selves "Social-Democrats if they like, I am not a child to get excited over a label. But see that they do not fall under tthe influence of those pernicious orthodox doctrinaires, let them allow "freedom of criticism" to those who unconsciously are driving Social-Democracy into trade-unionist channels.
And the light chuckle of our constitutionalist will turn into Homeric laughter when he learns that the Social-Democrats who talk about Social-Democracy being the vanguard at the present time, when spontaneity completely dominates our movement, fears nothing so much as "belittling the spontaneous elements," as "belittling the significance of the forward march of the drab, every-day struggle, as compared with the propaganda of brilliant and finished ideas," etc., etc.! A "vanguard," which fears that consciousness will outstrip spontaneity, which fears to put forward a bold "plan" that would compel universal recognition even among those who think differently from us—Are they not confusing the word "vanguard" with the word "rearguard"?
Ponder over the following piece of Martynov reasoning. On page 42 he says that Iskra's tactics of exposing abuses are one-sided, that "however much we may spread distrust and hatred towards the government, we shall not achieve our aim until we have succeeded in developing sufficiently active social energy for its overthrow." This, it may be said in parenthesis, is the concern we have already met with for increasing the activity of the masses, while at the same time striving to restrict its activity. This is not the point we are now discussing, however. Martynov, therefore, speaks of revolutionary energy ("for its overthrow"). But what conclusion does he arrive at? As in ordinary times, various social strata inevitably march separate!y, therefore,
In view of that, it is clear that we Social-Democrats cannot simultaneously guide the activities of various opposition strata, cannot dictate to them a positive programme of action, we cannot point out to them in what manner they can fight for their daily interests. … The liberal strata will themselves take care of the active struggle for their immediate interests and this struggle will bring them up against our political régime.
Thus, having commenced by speaking about revolutionary energy—of the active struggle for the overthrow of the autocracy, Martynov immediately turned towards trade-union energy and active struggle for immediate interests! It goes without saying that we cannot guide the struggle of the students, liberals, etc., for their "immediate interests," but this is not the point we were arguing
81
