81
ing here. She was perfectly aware that the Executive favoured not sects, but mass organisations.
Even if Comrade Rakosi did really say the words ascribed to him, Comrade Zetkin is in the wrong just the same, because she left the Central Committee together with a whole group, causing thereby a serious crisis in the Party. And that is why we maintain that the Executive was right when it rebuked this step, particularly because it has since been demonstrated that we acted quite correctly in the Italian question. I do not know what Rakosi may have said, but I would like to quote a passage from Lenin's speech of yesterday: "58,000 Communist workers in so small a country as Italy are not at all negligible. They represent the first step towards the formation of a mass organisation." Now, this passage could be taken out of its context and made the basis for an assertion that Lenin is also in favour of sectarianism. On this point, Comrade Zetkin is totally wrong, and I believe she cannot help but acknowledge her mistake.
On the question of the K.A.P.D. I have the following remark to make; The comrades of the K.A.P.D. assert that it has been no easy matter for them to decide whether or not they should leave the Third International. This we quite believe, for we too have found it no easy matter to decide this question. We think that the K.A.P.D., just like any other party, should adapt itself to international discipline.
This is the only thing that matters. The comrades say: You must tolerate opposition. But they behave as if they do not want any opposition from the International. They would like to impose their views on the Third International. This can be the only meaning of the phrase—that their programme must remain "invoilable"; that means "do whatever you wish, pass any resolutions that you like, we will laugh at your decisions." Such a situation is impossible in the long run. We have shown a fair
