when the Left
|
|||
|
|
The magazine Proletarskaya Revolutsia, No. 6 (113), 1931* Junius was the pen name of Rosa Luxemburg, leader of the Lefts in the Social-Democratic Party of Germany.1. Proletarskaya Revolutsia (Proletarian Revolution)—a historical magazine published from 1921 to 1928 by the History of the Party Department (a commission on the history of the October Revolution and the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks), subsequently the Department of the C.C., C.P.S.U.(B.) for studying the history of the October Revolution and the C.P.S.U.(B.), and from October 1928 to 1931 by the Lenin Institute of the C.C., C.P.S.U.(B.). After a year 's interval, the magazine was published from 1933 to 1941 by the Marx- Engels-Lenin Institute of the C.C., C.P.S.U.(B.).
|
|||
|
|
2. See V. I. Lenin, Works, 4th Russ. ed., Vol. 22, pp. 305, 304.
|
|||
|
|
3. See V. I. Lenin, Works, 4th Russ. ed., Vol. 5, p. 345.
|
|||
|
|
4. V. I. Lenin, The Attitude of Social-Democracy towards the Peasant Movement (see Works, 4th Russ. ed., Vol. 9, p. 213). p. 103
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Collected Works Index | Volume 13 Index
|
|||
|
|
Works by Decade | J. V. Stalin Archive
|