Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 26 - From Marx to Mao

REVISION OF THE PARTY PROGRAMME173time taking a sober view of the facts, we have no right toabandon the minimum programme.By abandoning it we should prove that we have lost ourheads before we have won. And we must not lose our headseither before our victory, at the time of victory, or after it;for if we lose our heads, we lose everything.Comrade Bukharin actually proposed nothing concrete;he only repeated what had been said long before concerningthe nationalisation of banks and syndicates. Comrade Smirnovin his article offered a very interesting and instructiveseries of tentative reforms that may be reduced to the regulationof production and consumption of commodities. Ina general way all this is contained in my draft, followed byan “etc.”. To go further, to venture into a discussion of separateand concrete measures, seems to me inexpedient. Manythings will become clearer after the basic measures of thenew type have been carried out, after the nationalisation ofbanks, after the introduction of workers’ control; experiencewill tell us a lot more, for it will be the experience of millions,the experience in building a new system of economywith the conscious participation of millions. It stands toreason that to indicate the new, develop plans, evaluate them,analyse the local and partial experiences of various Sovietsor supply committees, etc., is all very useful work to bedone in articles, pamphlets and speeches. But to inject intothe programme an overdose of detail is premature and maybecome even harmful by tying our hands with petty matters.Our hands must be free so that we may build the new withgreater vigour, once we have fully entered upon the new path.VIIIComrade Bukharin’s article touches upon another questionworthy of consideration.“The question of the revision of our Party programme should bebound up with the question of working out a single programme forthe international party of the proletariat.”This is not very clearly expressed. If we take it to meanthat the author advises us not to accept a new programmeuntil a single international programme, a programme of theThird International, has been drawn up, then we have to