From the Editorial Board of the Proletary

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

This note was published in the newspaper Proletary as an after word to the article “Pyotr Maslov Corrects Karl Marx’s Rough Notes” (see The Agrarian Programme of Social-Democracy in the First Russian Revolution, 1905-07, present edition, Vol. 13, pp. 300-07).

The present sketch of Comrade Maslov’s theoretical misadventures is borrowed from the book by N. Lenin which gives a systematic analysis of the tendencies in our agrarian development. Naturally, the exposure of the “original” agrarian theories of Maslov, which are saturated with a spirit of t.he most crude revisionism, inevitably involves the criticism of some propositions in the Party programme also. We think a discussion in the Party press on this question is quite timely.

As for Comrade Maslov’s theoretical “discoveries”, we have to address a few words to Comrade Plekhanov in particular about them, since he is the guardian angel of our agrarian revisionist.

In No. 6–7 of Golos Sotsial-Demokrata, when discussing momentous theoretical issues, you deigned incidentally to launch upon evasive and ambiguous remarks which are nothing short of indecent. You took upon yourself to declare in print that such-and-such members of our Party were no comrades of yours, while at the same time you lacked the courage to explain openly and plainly whether you had decided to withdraw from our organisation, or whether you sought the expulsion of such-and-such members from it. That was at once cowardly and rude.

So meditate a little, incorruptible warrior, over the revisionist feats of your Maslov. They fall, if anything does, under that little local authority where you, judging by published literature, have the reputation of a dread Dumbadze. Where then is your criticism of Comrade Maslov’s revisionist fabrications? Where is your defence of the economic theory of Karl Marx? And who, if not you, gave Maslov every support and encouragement?

Our Party Famusovs are not unwilling to play the part of mercilessly determined fighters for Marxism—but in the service of factional favouritism they don’t mind covering up very serious departures from Marxism!