Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 16 - From Marx to Mao

250V. I. LENINis that they are causing their ruin by making them moredependent on liquidationism. Whereas the decisive actionof all the non-factional Social-Democrats against Mikhailand Co. and against Potresov and Co. (surely, neither Trotskynor Yonov would venture to defend these groups!) mighthave brought some of the Golos captives of liquidationismback into the Party—the grimaces and the affectationof the “conciliators”, while in no way reconciling the Partywith the liquidators, only inspire the Golosists with “insensatehopes”.Incidentally, these grimaces and this affectation of the“conciliators” are, undoubtedly, to a large extent due simplyto a failure to understand the situation. It is only owingto lack of understanding that Comrade Yonov can confinehimself to the question of the publication or non-publicationof Martov’s article, and that the Viennese supportersof Trotsky can reduce the question to “conflicts” on theCentral Organ. Both Martov’s article (“On the Right Path” ...to liquidationism) and the conflicts on the Central Organare only particular episodes which cannot be understoodapart from their connection with the whole situation. Forinstance, Martov’s article clearly showed us, who duringthe past year have studied all the shades of liquidationismand Golosism, that Martov has turned (or was turned).The Martov who signed the “Letter” of the Central Committeeon the conference could not be the same Martov whowrote such article as “On the Right Path.” By divorcingMartov’s article from the chain of events, from the “Letter”of the Central Committee that preceded it, from No. 19-20of Golos that followed it, from the Manifesto of the Sixteen,from the articles of Dan (“The Fight for Legality”), Potresovand Vozrozhdeniye, and by divorcing from the same chain ofevents the “conflicts” on the Central Organ, Trotsky andYonov deprive themselves of the possibility of understandingthe events that are taking place.* And, conversely,everything becomes quite intelligible as soon as we focus our* Take also, for instance, “the theory of equal rights” for legalindividuals in the illegal Party. Is it not clear after the actions ofMikhail and Co. and Potresov and Co. that the meaning and significanceof this theory is the recognition of the group of independentlegalistsand the subordination of the Party to them?