Lenin CW-Vol. 23.pdf - From Marx to Mao

OPEN LETTER TO B. SOUVARINE201other hand, the American Renaudels and Sembats advocate“national defence” and “preparedness”. The American Longuetsand Pressemanes—the poor souls!— are trying to bringabout a reconciliation between social-chauvinists and revolutionaryinternationalists.Two Internationals already exist. One is the Internationalof Sembat-Südekum-Hyndman-Plekhanov and Co. Theother is the International of Karl Liebknecht, MacLean (theScottish school-master whom the English bourgeoisie sentencedto hard labour for supporting the workers’ classstruggle), Höglund (the Swedish M. P. and one of the foundersof the Zimmerwald Left sentenced to hard labour forhis revolutionary propaganda against the war), the fiveDuma members exiled to Siberia for life for their propagandaagainst the war, etc. On the one hand, there is the Internationalof those who are helping their own governments wage theimperialist war, and on the other, the International of thosewho are waging a revolutionary fight against the imperialistwar. Neither parliamentary eloquence nor the “diplomacy”of socialist “statesmen” can unite these two Internationals.The Second International has outlived itself. The ThirdInternational has already been born. And if it has not yetbeen baptised by the high priests and Popes of the SecondInternational but, on the contrary, has been anathemised(see Vandervelde’s and Stauning’s speeches), this is notpreventing it from gaining strength with every passing day.The Third International will enable the proletariat to riditself of opportunists and will lead the masses to victory inthe maturing and approaching social revolution.Before concluding, I would like to say a few words inreply to Souvarine’s personal polemics. He asks (the socialistsnow residing in Switzerland) to moderate their personalcriticism of Bernstein, Kautsky, Longuet, etc.... For mypart, I must say that I cannot accept that. And I wouldpoint out to Souvarine, first of all, that my criticism of the“Centre” is political, not personal. Nothing can restore themass influence of the Südekums, Plekhanovs, etc.: theirauthority has been so undermined that everywhere the policehave to protect them. But by their propaganda of “unity”and “fatherland defence”, by their striving to bring abouta compromise, by their efforts to draw a verbal veil over