First published in 1926.
Sent from Munich to Geneva.
Printed from the original.
Source: Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1974, Moscow, Volume 34, pages 74-75.
Translated: Clemens Dutt
Transcription\Markup: D. Moros
Public Domain: Lenin Internet Archive (2005). 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.
Other Formats: Text • README
July 7, 1901
How is your work going? All this time I have been wanting to write you about the ending to Orthodox’s article, i.e., the later addendum concerning Berdayev’s article in No. 6 of Mir Bozhy. Our Struvefreundliche Partei rejected this ending by a majority of 2 3/4 votes against 1 1/4 (Alexei “divided himself” into 3/4 and 1/4)—I was left in the minority with my “in favour”. They didn’t like the note on romantic love either, no? the general character of the addendum. In my opinion, however, it gave a brief, sharp, clear and business-like rebuff to the gentleman in question? the concluding verses are especially good!
We are again told in letters from Russia that there is to be a congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party—in one town even an invitation has been received. It is extremely important to make haste with the programme. Write, please, whether you are thinking of undertaking and can undertake this work. Apart from you and P. B. there is really no one: the formulation requires intensive thinking put, but with the bustle existing here, for example, it is quite impossible to concentrate and give proper thought to it. Those old drafts of the programme and the article (that is, one draft and one article) which. Alexei brought you—and which he quite wrongly took back—are hardly likely to be of much use, are they? What do you think? If, however, you need them, we shall immediately send them to you.
I have ordered Shakhovskoi and Tezyakov. Why do you need them for the programme? You are not thinking of drawing up demands for the agricultural workers on the basis of them, are you? And what is your attitude to demands for the peasantry? Do you in general accept the possibility of such demands in the Russian Social-Democratic programme?
The proofs of your article have not yet come. Zarya No. 2 contains: Old Believer on Russkoye Bogatstvo, V. I. on Berdayev, I have written on the Witte memorandum and trounced the Preface (I am thinking of sending it to you for your advice, but I don’t know whether there will be enough time), Alexei has an essay on “The Tasks of the Socialist Intelligentsia”—you have seen it, what do you think of it? I shall write, too, against Chernov. . And will you do the review of the miscellany At the Post of Honour?
For Iskra (No. 6 is being set up and will appear in July, No. 7 should appear in August) we are expecting from you articles concerning the letter of a worker and on the “Rebirth of Revolutionism in Russia”.
Parvus is still standing by his “organisation”!
Kautsky passed through here. He is going on holiday and does not promise to write anything just now.
Nevzorov has sent Iskra a “disgusting” (the comment of V. I. and Puttman) article against the article “Where To Begin”—a hymn to the committees, a defence (evasive) of Rabocheye Dyelo, etc. We shall return it to the author (we shall make a copy and send it to you, if you like).
Yes, regarding the plan of federation or amalgamation with the Union, I hope you have seen our counter-plan? If not, ask Koltsov to get it from Dvinskaya. I doubt whether anything will come of this.
All the very best.
Oh, yes, about the money from the Belgians for our movement. I think one-third should be given to Rabocheye Dyelo: for the sake of 50–100 francs it is not worth while to give cause even for talk.
 “The Agrarian Question and the ’Critics of Marx”’ (see present edition, Vol. 5).—Ed.
 Berdayev, Nikolai Alexandrovich (1874-1948)—a reactionary idealist philosopher and publicist.
The reference here is to his article “The Fight for Idealism”, published in the journal Mir Bozhy No. 6, for 1901. p. 74
 Struvefreundliche Partei—the name by which Potresov and Zasulich were jokingly called among the editorial staff of Iskra. p. 74
 The reference is to the books: N. Shakhovskoi, Agricultural Outside Employments, Moscow, 1896; N. I. Tezyakov, Agricultural Workers and the Organisation of Sanitary Supervision Over Them in Kherson Gubernia, Kherson, 1896. p. 74
 The preface to Witte’s “memorandum” was written by P. B. Struve. Lenin “trounced” Struve’s preface in Chapter V of his article “The Persecutors of the Zsemstvo and the Hannibals of Liberalism” (see Vol. 5 of this edition). p. 75
 This refers to Nevzorov’s (Y. M. Staklov’s) article “And So, Where Do We Begin?” directed against Lenin’s article “Where To Begin” (see Vol. 5 of this edition). p. 75