Concerning the Third Congress

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

The news of the Central Committee’s support to the Bureau of Committees of the Majority on the question of convening the all-Party Congress has brought from Iskra, No. 94, a retort of abuse and hysteria, further personal suspicions, fairy-tales about the strength of the Minority groups, and so on. Naturally, we ignore all these tricks, which are worthy of the famous League Congress. Strictly speaking, only two points are worth taking up. If the Congress does take place, says Iskra, it will be only as a conference of separated trends. In other words, the new-Iskrists admit their break-away from the Party, they admit the split as an accomplished fact. We would always prefer this frank admission to a sneaking secret split. But how do you make this out, gentlemen? You admit yourselves to be one part of the Party that has broken away from the other and yet modestly retain the titles and ranks that belong to the whole Party (“Central Organ”, “Council”)! Is this honourable?

Secondly, Iskra usually considers the Party to be split when it is a question of the centres reporting to the Party, while considering the Party to be united when the issue is the power of the centres over the Party. The very thing is now happening again. On the one hand, “separated trends”; on the other, “the Congress can be convened only by the Council”. Fine, gentlemen! But why, then, is your “Council” silent? Why did it not respond to the CC’s statement of March 4, 1905? Why no word about the Council in Iskra, No. 94? Are not the Party members justified in asking whether the Council exists at all, whether it is in a position to meet and make decisions?