Bolshevik Leaders correspondence

Bolshevik leadership Correspondence. 1912-1927
Collection of documents 1996.
Compiled by: A.V.Kvashonkin, L.P.Kosheleva, L.A.Rogovaya, O.V.Khlevnyuk.

N. I. Podvoisky, K. A. Mekhonoshin - V. I. Lenin

February 24, 1921

Member of the Central Committee of the RCP Comrade. Lenin.

Materials for our note to the Central Committee, submitted on November 13, 21 for the first time 1 and on November 24 for the second time 2 .
1) Yesterday, at a meeting of senior officials in the hall of the Moscow Soviet , 3 in the report of the Secretary of the Moscow Committee Comrade. Yakovleva pointed out that the first wave of discontent among the workers, aroused by the famine and organized by the anti-Soviet parties, was about three weeks ago (metal workers' strikes), but subsided. Unexpectedly (!) the second wave, more serious, has risen today.

Comrade's report YAKOVLEVOY is not accurate. The unrest among a part of the Moscow workers essentially did not stop. Last week there was a meeting of bakers, where they did not want to listen to the Communists, comrade. ARTEM spoke with an obviously hostile attitude. 3 maximalists 4 , 1 anarchist and 1 communist were elected to the presidium. The decision of the bakers was as follows: "PAVLOV, the Maximalist, expelled from the Union of Food Workers by the MGSPS, must be returned to the Union along with his two comrades, and the Bakers' Section must be restored."

Workers of recycling workshops (there are 7,000 of them in Moscow: Tsentroutil and Moskutil) on Friday, February 11, threatened MGSPS with a strike. Their requirements: natural premium, clothes, shoes. A non-Party Conference was held on February 17, which passed with restraint, but repeated the demands of the entire mass of workers. (The scrap workers are real pariahs, they are in the pen, they are called junk workers, they are insulted in the Unions, they are not given anything, in relation to them the aristocracy of professionals was manifested). Utilrabochiy today demanded in the Presidium of the MGSU: either we are not needed, then dismiss us, or equalize with others. The Presidium issued at a time 1,500 pounds of flour from the remnants of natural premiums. This is the grossest mistake of the MGSUS: it will entail the appeal of other plants as well.

The "surprise" of the "second wave" is a sign of the ossification of the Moscow Organization and the Trade Unions, their isolation from the masses and their inability to carry out the entire program that follows from the moment.

2) The Five (even she!), singled out by the MC, recognized the extreme confusion of the cells in connection with yesterday's events and noted two extremes about yesterday's events: some call for the methods of the Cheka, others simply give in, because in their mass they do not often have what to object to complaints about abuses, inequality, and so on.

3) The Five decided not to use repressions, in view of the fact that “there is a danger of provocative use of the movement by the elements that have attached themselves” (only for this reason ?!) and that the planned restoration of protective measures involves only “reminding that power has not left”. Tov. Kamenev spoke in the same spirit at yesterday's meeting.

4) The text of the appeal from the Moscow Defense Committee is extremely unsuccessful. He starts by exposing the gosznak's skinning, talks about their attempts to shut down the factories, and ends with heavy security. Meanwhile, firstly, it was necessary to separate these two issues, because such a connection is not logical and not profitable, secondly, the authorities should not engage in pitting groups of workers, thirdly, exposing selfishness on the State Sign should be the business of the Moscow State Union of Trade Unions and the Union Pechatnikov.

5) Tov. At yesterday's meeting, Lenin spoke about our mistakes in the food and fuel business, which, they say, we did not calculate. With food, fuel, this has already happened several times. Errors were found (only errors?), And calmly moved on to the order of the day. At a meeting of the non-Party Conference, a metal worker said that in the tsarist system ministers were persecuted for mistakes and hinted that the entire Council of People's Commissars should be driven out. Such a mood is created due to the permanence of everyone, even the guilty ones. “Well, what can you do, they made mistakes due to inexperience, distributed 25,000,000 tons a month in the first half of the year and left 15,000,000 tons a month for the second half of the year.” There is not only inexperience, but also complete irresponsibility. The workers complain about the direct concealment of the truth before the workers by every communist who was at the head of an institution, in the interests of his institution: so that they do not take firewood, so that food is not taken away. The workers say: “If you press it, it turns out that there is what you need in the warehouses.”

In view of the obvious inconsistency from time to time in the reports on the food and fuel situation, the Central Committee must, in the Party order, demand from everyone data on the actual state of them in the institution he leads and publish them on behalf of the Central Committee so as not to confuse the rank and file workers.

6) Tov. Badaev discovered that in Moscow there were up to 300,000 military rations, apparently from the rear - why did he only now discover this? - After all, it could weaken the crisis.

7) Of the measures outlined by the five MKs (adopted yesterday by the meeting), almost the first place is occupied by the issuance of meat, clothing, etc. The same happened after the strike of the metalworkers. If you can give, why not give before? Why was pressure expected? This inspires the workers with the idea of the possibility of achieving improvement by strikes. This discredits the authorities in the sense that it deprives the statement that there are no products. This creates a danger that too much will be distributed in Moscow in a panic and thereby undermine the possibility of organizing republican work.

8) The question of removing (or reducing) privileged Soviet workers from rations has been raised time and time again . How long will this not be done? We have in mind not the Sovnarkomovsky ration, which has been partially abolished, but the verification of mass renditions in Soviet institutions. There is some kind of obvious impotence of the authorities here - to rebound from this matter. The same goes for consumer cards.

9) At yesterday's meeting, the representative of the "group of responsible workers" spoke about the need to eliminate the outrages of responsible workers with mansions and so on. This moment, undoubtedly, discredits the power. The issuance of an order that the mansions be transferred to workers' nurseries and orphanages would undoubtedly have great moral significance, now the communist aristocracy lives there. In the propaganda sense, such a measure is extremely important, there is something in it and practically important.

10) In the plan of the MK, a large place is occupied by the transfer of communists from Soviet institutions to regions, factories, and attachment to cells. An urgent task was given, approved by the Central Committee 6 . This case, there is reason to believe, will not be carried out as before, and if it is partially carried out, then it will be bad. It is planned to stop classes at SVERDLOV University, command courses and the transfer of communists from there. If this is carried out the way it was done with the Sverdlovites yesterday, then there will be embarrassment, because for sure 75% of the communists from the SVERDLOV University and the courses are not suitable for this.

11) In everything outlined by the MK plan, everything is built on the panic of today, nothing systemic, systematic, and therefore the shake-up will not bear fruit and will not warn a new wave in the shortest possible time. What is needed is a plan to satisfy the needs of the working class, not for today, but thought out for a long time in all parts.

And only along with this we need demonstrative measures that would purify the atmosphere and create the confidence of the non-Party masses, restoring order within them.

12) It is necessary, finally, to carry out a broad plan of organizational rapprochement between the Party and trade union organizations and the masses, by eliminating bureaucracy from all organs. This is the work of a stubborn and long order 7 .

11/24/21

N. Podvoisky. K. Mekhonoshin.

RTSKHIDNI. F. 5. Op. 2. D. 246. L. 1-2. Typewritten text. Signatures - autographs.

Notes:

1 The first statement of Podvoisky and Mekhanoshin of February 13 was discussed at a meeting of the Politburo on February 14, 1921. It was decided to send it to Trotsky for conclusion.

On February 24, 1921, a meeting of the party activists of the city took place in Moscow, at which Lenin delivered a speech. Along with the problems of the food and fuel crisis, Lenin raised questions of workers' discontent and drew attention to the squabbles in the Moscow organization. According to him, the squabble began with the November (1920) provincial Moscow party conference and was connected with the beginning of the discussion about trade unions. Lenin accused the opposition minority of the MK of dragging out the conflict and called for unity (Lenin V.I. PSS. T. 42. S. 348-350). Members of the opposing factions assessed the reasons for the current economic and political situation differently, as evidenced by this letter.

3On February 23, 1921, at a joint meeting of members of the Central Committee and the Moscow Party Committee, the question of the difficult situation in Moscow with food and fuel was discussed. Lenin took part in the work of the meeting (V. I. Lenin. Biographical chronicle. T. 10. P. 152). The decision read: “I. a) Instruct Comrade Zinoviev to talk with Comrades Bukharin and Steklov about the nature of the information in the press about the Moscow events. To entrust the [...] letter to the Moscow workers to be written to comrades Zinoviev and Radek. b) Establish a commission of representatives of the Ministry of Economy, the Supreme Economic Council, the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions, the People's Commissariat of Trade Unions, the Moscow Top [...] Tasks of the commission: to consider the issue of unloading Moscow and Petrograd for political reasons from the labor mobilized, discussing the extent and in what order to carry out this unloading and guided by that the Central Committee demands that this be done immediately. Besides, and submit to the Central Committee their views on the term of arrests of the second stage of wider circles who are now conducting counter-Soviet agitation [...] ”(RTsKhIDNI. F. 17. Op. 2. D. 57. L. 6-9). On February 24, 1921, the question of the situation in Moscow was discussed at a plenum of the Central Committee. The Plenum instructed the commission of the Moscow Committee of the RCP(b) established on February 23 to submit a report on the results of its work to the Politburo no later than February 25 (Ibid. D. 58. L. 2). On February 26, 1920, the report of Yakovleva, Menzhinsky and Radek was discussed at a meeting of the Organizing Bureau.

4 Members of the maximalist party that collapsed in 1919 and joined the RCP(b) in 1920.

On February 8, 1921, the Decree of the Council of People's Commissars was adopted on the reduction of all types of food rations and on measures to stop illegal extraditions. The Council of People's Commissars instructed the Central Commission for the Supply of Workers under the People's Commissariat for Food to establish within three days the rate of food supplies for especially responsible workers so that these rates do not exceed the workers' supply rates. The Council of People's Commissars abolished all special increased rates of food rations (Decrees of Soviet Power. T. XIII. M., 1989. P. 50).

On February 26, the Organizing Bureau decided: “The issue of transferring 30 party workers from the central institutions to the MC, as well as transferring part of the employees of the central institutions to the factories, to be submitted for consideration by the secretariat of the Central Committee together with the secretary of the MC” (RTsKhIDNI. F. 17. Op. 112. D. 130. L. 4).

On February 25, 1921, the plenum of the Central Committee rejected the proposals of Podvoisky and Mekhanoshin. The plenum instructed Lenin and Radek to speak with Podvoisky "in order to clarify the wrong side of his agitation" (Ibid. Op. 2. D. 60. L. 2)