Page:Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - On Organization (1926).pdf/85

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

LENIN ON ORGANIZATION

I invite our economists, terrorists and "economist-terrorists"^[1] to confuse these premises. I will here dwell on the last two only. The question as to whether it is easier to catch "ten wise men" than "a hundred fools" amounts in the end to the question we have considered above, namely, whether it is possible to have a mass organization when the maintenance of strict conspiracy is essential. We can never place a wide organization on that conspiratorial level without which the stability and continuity of the struggle against the government is unthinkable. To concentrate all conspiratorial functions in the hands of as small a number of professional revolutionaries as possible, does not mean that the latter will "think for all" and that the crowd will put forward increasing numbers of such professional revolutionaries, for it will know that it is not enough to collect together the few

↑ This latter term is perhaps more applicable to "Svoboda" than the former, for in an article entitled "The Revival of the Revolution" it defends terrorism, while in the article at present under review it defends economism. One might say of "Svoboda" that it would, but it cannot. Its wishes and intentions are excellent—but the result is utter confusion; and this is chiefly due to the fact that while "Svoboda" advocated continuity of organization, it refuses to recognize the necessity for continuity of revolutionary thought and Social Democratic theory. It wants to recall the professional revolutionary existence ("The Revival of the Revolution") and to that and proposes, firstly, provocative terrorism, and secondly, "The organization of the average worker," because he will be less likely to be "pushed on from outside." In other words, it proposes to break up the house in order to prevent it catching fire.

83

[1] This latter term is perhaps more applicable to "Svoboda" than the former, for in an article entitled "The Revival of the Revolution" it defends terrorism, while in the article at present under review it defends economism. One might say of "Svoboda" that it would, but it cannot. Its wishes and intentions are excellent—but the result is utter confusion; and this is chiefly due to the fact that while "Svoboda" advocated continuity of organization, it refuses to recognize the necessity for continuity of revolutionary thought and Social Democratic theory. It wants to recall the professional revolutionary existence ("The Revival of the Revolution") and to that and proposes, firstly, provocative terrorism, and secondly, "The organization of the average worker," because he will be less likely to be "pushed on from outside." In other words, it proposes to break up the house in order to prevent it catching fire.

[1]