Proposal of the Central Committee of the RSDLP to the Second Socialist Conference - Lenin
(The International Socialist
Committee announcing that it would convene a second conference, invited
organizations to discuss these issues and send their proposals. The following
theses represent our party's response to this invitation.)
________
1. Just as every war is only a
continuation by means of violence of the policy pursued by the belligerent
states and their ruling classes for many years, sometimes decades, before the
war, so the peace that ends any war can only be an account and record of real
changes in strength, achieved during and as a result of this war.
2. An imperialist war, as long as the foundations of the present, i.e., bourgeois social relations, remain inviolable, can only lead to an imperialist peace, i.e., to strengthening, expanding, and intensifying the oppression of weak nations and countries by financial capital, which has grown especially gigantically not only before this war, but also during it. The objective content of the policy pursued by the bourgeoisie and the governments of both groups of great powers, both before and during the war, lead to increased economic oppression, national enslavement, and political reaction. Therefore, peace ending this war, whatever its outcome, cannot but consist in consolidating this worsening of the economic and political condition of the masses, since the bourgeois social system is preserved.
To assume the possibility of a
democratic peace arising from an imperialist war means - in theory - to put
a vulgar phrase in the place of a historical study of the policy that was
carried out before the given war and is being carried out during it; means in
practice to deceive the masses of the people, obscuring their political
consciousness, covering up and embellishing the real policy of the ruling
classes, which is preparing for the coming world, hiding from the masses the
main thing, namely, the impossibility of a democratic world without a series of
revolutions.
3. The socialists do not give
up the struggle for reforms. They must vote, for example, even now in
parliaments for any, even small, improvement in the condition of the masses,
for an increase in benefits for the inhabitants of devastated regions, for a
weakening of national oppression, etc.
But a mere bourgeois deception is
the preaching of reforms for the solution of questions which history and the
actual political state of affairs have raised in a revolutionary way. These are
the questions placed on the order of the day by this war. These are the
fundamental questions of imperialism, i.e., of the very existence of capitalist
society, the questions of postponing the collapse of capitalism by means of
a new division of the world, in accordance with the new relations of
power between the "great" powers, which have developed over the
past decades not only colossally rapidly, but also - what is especially real
political activity that changes the balance of forces in society, and does not
only deceive the masses with words, is now possible only in one of two forms: either
helping “one’s own” national bourgeoisie to plunder foreign countries (and
calling this help “defence of the fatherland” or “saving the country” ), or to help
the socialist revolution of the proletariat, supporting and developing the
unrest among the masses that begins in all the belligerent countries,
assisting the strikes and demonstrations that begin, etc., expanding and
sharpening these, as yet weak, manifestations of the revolutionary mass
struggle in the general onslaught proletariat for the overthrow of the
bourgeoisie.
Just as all social-chauvinists
are now deceiving the people, obscuring the question of the real, i.e.,
imperialist policy of the capitalists, which is being continued in this war,
with hypocritical phrases about a "dishonorable" attack and
"honest" defense of this or that group of capitalist predators - in
the same way, phrases about "democratic peace" serve exclusively
to deceive the people, as if the coming peace, already being prepared now
by the capitalists and diplomats, could "simply" eliminate the
"dishonorable" attack and restore "honest" relations, and
was not a continuation, the development and consolidation of the same imperialist
policy, i.e., the policy of financial robbery, colonial robbery, national
oppression, political reaction, and every kind of aggravation of capitalist
exploitation.
What the capitalists and their
diplomats need now is just such “socialist” servants of the bourgeoisie
who would stun, fool, and lull the people with phrases about “democratic
peace”, cover up their real policy with these phrases, make it difficult
for the masses to open their eyes to its essence, distract the masses from the
revolutionary struggle.
4. It is just such bourgeois deceit and hypocrisy that the program of a "democratic" peace, which
the most prominent representatives of the Second International are now occupied
with, is inventing. For example, Huysmans at the Arnhem Congress and Kautsky in
the Neue Zeit, as one of the most authoritative, official and
"theoretical" representatives of this International, formulated this
program: renunciation of revolutionary struggle until such time as the
imperialist governments make peace, in the meantime, verbal denial of
annexations and indemnities, self-determination of nations, democratization
of foreign policy, arbitration courts for the analysis of international
conflicts between states, disarmament, the United States of Europe, etc., etc.
With particular clarity, the real
political significance of this "peace program" was revealed by
Kautsky when, as proof of the "unanimity of the International" on
this question, he cited the fact that the London (II. 1915) and Vienna (IV.
1915) conferences unanimously recognized the main point of this program,
namely, "the independence of nations." Kautsky thus openly
sanctioned before the whole world the deliberate deception of the people by the
social-chauvinists, who combine verbal, hypocritical, non-committal and leading
to nothing recognition of the "independence" or self-determination
of nations with support for the imperialist war of "their"
governments, although this the war is waged on both sides with a systematic
violation of the “independence” of weak nations and for the sake of
strengthening and expanding oppression over them.
The objective significance of
this most popular "peace program" is to strengthen the
subordination of the working class to the bourgeoisie by
"reconciling" the workers who are beginning to develop the
revolutionary struggle of the workers with their chauvinist leaders, by
obscuring the depth of the crisis in socialism in order to return to the state
of the socialist parties that was before the war. and which precisely gave rise
to the transition of the majority of the leaders to the side of the
bourgeoisie. The danger of this "Kautskian" policy is all the
greater for the proletariat because it is covered up with plausible phrases
and is carried on not in Germany alone, but in all countries. For example, in
England this policy is carried on by the majority of chiefs; in France Longuet,
Pressman and others; in Russia Axelrod, Martov, Chkheidze, etc.; Chkheidze
covers up the chauvinist idea of "defending the country" in this
war with the expression "saving the country" and, on the one hand,
verbally approves of Zimmerwald, on the other hand, in the official statement
of the faction, he praises Huysmans' notorious speech in Arnhem the Duma
tribune is not in the press against the participation of workers in
military-industrial committees and continues to be an employee of newspapers
leading the defense of such participation. In Italy, Treves is pursuing a
similar policy: see the threat of the central organ of the Italian socialist
party Avanti! the board of the party and Oddino Morgari, directed towards the
Zimmerwald association and the creation of a new International, etc., etc.
5. The main "question of
peace" at the present time is the question of annexations. And it is
precisely on this question that one can most clearly see both the socialist
hypocrisy now prevailing and the tasks of truly socialist propaganda and
agitation.
It is necessary to explain
what annexation is, why and how socialists should fight against annexations.
Neither annexation of "foreign" territory nor any military
annexation can be considered an annexation, because socialists, generally speaking, sympathize
with the elimination of frontiers between nations and the formation
of larger states; - not any violation of the status quo, because
that would be the greatest reactionary and a mockery of the basic concepts of
historical science; and because
socialists cannot deny violence and war in the interests of the majority of
the population. Annexation should be considered only the annexation of a
territory against the will of its population; in other words, the
concept of annexation is inextricably linked with the concept of
self-determination of nations.
(From the original version;
But on the basis of this war, precisely because it is imperialist on the part of both groups of belligerent powers, the phenomenon must have grown and has grown that the bourgeoisie and social-chauvinists are strenuously "fighting" against annexations when they are committed by an enemy state. It is clear that such a "struggle against annexations" and such "unanimity" on the question of annexations is sheer hypocrisy. It is clear that those French socialists who advocate war over Alsace-Lorraine, and those German socialists who do not demand the freedom to secede Alsace-Lorraine, German Poland, etc. from Germany, and those Russian socialists who call "the salvation of the country" the war for the new enslavement of Poland by tsarism, demanding the annexation of Poland to Russia in the name of "a world without annexations", etc., etc. are in fact annexationists.
In order for the struggle against
annexations not to be hypocrisy or an empty phrase, in order for it to
really educate the masses in the spirit of internationalism, this question
must be formulated in such a way that would open the eyes of the masses to
the deception that reigns today in the question of annexations, and not
cover up this deception. It is not enough for the socialist of every nation
to verbally recognize the equality of nations, or to declaim, and swear that he
is against annexations. It is essential that the socialist of every nation
demand immediately and unconditionally the freedom to secede from the
colonies and nations oppressed by his own "fatherland".
Without this condition, even in
the Zimmerwald Manifesto, recognition of the self-determination of nations
and the principles of internationalism will remain, at best, a dead letter.
6. The "peace
program" of the socialists, as well as their program of "struggle
to end the war", must proceed from exposing the lies about
"democratic peace", the peace-loving intentions of the
belligerents, etc., which the demagogic ministers are now addressing the
people, pacifist bourgeois, social-chauvinists and Kautskyites of all
countries. Any “peace program” is a deception of the people and hypocrisy,
if it is not based primarily on explaining to the masses the need for
revolution and supporting, assisting, developing the revolutionary struggle of
the masses that is beginning everywhere (fermentation among the masses,
protests, fraternization in trenches, strikes, demonstrations, letters from
front to relatives - for example, in France - so that they do not subscribe to
a war loan, etc.
It is the duty of socialists
to support, expand and deepen every popular movement for ending the
war. But in reality, this duty is performed only by those socialists who, like
Liebknecht, call on the soldiers to lay down their arms from the parliamentary
platform, preach revolution, the transformation of the imperialist war into a
civil war for socialism.
As a positive slogan, drawing the
masses into the revolutionary struggle and explaining the necessity of revolutionary
measures for the possibility of a "democratic" peace, the slogan of
refusing to pay state debts should be raised.
It is not enough that the
Zimmerwald Manifesto alludes to revolution by saying that workers must make
sacrifices for their own cause and not for someone else's. It is necessary
to show the masses their path clearly and definitely. It is necessary that
the masses know where and why to go. That mass revolutionary actions during the
war, if they are successfully developed, can only lead to the
transformation of the imperialist war into a civil war for socialism, this is
obvious, and it is harmful to hide this from the masses. On the
contrary, this goal must be clearly stated, no matter how difficult it
may seem to achieve it when we are only at the beginning of the path. It is not
enough to say, as the Zimmerwald Manifesto says, that "the capitalists are
lying when they talk about defending the fatherland" in this war, and that
the workers in the revolutionary struggle should not take into account the
military situation of their country; it must be said clearly what is
hinted at here, namely, that not only the capitalists, but also the
social-chauvinists and Kautskyites, are lying when they allow the
concept of defending the fatherland to be applied in the given, imperialist,
war; - that revolutionary action in time of war is impossible without the
threat of defeat to "one's own" government, and that any defeat of
the government in a reactionary war facilitates a revolution, which alone
is able to bring a lasting and democratic peace.
Finally, the masses must be told
that unless they themselves create illegal organizations and a press free from
military censorship, i.e., an illegal press, serious support for the beginning
revolutionary struggle, its development, criticism of its individual steps,
correction of its mistakes, its systematic expansion and sharpening is
inconceivable.
7. On the question of the
parliamentary struggle (Action) of the socialists, it must be borne in mind
that the Zimmerwald Resolution not only expresses sympathy for the five
Social-Democratic deputies of the State Duma, who belong to our party and are
condemned to exile in Siberia, but also expresses solidarity with their
tactics. It is impossible to recognize the revolutionary struggle of the masses
and to put up with the exclusively legal activity of socialists in
parliaments. This only leads to legitimate dissatisfaction among the
workers and their departure from social democracy into anti-parliamentary
anarchism or syndicalism. It must be said clearly and publicly that the Social-Democrats
in parliaments must use their position not only for speeches in parliaments,
but also for all-round extra-parliamentary assistance to the illegal
organization and revolutionary struggle of the workers, and that the masses
must themselves, through their illegal organization, check such activities of
their leaders.
8. The question of convening the
International Socialist Bureau boils down to the fundamental question of whether
unity between the old parties and the Second International is possible. Each
step forward taken by the international working-class movement along the
path outlined in Zimmerwald shows more and more clearly the inconsistency of
the position taken by the Zimmerwald majority: because on the one hand, the
policy of the old parties and the Second International is identified with
bourgeois politics in the labor movement, with bourgeoisie, and not the interests of the
proletariat (this includes, for example, the words of the Zimmerwald Manifesto
that the “capitalists” are lying when they talk about “defending the
fatherland” in this war, then a number of even more specific statements in the
circular Internationale Sozialistische Kommission of 10.2.1916 .117); on the other
hand, the Internationale Sozialistische Kommission fears a split with the
International Socialist Bureau and officially promises that the Internationale
Sozialistische Kommission will be dissolved if this Bureau meets again.
We state that such a promise
not only was not voted on, but was not even discussed in Zimmerwald.
The six months that have elapsed
since Zimmerwald have proved that, in fact, work in the spirit of Zimmerwald - we
are not talking about empty words, but only about work - all over the world
is connected with the deepening and widening of the split. In Germany,
illegal proclamations against the war are issued contrary to the decisions
of the Party, that is, in a splitting manner. When deputy Otto Ruhle, a
close comrade of K. Liebknecht, openly declared that there were actually two
parties: one helping the bourgeoisie, the other fighting it, many
people, including the Kautskyites, scolded Ruhle for this, but no one refuted
him. In France, Bourderon, a member of the socialist party, is a determined
opponent of a split, but at the same time he proposes to his party such a
resolution - to disavow the Central Committee of the party and the
Parliamentary Group (désapprouver Comm. Adm. Perm, and Gr. Pari.), - which
would cause an unconditional and immediate split, had it been accepted. In
England, in the pages of the moderate Labor Leader, I.L.P.T. Rüssel Williams
openly acknowledges the inevitability of a split, finding support in letters
from local workers. The example of America is perhaps even more instructive
because there, even in a neutral country, two irreconcilably hostile currents
in the socialist party have already been revealed: on the one hand, supporters
of the so-called "preparedness", that is, war, militarism and navalism,
on the other hand, such socialists as Eugene Debs, the former candidate of the
Socialist Party for the presidency, openly preaching a civil war for
socialism precisely in connection with the coming war.
In fact, there is already a split
all over the world, two completely irreconcilable policies of the working
class in relation to the war have already come to light. You can't close
your eyes to this; this will only lead to confusing the working masses, to
obscuring their consciousness, to hindering that revolutionary mass struggle
with which all Zimmerwalders officially sympathize, to strengthening the
influence on the masses of those leaders whom the Internationale Sozialistische
Kommission in a circular of 10.2.1916 directly accuses of that they are
"misleading" the masses and preparing a "conspiracy"
("Pakt") against socialism.
The bankrupt International
Socialist Bureau will be restored by the social-chauvinists and Kautskyites
of all countries. The task of the socialists is to explain to the masses the
inevitability of a split with those who are pursuing the policy of the
bourgeoisie under the flag of socialism.
Written at the end of February -
March 1916.
Printed April 22, 1916, in
Bulletin. Internationale Sozialistische Kommission zu Bern» No. 4
Published in Russian on June 10,
1916, in the newspaper Sotsial-Demokrat No. 54-55
Printed according to the
manuscript
Lenin V.I. Complete Works Volume
27
.jpg)
No comments