---
title: D. What Is There in Common between Economism and Terrorism?
url: https://propagandaarchive.org/library/lenin-what-is-to-be-done-1902/14-d-what-is-there-in-common-between-economism-and/
description: D. What Is There in Common between Economism and Terrorism?, 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/)

# D. What Is There in Common between Economism and Terrorism?

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/)

[← 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/) [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/)

In the last footnote we quoted the opinion of an Economist and of a non-Social-Democratic terrorist who, by chance, proved to be in agreement with him. Speaking generally, however, between the two there is not an accidental, but a necessary mutual connection, about which we shall have to speak farther on in connection with the question of training the masses in revolutionary activity. The Economists and the modern terrorists spring from a common root, namely, subservience to spontaneity, which we dealt with in a . previous chapter as a general phenomenon, and which we shall now examine in relation to its effect upon political activity and the political struggle. At first sight, our assertion may appear paradoxical, for the difference between these two appears to be so enormous: One stresses the “drab every-day struggle” and the other calls for the most self-sacrificing struggle of individuals. But this is not a paradox. The Economists and terrorists merely bow to different poles of spontaneity: The Economists bow to the spontaneity of the “pure and simple” labour movement while the terrorists bow to the spontaneity of the passionate indignation of the intellectuals, who are either incapable of linking up the revolutionary struggle with the labour movement, or lack the opportunity to do so. It is very difficult indeed for those who have lost their belief, or who have never believed, that this was possible, to find some other outlet for their indignation and revolutionary energy than terror. Thus, both the forms of subservience to spontaneity we have mentioned are nothing more nor less than a beginning in the carrying out of the notorious Credo programme. Let the workers carry on their “economic struggle against the employers and the government” (we apologise to the author of Credo for expressing his views in Martynov’s words! But we think we have the right to do so because even the Credo says that in the economic struggle the workers “come up against the political régime”’), and let the intellectuals conduct the political struggle by their own efforts—with the aid of terror, of course! This is an absolutely logical and inevitable conclusion which must be insisted upon—even though those who are beginning to carry out this programme did not themselves realise that it is inevitable. Political activity has its logic quite apart from the consciousness of those who, with the best intentions, call either for terror, or for giving the economic struggle itself a political character. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and, in this case, good intentions cannot save one from being spon- > along the line taneously drawn “along the line of least resistance,’ of the purely bourgeois Credo programme. Surely it is not an accident that many Russian liberals—avowed liberals and liberals who wear the mask of Marxism—wholeheartedly sympathise with terror, and strive to foster the spirit of terrorism that is running s¢e high at the present time.

The formation of the Svoboda Revolutionary Socialist group— which was formed with the object of giving all possible assistance to the labour movement, but which included in its programme terror, and emancipation, so to speak, from Social-Democracy—this fact once again confirmed the remarkable penetration oleh be Axelrod who literally foretold these results of Social-Democratic wavering as far back as the end of 1897 [Modern Tasks and Modern Tactics], when he outlined his remarkable “two prospects.” All the subsequent disputes and disagreements among Russian Social- Democrats are contained, like a plant in the seed, in these two prospects. * From this point of view it will be clear that Rabocheye Dyelo, being unable to withstand the spontaneity of Economism, has been unable also to withstand the spontaneity of terrorism. It would be interesting to note here the specific arguments that Svoboda advanced in defence of terrorism. It “completely denies” the deterrent réle of terrorism [The Regeneration of Revolutionism, p. 64], but instead stresses its “excitative significance.” This is characteristic, firstly, as representing one of the stages of the break-up and decay of the traditional (pre-Social-Democratic) cycle of ideas which insisted upon terrorism. To admit now that the government cannot be “terrified,” and therefore disrupted, by terror, is tantamount to condemn. ing terror as a system of struggle, as a sphere of activity sanctioned by the programme. Secondly, it is still more characteristic as an example of the failure to understand our immediate task of “training the masses in revolutionary activity.” Svoboda advocates terror as a means of “exciting” the labour movement, and of giving it a “strong impetus.” It is difficult to imagine an argument that disproves itself more than this one does! Are there not enough outrages committed in Russian life that a special “stimulant” has to be invented? On the other hand, is it not obvious that those who are not, and cannot be, roused to excitement even by Russian tyranny will stand by “twiddling their thumbs” even while a handful of terrorists are engaged in single combat with the government? The fact is, however, that the masses of the workers are roused to a high pitch of excitement by the outrages committed in Russian life, but we are unable to collect, if one may put it that way, and concentrate all these drops and streamlets of popular excitement that are called forth by the conditions of Russian life to a far larger extent than we imagine, but which it is precisely necessary to combine into a single gigantic flood. And this we must do. That this task can be accomplished is irrefutably proved by the enormous growth of the labour movement, and the greed with which the workers devour political literature, to which we have already referred above. Calls for terror, and calls to give the economic struggle itself a political character are merely two different forms of evading the most pressing duty that now rests upon Russian revolutionaries, namely, to organise an all-sided political agitation. Svoboda desires to substitute terror for agitation, although it openly admits that “as soon as intensified and strenuous agitation is commenced among the masses its excitative function will be finished.” [The Regeneration of Revolutionism, p. 68.] This proves precisely that both the terrorists and the Economists underestimate the revolutionary activity of the masses, in spite of the striking evidence of the events that took place in the spring, and whereas one goes out in search of artificial “stimulants” the other talks about “concrete demands.” But both fail to devote sufficient attention to the development of their own activity in political agitation and organisation of political exposures. And no other work can serve as a substitute for this work, either at the present time, or at any other time.

> * Martynoy “conceives of another, more realistic [?] dilemma” [ Social- Democracy and the Working Class, p. 19]: “Either Social-Democracy undertakes the direct leadership of the economic struggle of the proletariat and by that [!] transforms it into a revolutionary class struggle . . .” “and by that.? i:ses apparently the direct leadership of the economic struggle. Can Martynov quote an example where the leadership of the industrial struggle alone has succeeded in transforming the trade-union movement into a revolutionary class movement? Cannot he understand that in order to “transform” we must undertake the “direct leadership” of all-sided political agitation? “.. . Or the other prospect: Social-Democracy refrains from taking the leadership of the economic struggle of the workers and so . . . clips its own wings. .. .” In Rabocheye Dyelo’s opinion, which we quoted above, Iskra “refrains.” We have seen, however, that the latter does far more to lead the economic struggle than Rabocheye Dyelo, but it does not confine itself to this, and does not curtail its political tasks for the sake of it.

[← 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/) [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/)

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/).