LENIN ON ORGANIZATION 
of the central points of the question. Is it true 
that this principle (which allows a person who does 
not belong to any organization of the Party, but 
who only “in one way or another helps it”) is really 
a Social Democratic principle? Plekhanov gave 
the only possible reply to this question: ‘Axelrod 
was wrong in his reference to the ’seventies. There 
existed at that time, an execellent organization with 
a magnificently disciplined centre; around it were 
gathered groups of various kinds which it had 
created; beyond these organizations sheer chaos 
and anarchy. The component parts of this chaos 
called themselves members of the Party, but from 
this circumstance the cause did not gain, but, on 
the contrary, lost. We must not imitate the anarchy 
of the ’seventies, we must avoid it.” Thus, the 
“principle” which Comrade Axelrod wanted to pass 
off as a Social Democratic principle, is in fact a 
principle of anarchy. In order to confute this, the 
possibility of control, guidance and discipline out- 
side the Party must be demonstrated; the necessity 
for applying the name of Party member to the 
“elements of the chaos” must be proven. Neither 
the one nor the other can be proved by the defenders 
of the draft of Comrade Martov. Comrade Axelrod 
took as an example: “a professor who regards him- 
self ag a Social Democrat and declares the fact.” 
To finish off the idea which this example implies, 
Comrade Axelrod ought to have further stated 
whether the organized Social Democrats themselves 
regard the professor as a Social Democrat? Not 
122