LENIN ON ORGANIZATION 
Party Congress. The debate occupied almost the 
whole of two sittings and ended in two personal 
votes (during the whole course of the congress, if 
I am not mistaken, there were only eight personal 
votes; personal votes, owing to the great loss of 
time they involved were resorted to only in extreme 
cases). The question involved in this instance was 
undoubtedly one of principle. The interest dis- 
played by the congress in the debate was tremen- 
dous. All the delegates took part in the voting— 
a rather rare phenomenon at our congress (as at 
all large congresses) and also a further indication 
of the interest displayed by the disputants. 
It will be asked, what was the crux of the ques- 
tion? I said at the Congress, and have since more 
than once repeated, that, “I by no means regard 
our difference of opinion (over par. 1) as being so 
important that the life and death of the Party 
depends on it. ‘We shall not perish merely because 
of a bad point in the statutes.” The difference in 
itself, although it implies differences of principle, 
ought not to have called forth such a division (or 
to speak without circumlocution, such a split) as 
took place after the congress. But a small differ- 
ence may become a big difference if it is insisted 
on, prime importance is attached to it, and if every 
root and branch of the difference is deliberately 
professed. A small difference may acquire tremen- 
dous significance if it becomes a starting point for 
definitely erroneous views, and if these erroneous 
views, being reinforced by fresh differences, are 
128