| Category | Template | Form |
|---|---|---|
| Text | Text | Text |
| Author | Author | Author |
| Collection | Collection | Collection |
| Keywords | Keywords | Keywords |
| Subpage | Subpage | Subpage |
| Template | Form |
|---|---|
| BrowseTexts | BrowseTexts |
| BrowseAuthors | BrowseAuthors |
| BrowseLetters | BrowseLetters |
Template:GalleryAuthorsPreviewSmall
Special pages :
Letter to Maxim Gorky, May 27, 1911
Source: Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1974, Moscow, Volume 34, pages 446-447
May 27, 1911
Dear A. M.,
A few days ago I received a letter from Poletayev. He writes, inter alia: âWe have received a letter from Gorky. He is proposing that N. I. should come abroad to work out a plan for unity around some organ, and adds that he has spoken to you about this and to the Menshevik Mâ (Martov, I assume).
Poletayev adds that N. I. is hardly suitable for this plan and that if somebody must come, it should be somebody else. It is hardly likely that Pokrovsky will make the journey.
Reading this in Poletayevâs letter frightened meâno, really.
Our uniting with Mensheviks like Martov is absolutely hopeless, as I told you here. If we start arranging a meeting for such a hopeless planâthe result will be nothing but a disgrace (personally I would not go even to a meeting with Martov).
Judging from Poletayevâs letter, the participation of the Duma group is planned. Is this necessary? If it is a question of a journal, then the Duma group has nothing to do with it. If it is a question of a newspaper, it should be borne in mind that we have had plenty of discord as it is with Zvezda: they have no line, they are afraid of going with us, afraid of going with the liquidators, they play hot and cold, they give themselves airs, they vacillate.
Besides, a union of the Plekhanovites+our people+the Duma group threatens to give Plekhanov a preponderance, for Mensheviks predominate in the Duma group. Is it desirable and reasonable to give Plekhanov a preponderance?
I very much fear that Yordansky is unsuitable for such plans (for he has âhisâ own journal and he will either raise obstacles or try to impose âhisâ journal, leaving it as his, that is, a semi-liberal organ).
To avoid disappointments and hopeless squabbles, I think we should be very careful as regards âunityâ. Upon my word, we should be not uniting now, but dissociating! If a publisher can be found for a journal or a newspaper, you should conclude an agreement with him off your own bat (or take money from him without an agreement, if possible), but the arrangement of a meeting will only make a mess. Truly, the result will be a mess.
I am writing to you because I do not want to see you of all people wasting your time, nervous energy, etc , on a mess. I know from my own bitter experience of 1908-11 that it is impossible to âuniteâ now. In our Mysl, for example, Plekhanov more than once behaved temperamentallyâhe was dissatisfied, for example, with my article on strikes and on Potresov,[1] saying that I was abusing âhimâ! We managed to smooth things over and for the time being we can and must work with Plekhanov, but formal unions and meetings are premature and could spoil everything.
Donât hurry with the meeting!
It is said positively among us that there exists a government oircular of Stolypinâs for closing down all Social-Democratic publications. It sounds like the truth Before the Fourth Duma they will probably put the screw on ten times tighter.
Legal opportunities will evidently diminish in the immediate future. We must push on with illegal work.
M. F. wrote that you have completely withdrawn from Znaniye. That means a complete break with Pyatnitsky and my last letter came too late?
All the best.
Yours,
Lenin
P. S. Sovremennaya Zhizn[2] in Baku has also been raided and suppressed!