Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 3 - From Marx to Mao

630
V. I. LENIN
article “A New Type of Local Statistical Publication” his
admission that “the statistical data must be adapted to
the groups themselves and not to such a conglomeration of
the most diverse economic groups of peasants as the village
or the village community,” and where I raise the
question as to why Mr. V. V. himself never once made use
of the data on these most diverse groups).
In conclusion, a few words about “orthodoxy,” which
will not be superfluous, since Mr. Skvortsov’s appearance
in the role of “genuine” Marxist renders particularly urgent
the precisest possible definition of what, if it may be so
expressed, is one’s position. While not in the least desiring
to place Mr. B. Avilov on a par with Mr. Skvortsov, I nevertheless
find it necessary to touch on a passage in the former’s
article in the same issue of the Nauchnoye Obozreniye. At
the end of a postscript to this article Mr. B. Avilov says:
“Mr. Ilyin stands also for orthodoxy. But I think there is
still plenty of room for ‘orthodoxy,’ i.e., the simple interpretation
of Marx . . .” (p. 2308). I think that the words I have
italicised are probably a slip of the pen, for I said quite
definitely that by orthodoxy I do not at all mean the simple
interpretation of Marx. In the article which Mr. B. Avilov
has in mind, after the words: “No, let us better remain
‘under the sign of orthodoxy,”’ I say: “Let us not believe that
orthodoxy means taking things on trust, that orthodoxy
precludes critical application and further development, that
it permits historical problems to be obscured by abstract
schemes. If there are orthodox disciples who are guilty of
these truly grievous sins, the blame must rest entirely with
those disciples and not by any means with orthodoxy, which is
distinguisbed by diametrically opposite qualities” (Nauchnoye
Obozreniye, 1899, No. 8, p. 1579). 176 Thus I definitely said
that to accept anything on trust, to preclude critical application
and development, is a grievous sin; and in order to
apply and develop, “simple interpretation” is obviously not
enough. The disagreement between those Marxists who stand
for the so-called “new critical trend” and those who stand
for so-called “orthodoxy” is that they want to apply and
develop Marxism in different directions: the one group want to
remain consistent Marxists, developing the basic tenets of