Page:Grigory Zinoviev - Report of the Executive Committee of the Communist International (1921).pdf/21

 munist International. Therefore, they said in their resolution as follows: "The differences of opinion in the movement of the historical period through which we are passing, cannot serve as sufficient cause for splitting the Party. The various schools within the Socialist Party, which had always existed in the past, have by no means hindered its mighty growth; neither will they prove to be any hindrance to fraternal and common work in the future; and the fruit borne by this work will be in direct ratio to the amount of respect shown by the various factions within the Party towards one another and towards the common will, with liberty of opinion fully maintained with regard to every situation, and the strictest discipline in the manifold forms of development of the class struggle."

That is the climax of reformist diplomacy. Turati, Treves and d'Aragona are familiar with such diplomacy, and are going to become brilliant ministers some day. What have they done? They have passed the following decision: "The concentration section confirms the affiliation of the Party to the Third International as well as the uniform interpretation of the 21 points, which are to be applied in accordance with the conditions of each country. The section declares most decidedly, that the anarchist and syndicalist groups as well as the freemasons, must be excluded from the International."

They have repeated what Serati suggested to them: they are for the 21 points on condition, however, that they be carried out in accordance with the conditions of the country. They are for a united party, but against syndicalists and anarchists. It is our Communist comrades whom they call syndicalist and freemason elements. That does not cost much.

The resolution of the concentration section could not refrain from making mention of the dictatorship of the proletariat. It contained the following statement: "The dictatorship of the proletariat, when