Letter to the Editor of Pravda, August 2, 1912

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

Dear Colleague,

Kamenev writes to us today that you have informed him that peaceful relations have once again been restored between Plekhanov and yourselves by the elimination of “misunderstandings”.

I would very much ask you to let me know the meaning of this dream. We had every reason to believe that the rejection of the articles by Dnevnitsky and Plekhanov regarding a concession to the liquidators (for it was precisely about this that they were writing, under the screen of “unity”) took place quite deliberately and resolutely. So what “misunderstandings” could there be in this case?

Are there not new misunderstandings in this latest communication?

The last, or more precisely yesterday’s, editorial in Rech (July 19) is of tremendous importance. It cannot be doubted that the Cadets have done everything in their power (and beyond it) to “hush up” Zvezda and Pravda. And now they have come out with it! It is clear that they themselves have thereby admitted the danger. They have shown themselves unable to pass it by and hush it up. They have been driven out of their position of silence. And Prokopovich and Blank in Zaprosy Zhizni echo them still more crudely, stupidly, tearfully.

Now of all times it is essential, in my opinion, to bring intense pressure to bear on Rech, to publish a number of articles against it and inflame the struggle still further. This is necessary both from the point of view of principle (since only Zvezda and Pravda are carrying on a campaign on behalf of work ins-class democracy, while both Rech and the Prokopoviches approvingly pat the liquidators on the back), and for practical reasons (since it is just this more lively struggle that must liven up both arguments and talks with the electors and their enrol men t in the electoral registers).

Could you not find out how many people are registering, by polling districts, streets and professions? It would be extremely important to encourage them by concrete examples, in order to arouse competition between districts, streets and professions.

I hope you’ll be kind enough also to inform Nevskaya Zvezda that I insist on the return of my article replying to Blank (“Petty Artifices”) if it is not printed in No. 18. I will in that case certainly print it in the journal. Now that all the liberals + liquidators + non-Party and Co. have turned against us, it would be criminal for us to keep silent.

The election campaign in Petersburg has begun successfully—the leadership has been won by Zvezda and Pravda— what is necessary is not to lose one’s grip on it, and 1o carry through the Tight to a finish. This is in the interests of the paper itself, quite apart from everything else, which, of course, I do not mention.

I await news of the “positively decided” question.

With greetings,

V. Ulyanov

P.S. I still await a reply about the articles: “The Results of Six Months’ Work”.

P.P.S. Couldn’t you at least send me a cutting from No. 17 of Nevskaya Zvezda—the lit He article “Unity or Split”?