20
taken in the Marxist sense—(Turati and d'Aragona as interpreters of Marx!)—is not an obligatory condition of the programme, but a temporary measure, the necessity for which is called forth by special circumstances."
They are clever enough not to declare themselves against the "dictatorship in the Marxian sense." It is true that the dictatorship is not meant to be a permanent measure, it is but a temporary necessity. However, they look upon the matter as if the question of the dictatorship had already been liquidated, and assert that a "revolution in Italy accompanied by violence and destruction and by the immediate establishment of the Soviet system, as was the case in Russia, for which the extremist is striving, would be doomed to rapid failure unless it could secure the active support, both political and economic, of the proletariat of the more advanced states during the period of inevitable economic decay."
There you have the doctrine of the reformists! They do not want Italy to have a revolution accompanied by violence and destruction. They do not want the immediate establishment of a Soviet system of the Russian type. Well, we would even be satisfied with a Soviet system of the Italian type. (Laughter.)
This little matter stands in connection with the lengthy resolution on Freemasonry. That was the creed of the reformist group in Reggio Emilia, revealing the true character of this group as clearly as through a magnifying glass. Here is where we were obliged to act; we had to expel them. The whole controversy was centred around this group which has declared itself against the dictatorship of the proletariat and the revolution, and against a Soviet system of the Russian type.
After all these declarations Serati dared to say that there were no reformists in Italy, that he advocated the expulsion of reformists, that he was more strict than we are, and that we should only point out
