V. I.

Lenin
THESES FOR AN APPEAL TO THE INTERNATIONAL
SOCIALIST COMMITTEE AND ALL SOCIALIST
PARTIES
ROUGH DRAFT

Written before December 26, 1916 Published according to

(January 7, 1917) the manuscript

First published in 1931

in Lenin Miscellany XVII

From V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, 4th English Edition,

Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1964

Vol. 23, pp. 205-16.

Translated from the Russian by

M. S. Levin, Joe Fineberg and Others
Edited by M. S. Levin

Prepared © for the Internet by David J. Romagnolo,

djr@marx2mao.org (May 2002)

page 205

THESES FOR AN APPEAL

TO THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST COMMITTEE
AND ALL SOCIALIST PARTIES[97]
ROUGH DRAFT
 1. The turn in world politics, from imperialist war to open appeals by a number of
bourgeois governments for an imperialist peace, coincides with a turn in the development
of world socialism.

2. The first turn has produced a spate of pious and sentimental pacifist phrases,
promises and pledges, with which the imperialist bourgeoisie and the imperialist
governments seek to deceive the peoples and "peacefully" condition them to obediently
bear the whole cost of the predatory war, peacefully disarm the millions of proletarians
and cover up, by paltry concessions, the preparation for a deal to divide up the colonies
and financially (also politically if possible) strangle weak nations. This deal comprises
the sum and substance of the projected imperialist peace and is a direct continuation of
the existing secret predatory agreements, particularly those concluded during the war,
between all the powers of both warring imperialist coalitions.

3.* The second turn consists in a "reconciliation" between the social-chauvinists, who
have betrayed socialism and defected to bourgeois nationalism or imperialism, and the
Zimmerwald Right wing, as represented by Kautsky and Co. in Germany, Turati and Co.
in Italy, Longuet-Pressemane-Merrheim in France, etc. By uniting on a basis of empty,
meaningless and non-committal pacifist phrases,

* Combine with §4.

page 206

which in practice serve to disguise imperialist policy and imperialist peace, embellish
them instead of exposing them, these two trends are taking a decisive step towards the
greatest deception of the workers, towards consolidating the domination in the labour
movement of a bourgeois labour policy veiled by socialist phraseology, the domination of
leaders and privileged sections of the working class that have helped the governments
and the bourgeoisie wage this predatory imperialist war on the plea of "defending the
fatherland".

4. Social-pacifist policy, or the policy of social-pacifist phraseology, now

predominates in the socialist parties of the chief European countries (see Kautsky's five
pacifist articles in the German Social-Democratic press and, appearing at the same time,
the statement of the social-imperialist leaders in the Chemnitz Volksstimme that they are
fully prepared for peace and unity with the Kautskyites on a basis of pacifist phrases; the
January 7, 1917 pacifist manifesto of the German Kautskyite opposition; the Longuetists
and Renaudel and Co. voting together at the French Socialist Party Congress, and
Jouhaux and Merrheim, also Broutchoux, at the General Confederation of Labour
Congress, for resolutions composed of misleading pacifist phrases; a similar pacifist
statement by Turati on December 17, 1916, and the defence of his position by the entire
Socialist Party of Italy). Whatever the terms of the peace now being prepared between the
present, i.e., bourgeois, governments of both imperialist coalitions, this policy signifies
the conversion of socialist and syndicalist (Jouhaux and Merrheim) organisations into a
tool of government intrigue and secret imperialist diplomacy.

5. The possible terms of the peace now being prepared by the bourgeois governments
of both imperialist coalitions are in reality determined by the altered balance of forces
which the war has already produced and might still produce. In their basic and principal
features the changes are as follows: (a) the German imperialist coalition has up to now
proved much stronger than its adversary. The territories occupied by German and
German-allied forces are its guarantee in a new imperialist division of the world
colonies, weak countries, finance capital's spheres of

page 207

influence, etc.), which will merely be formalised by the peace treaty; (b) the British
imperialist coalition hopes to improve its military position in the spring; but (c) the
exhaustion caused by the war and, chiefly, the fact that it is hard for the financial
oligarchy to rob the peoples still more than it has already done through unparalleled "war
profits", is giving rise, in connection with the fear of proletarian revolution, to attempts
by some bourgeois circles to end the war as soon as possible through a deal between the
two groups of imperialist freebooters; (d) there is a noticeable shift in world politics from
the Anglo-Russian coalition against Germany towards a coalition (just as imperialist in
nature) of Germany and Russia against England. The basis for this is that tsarism has not
the strength to seize Constantinople, promised it in the secret treaties with France,
England, Italy, etc., and is therefore seeking compensation in a division of Galicia,
Armenia and, possibly, Rumania, etc., and also in an alliance with Germany against
England for the plunder of Asia; (e) another major change in world politics is the
tremendous enrichment, at Europe's expense, of United States finance capital, which has
latterly increased its armaments (just like Japanese imperialism, which is much weaker)
to unprecedented proportions, and which would be only too glad to divert the attention of
"its" workers from these armaments by cheap pacifist phraseology . . . relating to Europe
!

6. Out of fear of proletarian revolution, the bourgeoisie finds itself compelled in every
possible way to conceal and embellish this objective political situation, this imperialist
reality. It is trying to dupe the workers, divert their attention, and the best means to that
end is the customary diplomatic duplicity of non-committal, hypocritical phrases about a
"democratic" peace, freedom for small nations "in general", "armaments restriction", etc.
This duping of the people comes all the easier to the imperialist bourgeoisie because,
when it speaks of, say, "peace without annexations" every bourgeoisie has in view
annexations by its adversary, and is "modestly reticent" about annexations it itself has
already made. The Germans "forget" that they have factually annexed not only
Constantinople, Belgrade, Bucharest, Brussels, but also Alsace-Lorraine, part of

page 208
Schleswig, Prussian Poland, etc. Tsarism and its flunkeys, the Russian imperialist
bourgeois (Plekhanov, Potresov and their ilk included, i.e., the majority of the Organising
Committee party in Russia), "forget" that Russia has annexed not only Erserum and part
of Galicia, but also Finland, the Ukraine, etc. The French bourgeoisie "forgets" that,
together with the English, it has robbed Germany of her colonies. The Italian bourgeoisie
"forgets" that it is robbing Tripoli, Dalmatia, Albania, and so on without end.

7. That being the objective state of affairs, it is the obvious and imperative task of
every sincere socialist policy, every honest proletarian policy (not to speak of conscious
Marxist policy) first of all and above all consistently, systematically, boldly and
unreservedly to expose the pacifist and democratic hypocrisy of one's own government
and one's own bourgeoisie. Lacking that, all talk of socialism, syndicalism,
internationalism is a sheer deception of the people. For exposure of annexations by one's
imperialist rivals (regardless of whether they are named or merely implied, by
denouncing annexations "generally" or by similar "diplomatic" methods of concealing
one's thoughts) is the direct concern, the direct business, of all venal journalists, all
imperialists, including those that parade as socialists, such as Scheidemann and Co.,
Sembat and Co., Plekhanov and Co., etc.

8. Turati and Co., Kautsky and Co., Longuet and Merrheim and Co. utterly fail to
understand that this is their direct duty. They represent a definite trend in international
socialism and, objectively, in practice -- regardless of how supremely virtuous their
intentions may be -- are simply helping their "own" imperialist bourgeoisie to dupe the
people, embellish its imperialist aims. These social-pacifists, i.e., socialists in words and
vehicles of bourgeois-pacifist hypocrisy in deeds, now play exactly the same part as the
Christian priests, who for centuries sought to embellish the policy of the oppressing
classes -- the slave-owners, feudals and capitalists -- and make their rule acceptable to
the oppressed classes by preaching Christian love of one's neighbour and Christ's
commandments.

9. A policy designed not to mislead the workers, but to open their eyes to reality,
should consist in the following:

page 209

(a) Socialists in every country must now, when the question of peace is so directly
posed, unfailingly and more vigorously than usual expose their own government and their
own bourgeoisie. They must expose the secret agreements they have concluded, and are
concluding, with their imperialist allies for the division of colonies, spheres of influence,
joint financial undertakings in other countries, buying up of shares, monopoly
arrangements, concessions, etc.

For in this, and in this alone, lies the real, not deceptive, basis and substance of the
imperialist peace now being prepared. Everything else is meant to deceive the people.
Those who vow and swear by these catchwords are not really supporting a democratic
peace without annexations, etc., for real support means exposing, in practice, one's own
bourgeoisie, which by its actions is destroying these great principles of true socialism and
true democracy.

For every member of parliament, every editor, every secretary of a labour union, every
journalist and public leader can always gather the information kept secret by the
government and the financiers that reveals the truth about the real basis of imperialist
deals. A socialist's failure to fulfil this duty is a betrayal of socialism. There need be no
doubt that no government will allow, especially now, free publication of exposures of its
real policy, its treaties, financial deals, etc. That is no reason to renounce such exposures.
Rather it is a reason to renounce servile submission to the censorship and publish the
facts freely, i.e., uncensored, illegally.

For the Socialist of another country cannot expose the government and bourgeoisie of
a country at war with "his own" nation, and not only because he does not know that
country's language, history, specific features, etc., but also because such exposure is part
of imperialist intrigue, and not an internationalist duty.

He is not an internationalist who vows and swears by internationalism. Only he is an

internationalist who in a really internationalist way combats his own bourgeoisie, his own
social-chauvinists, his own Kautskyites.

(b) In every country the Socialist must above all emphasise in all his propaganda the
need to distrust not only every political phrase of his own government, but also every

page 210

political phrase of his own social-chauvinists, who in reality serve that government.

(c) In every country the Socialists must above all explain to the masses the indisputable
truth that a genuinely enduring and genuinely democratic peace (without annexations,
etc.) can now be achieved only if it is concluded not by the present bourgeois
governments, or by bourgeois governments in general, but by proletarian governments
that have overthrown the rule of the bourgeoisie and are proceeding to expropriate it.

The war has reaffirmed clearly enough and in a very practical way a truth which prior
to the war was repeated by all the socialist leaders who have now gone over to the
bourgeoisie, namely, that modern capitalist society, particularly[*] in the advanced
countries, has fully matured for the transition to socialism. If, for instance, Germany can
direct the economic life of 66 million people from a single centre, and strain the people's
energies to wage a predatory war in the interests of 100 or 200 financial magnates or
aristocrats, the monarchy, etc., then the same can be done, in the interests of nine-tenths
of the population, by the non-propertied masses if their struggle is directed by class-
conscious workers, liberated from social-imperialist and social-pacifist influence.
 All propaganda for socialism must be refashioned from abstract and general to
concrete and directly practical: expropriate the banks and, relying on the masses, carry
out in their interests the very same thing the W.U.M.B.A.** is carrying out in Germany!

(d) In every country the socialist must explain to the masses the indisputable truth that,
if the phrase "democratic peace" is to be taken seriously, sincerely and honestly, and not
merely used as a false Christian phrase meant to conceal an imperialist peace, then the
workers have only one means of really achieving such a peace right now. That means is
to turn their weapons against their own government (i.e., follow the advice of Karl
Liebknecht, for which he has been

* In the manuscript, the words "at any rate" are written over the word "particularly". --Ed.
** Waffen- und Munitionsbeschaffungsamt -- Weapons and Ammunition Supply Department. --Ed.

page 211

sentenced to hard labour. He urged, in other words, what our Party manifesto of
November 1, 1914[*] defined as turning the imperialist war into a civil war of the
proletariat against the bourgeoisie and for socialism).

The Basle Manifesto of November 24, 1912, signed by all the socialist parties, had in
view the very war that is now raging. And when it threatened the governments with
"proletarian revolution " in connection with the imminent war, when it referred to the
Paris Commune, it spoke the truth, a truth from which the betrayers of socialism are now
cowardly retreating. For if in 1871 the Paris workers could utilise the excellent weapons
given them by Napoleon III in pursuance of his ambitious plans, to make their heroic
attempt, admired by socialists the world over, to overthrow bourgeois rule and capture
power for the introduction of socialism -- then a similar attempt is a thousand times more
achievable, possible and likely to succeed now, when a much larger number of better
organised and more class conscious workers of several countries are in possession of
much better weapons, and when with every passing day the course of the war is
enlightening and revolutionising the masses. In all countries the chief obstacle to
initiating systematic propaganda and agitation in this spirit is definitely not the "fatigue of
the masses", as the Scheidemanns plus Kautsky, etc., falsely plead. The "masses" are not
yet tired of shooting and will continue to shoot even more in the spring, unless their class
enemies come to some arrangement about dividing up Turkey, Rumania, Armenia,
Africa, etc. The chief obstacle is the faith part of the class-conscious workers have in the
social-imperialists and social-pacifists. Today's major task must be to destroy the faith in
these trends, ideas, methods of policy.

To what extent such an attempt is feasible, from the standpoint of the sentiment of the
broad masses, can only be proved by launching this type of agitation and propaganda
everywhere and in the most resolute and energetic way; by giving the most sincere and
devoted support to all revolutionary manifestations of the mounting mass resentment, to
the strikes and demonstrations that are forcing the Russian
 * See present edition, Vol. 21, pp. 25-34. --Ed. [Transcriber's Note: See Lenin's "The War and Russian
Social-Democracy". -- DJR]

page 212

bourgeoisie frankly to admit that the revolution is on the march, and have forced
Helfferich to declare in the Reichstag: "Better to keep the Left Social-Democrats in
prison than to have Potsdam Square littered with corpses," i.e., to admit that the masses
are responding to agitation by the Left.

In any case, the alternative which socialists must clearly place before the masses is
this: either continue to kill each other for capitalist profits, put up with the high cost of
living, hunger, the burden of a debt running into billions, and accept the farce of an
imperialist truce veiled by democratic and reformist promises, or rise in revolt against the
bourgeoisie.

A revolutionary party which openly, before the whole world, threatened the
governments with "proletarian revolution" in the event of such a war as is now being
waged, would be committing moral suicide if it did not urge the workers, and the masses
generally, to direct all thought and effort towards revolt, now that the masses are so
excellently armed, so excellently trained in the art of warfare, and fed up with the
absurdity of this criminal imperialist shambles, which up to now they have been helping.

(e) Socialists must centre their activity on the struggle against reformism, which has
always corrupted the revolutionary labour movement by injecting bourgeois ideas, and
has now assumed a somewhat special form, namely: "reliance" on the reforms the
bourgeoisie is supposed to carry out after the war! Reformists argue that in urging,
popularising and preparing the socialist revolution of the proletariat, we are "losing sight"
of the "practical" aspect, "forfeiting" our chances to win reforms.

That argument, customary both to social-chauvinists and supporters of Kautsky, who

has even denounced street demonstrations as "adventuristic", is thoroughly unscientific,
fundamentally false, a bourgeois lie.

In the course of the war world capitalism has taken a forward step not only towards
concentration in general, but also towards transition from monopoly in general to state
capitalism on a much broader scale than before. Economic reforms in this direction are
inevitable.

In the political sphere, the imperialist war has demon-

page 213
strated that from the imperialists' standpoint it is sometimes much more advantageous to
have as war ally a politically independent but financially dependent small nation rather
than risk Irish or Czech "incidents" (i.e., uprisings or the defection of whole regiments)
during a war. It is quite possible, therefore, that parallel with its policy of strangling small
nations -- a policy it can never wholly abandon -- imperialism will in individual cases
follow a policy of "voluntary" alliance (i.e., resulting exclusively from financial
strangulation) with new small national states, or with mongrel states, such as Poland.

However, it does not follow from this that Social-Democrats can, without betraying
their cause, "vote" for or support such imperialist "reforms".

Only bourgeois reformism, which in substance is the position of Kautsky, Turati and
Merrheim, poses the question thus: either renunciation of revolution and that means
reforms, or no reforms at all.

Yet all the experience of world history, like the experience of the 1905 Russian
Revolution, teaches us the very opposite: either revolutionary class struggle, of which
reforms are always a by-product (when the revolution is not completely successful), or no
reforms at all.

For the only effective force that compels change is popular revolutionary energy,
providing it does not remain on paper, as has been the case in the Second International,
but finds expression in comprehensive mass revolutionary propaganda, agitation and
organisation conducted by parties marching at the head of the revolution, not limping
along in its tail.

Only by openly proclaiming revolution, by purging the workers' parties of all who
oppose revolution or "sceptically" accept it -- only by giving every aspect of party
activity a revolutionary content, can Social-Democracy, in such "critical " eras of world
history as the present one, guarantee the masses either complete success of their cause if
the revolution is supported by very broad masses, or reforms, i.e., concessions by the
bourgeoisie, if the revolution is only partially successful.

Otherwise, if the Scheidemann and Kautsky policy prevails, there is no guarantee that
the reforms will not be

page 214

reduced to naught, or carried out with police and reactionary restrictions that will rule out
the very possibility of the proletariat using them in a repeated fight for the revolution.

(f) Socialists must make a serious effort to bring to reality Karl Liebknecht's slogan.
The popularity that name enjoys among the masses is a guarantee that revolutionary
activity is both possible and likely to succeed. The attitude of Scheidemann and Co.,
Kautsky and Co. towards that name is an example of hypocrisy: in words they swear by
the "Liebknechts of all countries"; in deeds they combat Liebknecht's tactics.
 Liebknecht broke not only with the Scheidemanns (Renaudels, Plekhanovs, Bissolatis),
but also with the Kautsky trend (Longuet, Axelrod, Turati).

Liebknecht declared, as early as October 2, 1914, in his letter to the Party Executive:

"Ich habe erklärt, dass die deutsche Partei, nach meiner innersten Überzeugung, von
der Haut bis zum Mark regeneriert werden muss, wenn sie das Recht nicht verwirken
will, sich sozialdemokratisch zu nennen, wenn sie sich die jetzt gründlich verscherzte
Achtung der Welt wiedererwerben will." (Klassenkampf Begen den Krieg! Material zum
"Fall Liebknecht". Seite 22.) (Geheim gedruckt in Deutschland: "Als Manuskript
gedruckt".)*

All parties should take up Liebknecht's slogan and it would certainly be ridiculous to
even think of being able to turn it into effect without ridding the party of the
Scheidemanns, Legiens, Renaudels, Sembats, Plekhanovs, Vanderveldes and Co., or
without denouncing the policy of concessions to the trend represented by Kautsky, Turati,
Longuet and Merrheim.

* *
*

10. We therefore suggest a conference of Zimmerwald supporters to discuss the

following proposals:

* I have declared my deep conviction that, if it does not want to forfeit the right to call itself a Social-
Democratic party, if it wants to restore its prestige in the eyes of the world, now so thoroughly undermined,
the German party must be regenerated from top to bottom. (Class Struggle After the War! Materials in the
"Liebknecht Case", p. 22.) (Printed secretly in Germany: Published as a manuscript.) --Ed.

page 215

(1) Socialist pacifism of a definite trend -- Longuet-Merrheim, Kautsky, Turati, etc., --

already rejected in principle at Kienthal, and its concrete defence by these representatives
of the afore-mentioned trends should be decisively and unconditionally rejected as
bourgeois reformism (on the basis of the theses formulated above).

(2) A similarly decisive organisational break with social-chauvinism .

(3) Explain to the working class its immediate and urgent revolutionary tasks, precisely
in connection with the fact that the masses have lost patience with the war and the lying
milk-and-water pacifist phrases of the bourgeoisie.

(4) Openly brand as a complete break with the spirit and decisions of Zimmerwald and
Kienthal, and condemn as such, the policy of the Italian Socialist Party, which is
following a patently pacifist path, and the policy of the Swiss Social-Democratic Party,
which on November 4, 1916 in Zurich voted to permit indirect taxes, and on January 7,
1917, through an alliance between the "Centrist" R. Grimm and the social-patriots
Greulich, G. Müller and Co., secured indefinite postponement of the special party
congress called for February 11, 1917 to discuss the war issue, and which now meekly
accepts the outright ultimatum of these same social-patriot leaders, who openly threaten
to resign from parliament if the party rejects fatherland defence.

The sad experience of the Second International has clearly demonstrated the immense
damage caused by combining, in actual practice, "general" revolutionary decisions,
formulated in general phrases, with reformist actions -- when professions of
internationalism are attended by refusal jointly to discuss, in a truly internationalist
manner, fundamental problems of the tactics of each individual party as a component part
of the international union.

Prior to the Zimmerwald Conference and at the Conference itself, our Party considered
it its duty to acquaint the comrades with our irrevocable condemnation of pacifism and
abstract preachment of peace as a bourgeois deception (a German translation of our
Party's resolution, in the pamphlet Socialism and War,* and a French translation, in a
separate

* See present edition, Vol. 21, pp. 158-64. --Ed. [Transcriber's Note: This is evidently a misprint. These
pages are for Lenin's "The Conference of the R.S.D.L.P. Groups Abroad". The correct citation for
Socialism and War is Vol. 21, pp. 295-338. -- DJR]

page 216

leaflet, were circulated at the Conference). The Zimmerwald Left, in whose organisation
we shared, was formed as a separate group at the Conference for the express purpose of
showing that we support the Zimmerwald group insofar as it combats social-chauvinism.

It has now been definitely established -- of this we are profoundly convinced -- that the
Zimmerwald majority, or the Zimmerwald Right, has made a roundabout turn not
towards struggle against social-chauvinism, but towards complete surrender to it, towards
merger with it on a platform of empty pacifist phrases. And we consider it our duty
openly to state that to support, in these circumstances, the illusion of Zimmerwald unity
and Zimmerwald struggle for the Third International would cause the greatest damage to
the labour movement. We declare, not as a "threat" or "ultimatum", but as an open
notification of our decision, that unless the situation changes we shall not remain a
member of the Zimmerwald group.

page 401
 NOTES

[97]
This "rough draft" was written early in January 1917. The manuscript bears this note by Lenin: (for the
I.S.C. and publication in the press)".
On January 7, 1917, Robert Grimm, the Kautskyite Chairman of the International Socialist Committee,
induced the Swiss Social-Democratic Party Executive to postpone indefinitely the emergency party
congress on the war issue, despite objections from the Left. On the same day the Centrist opposition in the
German Social-Democratic Party held a conference in Berlin and adopted a pacifist manifesto framed by
Kautsky, "Ein Friedensmanifest derdeutschen Parteiopposition" ("Peace Manifesto of the German Party
Opposition"), later published in a number of German newspapers and in the Swiss Socialist Volksrecht of
January 11. Since this signified an open alliance of the Right Zimmerwaldists with the social-chauvinists,
Lenin altered his draft but decided to postpone its publication. The manuscript bears his note: "Written
before January 7, 1917 and therefore partly obsolete." Later, using the draft as a basis, Lenin wrote his
appeal "To the Workers Who Support the Struggle Against the War and Against the Socialists Who Have
Sided with Their Governments" (see pp. 229-35 of this volume). [p. 205]