70
answer: Yes. But what shall be the fate of Smeral?
We do not demand his expulsion, but we claim the right to tell the Czecho-Slovak workers exactly what we have to say, warning them against such speeches and public appearances as those of Smeral. We ought not to forget that Smeral's speech which lasted three hours, was by no means an improvisation. The Speech had beer carefully prepared beforehand, every word weighed and measured. We call upon. the Czecho-Slovak workers to continue progressing and not to slide backwards. The Czecho-Slovak comrades have told us that the bourgeois press would be jubilant over our resolution. I don't know if their jubiliation would be justified. We know that the bourgeois press will attempt to make capital out of this compelled polemic. They will again indulge in foolish talk about the dictatorship of Moscow; or of the Hungarian comrades. I know also, that there are Party members who are susceptible to this kind of insinuation and sophistry. Indeed, our internationalism does not make it incumbent upon us to worry about such foolish prattle. It should therefore in no way whatever, affect our decisions. We must speak sincerely to the Czecho-Slovak workers. We have not a word to say against Smeral personally. When he came to us last year, opening his soul to us, and declaring: "I am a Social Patriot, but I have come here,"—we put no obstacle in his way. We have received him as a brother, we have supported him in the course of a whole year, to the best of our ability. We have no reason whatever to take exception to him personally, He is no doubt a man who wants to serve, unselfishly, the proletarian class. But we must point out his political flaws.
Comrade Kreibich was right: when he stated that in our discussion (in the autumn of 1920 in Berlin) with him about Smeral, we took a stand against Smeral. Kreibich tried to dissuade us in a tone of conviction. He was still thinking at the time that it
