---
title: A. What Is “Freedom of Criticism”?
url: https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/02-a-what-is-freedom-of-criticism/
description: A. What Is “Freedom of Criticism”?, from What Is To Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Movement by V. I. Lenin.
section: FRAME
---

![Illustration: a pre-1914 imperial intelligence-dossier collage of colonial telegraph logs, sepia field photography and empire maps.](https://propagandaarchive.org/static/generated/detail/hero-pre1914.jpg)

[Library](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/) · Book · [What Is To Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Movement](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/)

# A. What Is “Freedom of Criticism”?

This text

- **Work:** [What Is To Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Movement](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/)
- **Author:** V. I. Lenin
- **Published:** 1902

Full details

- **Rights:** The translation (J. Fineberg, ed. A. Trachtenberg) was first published in the United States in 1929, in Collected Works of V. I. Lenin, vol. IV, book II (International Publishers, notice "Copyright, 1929"; registered as A 19207, entered 31 December 1929 in the Catalog of Copyright Entries for 1930). A work published in the United States in 1929 entered the public domain there on 1 January 2025. This printing repeats that 1929 translation and its editor's notes; a comparison of the two scans found the same wording. Lenin died in 1924, so the Russian original is also public domain. The editor's foreword printed in this volume is signed "December, 1931", is not covered by the 1929 notice and is not included. The library is served from the United States; readers elsewhere should check their own law (the translator died in 1957).

Chapters

1. [Preface](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/01-preface/)
2. I. Dogmatism and “Freedom of Criticism”
3. [A. What Is “Freedom of Criticism”?](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/02-a-what-is-freedom-of-criticism/)
4. [B. The New Advocates of “Freedom of Criticism”](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/03-b-the-new-advocates-of-freedom-of-criticism/)
5. [C. Criticism in Russia](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/04-c-criticism-in-russia/)
6. [D. Engels on the Importance of the Theoretical Struggle](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/05-d-engels-on-the-importance-of-the-theoretical-st/)
7. II. The Spontaneity of the Masses and the Class-Consciousness of Social-Democracy
8. [Opening](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/06-opening/)
9. [A. The Beginning of the Spontaneous Movement](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/07-a-the-beginning-of-the-spontaneous-movement/)
10. [B. Bowing to Spontaneity. Rabochaya Mysl](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/08-b-bowing-to-spontaneity-rabochaya-mysl/)
11. [C. The Self-Emancipation Group and Rabocheye Dyelo](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/09-c-the-self-emancipation-group-and-rabocheye-dyel/)
12. III. Trade-Union Politics and Social-Democratic Politics
13. [Opening](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/10-opening/)
14. [A. Political Agitation and Its Restriction by the Economists](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/11-a-political-agitation-and-its-restriction-by-the/)
15. [B. A Tale of How Martynov Rendered Plekhanov More Profound](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/12-b-a-tale-of-how-martynov-rendered-plekhanov-more/)
16. [C. Political Exposures and “Training in Revolutionary Activity”](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/13-c-political-exposures-and-training-in-revolution/)
17. [D. What Is There in Common between Economism and Terrorism?](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/14-d-what-is-there-in-common-between-economism-and/)
18. [E. The Working Class as Champion of Democracy](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/15-e-the-working-class-as-champion-of-democracy/)
19. [F. Again “Slanderers,” Again “Mystifiers”](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/16-f-again-slanderers-again-mystifiers/)
20. IV. The Primitiveness of the Economists and the Organisation of Revolutionists
21. [Opening](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/17-opening/)
22. [A. What Are Primitive Methods?](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/18-a-what-are-primitive-methods/)
23. [B. Primitive Methods and Economism](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/19-b-primitive-methods-and-economism/)
24. [C. Organisation of Workers, and Organisation of Revolutionists](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/20-c-organisation-of-workers-and-organisation-of-re/)
25. [D. The Scope of Organisational Work](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/21-d-the-scope-of-organisational-work/)
26. [E. “Conspirative” Organisation and “Democracy”](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/22-e-conspirative-organisation-and-democracy/)
27. [F. Local and All-Russian Work](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/23-f-local-and-all-russian-work/)
28. V. The “Plan” for an All-Russian Political Newspaper
29. [Opening](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/24-opening/)
30. [A. Who Was Offended by the Article “Where to Begin”?](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/25-a-who-was-offended-by-the-article-where-to-begin/)
31. [B. Can a Newspaper Be a Collective Organiser?](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/26-b-can-a-newspaper-be-a-collective-organiser/)
32. [C. What Type of Organisation Do We Require?](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/27-c-what-type-of-organisation-do-we-require/)
33. [Conclusion](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/28-conclusion/)
34. [Appendix: The Attempt to Unite Iskra with Rabocheye Dyelo](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/29-appendix-the-attempt-to-unite-iskra-with-raboche/)
35. [Correction to “What Is To Be Done?”](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/30-correction-to-what-is-to-be-done/)

[← Preface](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/01-preface/) [B. The New Advocates of “Freedom of Criticism” →](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/03-b-the-new-advocates-of-freedom-of-criticism/)

“FREEDOM of criticism,” this undoubtedly is the most fashionable slogan at the present time, and the one most frequently employed in the controversies between the Socialists and democrats of all countries. At first sight, nothing would appear to be more strange than the solemn appeals by one of the parties to the dispute for freedom of criticism. Can it be that some of the progressive parties have raised their voices against the constitutional law of the majority of European countries which guarantees freedom to science and scientific investigation? “Something must be wrong here,” an onlooker who has not yet fully appreciated the nature of the disagreements among the controversialists will say, when he hears this fashionable slogan repeated at every cross-road. “Evidently this slogan is one of the conventional phrases which, like a nickname, becomes legitimatised by custom,” he will conclude.

In fact, it is no secret that two separate tendencies have been formed in international Social-Democracy.* The fight between these tendencies now flares up in a bright flame, and now dies down and smoulders under the ashes of imposing “resolutions for an armistice.” What this “new” tendency, which adopts a “critical” attitude towards “obsolete doctrinaire” Marxism represents, has been stated with sufficient precision by Bernstein, and demonstrated by Millerand.

> * This, perhaps, is the first occasion in the history of modern Socialism that controversies between various tendencies within the Socialist movement have grown from national into international controversies; and this is extremely encouraging. Formerly, the disputes between the Lassalleans and the Eisenachers, between the Guesdists and the Possibilists, between the Fabians and the Social-Democrats, and beween the Narodniki and the Social- Democrats in Russia, remained purely national disputes, reflected purely national features and proceeded, as it were, on different planes. At the present time (this is quite evident now) the English Fabians, the French Ministerialists, the German Bernsteinists [revisionists—Ed.], and the Russian “Critics’”— all belong to the same family, all extol each other, learn from each other, and are rallying their forces against “doctrinaire’ Marxism. Perhaps, in this first real battle with Socialist opportunism, international revolutionary Social-Democracy will become sufficiently hardened to be able, at last, to put an end to the political reaction, long reigning in Europe.

Social-Democracy must change from a party of the social revolution into a democratic party of social reforms. Bernstein has surrounded this political demand by a whole battery of symmetrically arranged “new” arguments and reasonings. The possibility of putting Socialism on a scientific basis and of proving that it is necessary and inevitable from the point of view of the materialist conception of history was denied; the fact of increasing poverty, proletarianisation, the growing acuteness of capitalist contradictions, were also denied. The very conception of “ultimate aim” was declared to be unsound, and the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat was absolutely rejected. It was denied that there is any difference in principle between liberalism and Socialism. The theory of the class struggle was rejected on the grounds that it could not be applied to strictly democratic society, governed according to the will of the majority, etc.

Thus, the demand for a decided change from revolutionary Social- Democracy to bourgeois reformism, was accompanied by a no less decided turn towards bourgeois criticism of all the fundamental ideas of Marxism. As this criticism of Marxism has been going on for a long time now, from the political platform, from university chairs, in numerous pamphlets, and in a number of scientific works, as the younger generation of the educational classes have been systematically trained for decades on this criticism, it is not surprising that the “new, critical” tendency in Social-Democracy should spring up, all complete, like Minerva from the head of Jupiter. This new tendency did not have to grow and develop, it was transferred bodily from bourgeois literature to Socialist literature.

If Bernstein’s theoretical criticism and political yearnings are still obscure to any one, the trouble the French have taken to demonstrate the “new method” should remove all ambiguities. In this instance, also, France has justified its old reputation as the country in which “more than anywhere else the historical class struggles were always fought to a finish” [Engels, in his introduction to Marx’s Eighteenth Brumaire]. The French Socialists have commenced, not to theorise, but to act. The more developed democratic political conditions in France have permitted them to ut Bernsteinism into practice immediately, with its inevitable consequences. Millerand has provided an excellent example of practical Bernsteinism. It is not surprising that he so zealously defends and praises Bernstein and Volmar! Indeed, if Social-Democracy, in essentials, is merely a reformist party, and must be bold enough to admit this openly, then, not only has a Socialist the right to join a bourgeois cabinet, but he ought always to strive to obtain places in it. If democracy, in essence, means the abolition of class domination, then why should not a Socialist minister charm the whole bourgeois world by orations on class co-operation? Why should he not remain in the cabinet even after the shooting down of workers by gendarmes has exposed, for the hundredth and thousandth time, the real nature of the democratic co-operation of classes? Why should he not personally take part in welcoming the Tsar, for whom the French Socialists now have no other sobriquet than “Hero of the Gallows, Knout and Banishment” (knouteur, pendeur et deportateur)? And the reward for this humiliation and self-degradation of Socialism in the face of the whole world, for the corruption of the Socialist consciousness of the working class—the only thing that can guarantee victory—the reward for this is, imposing plans for niggardly reforms, so niggardly in fact, that much more has been obtained even from bourgeois governments.

He who does not deliberately close his eyes cannot fail to see that the new “critical” tendency in Socialism is nothing more nor less than a new species of opportunism. And if we judge people not by the brilliant uniforms they deck themselves in, not by the imposing appellations they give themselves, but by their actions, and by what they actually advocate, it will be clear that “freedom of criticism” means freedom for an opportunistic tendency in Social- Democracy, the freedom to convert Social-Democracy into a democratic reformist party, the freedom to introduce bourgeois ideas and bourgeois elements into Socialism.

“Freedom” is a grand word, but under the banner of Free Trade the most predatory wars were conducted: under the banner of “free labour,” the toilers were robbed. The term “freedom of criticism” contains the same inherent falsehood. Those who are really convinced that they have advanced science, would demand, not freedom for the new views to continue side by side with the old, but the substitution cf the old views by the new views. The cry “Long live freedom of criticism,” that is heard to-day, too strongly calls to mind the fable of the empty barrel.* We are marching in a compact group along a precipitous and difficult path, firmly holding each other by the hand. We are surrounded on all sides by enemies, and are under their almost constant fire. We have combined voluntarily, especially for the purpose of fighting the enemy and not to retreat into the adjacent marsh, the inhabitants of which, right from the very outset, have reproached us with having separated ourselves into an exclusive group, and with having chosen the path of struggle instead of the path of conciliation. And now several in our crowd begin to cry out: Let us go into this marsh! And when we begin to shame them, they retort: How conservative you are! Are you not ashamed to deny us the right to invite you to take a better road!

Oh yes, gentlemen! You are free, not only to invite us, but to go yourselves wherever you will, even into the marsh. In fact, we think that the marsh is your proper place, and we are prepared to render you every assistance to get there. Only, let go of our hands, don’t clutch at us, and don’t besmirch the grand word “freedom” ; for we too are “free” to go where we please, free, not only to fight against the marsh, but also those who are turning towards the marsh.

[← Preface](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/01-preface/) [B. The New Advocates of “Freedom of Criticism” →](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/03-b-the-new-advocates-of-freedom-of-criticism/)

What Is To Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Movement, V. I. Lenin. The translation (J. Fineberg, ed. A. Trachtenberg) was first published in the United States in 1929, in Collected Works of V. I. Lenin, vol. IV, book II (International Publishers, notice "Copyright, 1929"; registered as A 19207, entered 31 December 1929 in the Catalog of Copyright Entries for 1930). A work published in the United States in 1929 entered the public domain there on 1 January 2025. This printing repeats that 1929 translation and its editor's notes; a comparison of the two scans found the same wording. Lenin died in 1924, so the Russian original is also public domain. The editor's foreword printed in this volume is signed "December, 1931", is not covered by the 1929 notice and is not included. The library is served from the United States; readers elsewhere should check their own law (the translator died in 1957). [Provenance and rights](https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/).