about, most worthy Economists! The point we were discussing is the possible and necessary participation of various social strata in the overthrow of the autocracy; not only are we able, but it is our duty to guide these "activities, of the various opposition strata" if we desire to be a "vanguard." Not only will the students and our liberals, etc., take care of the struggle that will bring them against our political régime; the police and the officials of the autocratic government will see to this more than any one. But, if "we" desire to be advanced democrats, we must make it our business to stimulate in the minds of those who are dissatisfied only with university or only with Zemstvo, etc., conditions the idea that the whole political system is worthless. We must take upon ourselves the task of organising a universal political struggle under the leadership of our party in such a manner as to obtain the support of all opposition strata for the struggle and for our party. We must train our Social-Democratic practical workers to become political leaders, able to guide all the manifestations of this universal struggle, able at the right time to "dictate a positive programme of action" for the discontented students, for the discontented Zemstvo, for the discontented religious sects, for the offended elementary school teachers, etc., etc. For that reason, Martynov's assertion "with regard to these, we can come forward merely in the negative rôle of exposers of abuses … we can only dissipate the hopes they have in various government commissions"—is absolutely wrong (our italics). By saying this Martynov shows that he absolutely fails to understand the rôle the revolutionary "vanguard" must really play. If the reader bears this in mind, the real sense of the following concluding remarks by Martynov will be clear to him:
Iskra is the organ of the revolutionary opposition which exposes the abuses of our system—particularly political abuses, in so far as they affect the interests of the most diverse classes of the population. We, however, are working and will continue to work for the cause of labour in close organic contact with the proletarian struggle. By restricting the sphere of our influence, we at the same time intensify that influence.
The true sense of this conclusion is as follows: Iskra desires to elevate working-class trade-union politics (to which, owing to misunderstanding, lack of training. or by conviction our practical workers frequently confine themselves) to Social-Democratic politics, whereas Rabocheye Dyelo desires to degrade Social-Democratic politics to trade-union politics. And while doing this, they assure the
82
