Written: Written between August 10 and 20, 1916
Published: First published in 1964 in Collected Works, Fifth (Russian) Ed., Vol. 49. Sent from Flums to Hertenstein. Printed from the original.
Source: Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, , Moscow, Volume 43, page 559.
Translated: Martin Parker and Bernard Isaacs
Transcription\Markup: R. Cymbala
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. • README
I suggest sending Yuri the following answer.
(He makes his point, I suppose, at the end of § 2: “not to be used”. If he wants us not to criticise his article now in the press, he is right.
But afterwards? If their faction builds up and a struggle develops?
If he wants us not to make a copy of his article or show it to members of the Party, we cannot agree to this.
We shall not conceal anything from members of the Party.)
I think the answer I propose will suffice for the time being. Let him make himself look ridiculous.
We must have his article in order to show it to Alexander, the Bureau and so on. This is essential.
I approve of your letter to Bukharin. I suggest (not in the form of an ultimatum) an addition. I think it best for the time being to send the letter only in your own name: it is not so official and, considering the tone, more convenient. We shall discuss it; it is not so urgent as the reply to Yuri (had we not better get Yuri’s answer first, before sending your letter to Bukharin?).
P. S. If you do not need the maps of all the war theatres in Le Temps and The Daily Telegraph, please cut them out and send them to me.
 See next letter.—Ed.
 This refers to the draft letter to Bukharin written by Zinoviev criticising the position of Bosh and Pyatakov during the talks concerning resumption of publication of the journal Kommunist.
To the words in Zinoviev’s hand: “...we wish to work with you despite our disagreements...” Lenin added: “which you apparently treat more carefully, partly perhaps because you have been writing more on economic than on political questions.”