LENIN ON ORGANIZATION 
reactionary nature of the “pedagogy” with which 
we are so often regaled in discussions on our duties 
towards the masses. It proves that our first and 
most urgent duty is to assist in training working 
class revolutionaries, who with regard to Party 
activities will be on the same level as intellectual 
revolutionaries (we emphasize the words “with 
regard to Party activities,” for although it is neces- 
sary for the worker to attain a similar level also in 
other respects, it is not so easy, nor is it so urgent). 
Therefore our main attention should be devoted to 
raising the workers to the level of revolutionaries, 
and not to lowering ourselves to the level of the 
“working masses,” as the economists advocate, or 
to the level of the “average worker” as “Svoboda” 
advocates, (whereby raising itself to the second 
stage of economic ‘“‘pedagogy”). I am far from 
denying the necessity for popular literature for the 
workers and of especially popular literature (pro- 
vided, of course, it be not puerile) for the more 
backward workers. But the perpetual intrusion of 
pedagogy in questions of politics and organization 
makes me ill. As a mater of fact, you gentlemen 
who are so concerned about the “average worker” 
insult the worker by your greater readiness to con- 
descend than to discuss working class politics 
or working class organization. Speak of serious 
things, straighten your backs and leave pedagogy 
to the pedagogues, not to politicians and organizers! 
Are there not advanced people, “average” people 
and the “mass” among the intellectuals themselves? 
99