Left Opposition in the United States

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Left Opposition in the United States chapter 1 Introduction: Left Opposition in the United States Paul Le Blanc ‘Left Opposition’ refers to what was originally a current in the Russian Com- munist Party. It was in opposition to the corruption and betrayal of the com- munist ideal by a bureaucratic dictatorship, and it resisted the elimination of workers’ democracy and internationalism from what had been the revolution- ary Marxist conception of socialism. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin had been the long-time leader of the revolutionary Bolshevik current in the Russian socialist movement, and it was this current which led the Russian Revolution of 1917 that gave birth to the Soviet Republic. After designating itself the Russian Communist Party, it helped create the Com- munist International, meant to facilitate a global transformation from capital- ism to socialism. After Lenin’s death, however, the Russian Revolution’s goal of soviet democracy and the commitment to a liberating revolution worldwide gave way to a bureaucratic dictatorship preaching ‘socialism in one country’ and advancing cynical policies to enhance its own power and privileges. This change did not take place without a struggle – and the struggle was associated especially with what was called the Left Opposition. While Leon Trotsky was one of the leaders in opposing bureaucratic degen- eration, the oppositional current included a number of prominent revolution- ary personalities and thinkers: Eugen Preobrazhensky, Karl Radek, Christian Rakovsky, Lev Kamenev, Gregory Zinoviev, Lenin’s widow Nadezhda Krups- kaya, and others collaborated in its efforts at various points, seeking to preserve and advance the original, heroic ideals and perspectives associated with the Russian Revolution, the early Soviet regime, and the Communist International. By the late 1920s, however, powerful forces around the rising dictator Joseph Stalin, consolidating his domination of the Russian Communist Party, were able to smash the oppositionists, and many, including some of the most prom- inent, abandoned opposition to avoid expulsion from the Communist Party. The fact thatTrotsky and a saving remnant of oppositionists held firm had rami- fications in the world Communist movement in the late 1920s, including in the United States, giving rise to a small but important international movement.1 1 On the general history, see Carr 2004 and Le Blanc 2015a. A primary source for the Left © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi: 10.1163/9789004356986_002 2 chapter 1 The Central Figure To understand this movement, then, one must give attention to the life and ideas of Leon Trotsky.There are a number of useful works that can be consulted to comprehend this brilliant and heroic figure, yet in Trotsky, A Graphic Bio- graphy, Rick Geary usefully summarises key aspects of the story in the book’s first four frames: In 1917, Leon Trotsky burst upon the international stage as the brain behind the Russian Revolution. He presided over the complete trans- formation of his country, not merely a change of government but a total restructuring of society on every level. To many, he was the heroic St. George, slaying the dragon of capitalist repression. To others, he was the ruthless and Satanic purveyor of bloody rebellion, the cold, detached the- orist gone mad with power. In truth, he fitted neither of these images. He was a writer, a thinker, a nation-builder – albeit a reluctant one – with deep roots in his Russia’s agricultural heartland. Trotsky’s dream was for a world free from injustice, inequality, and war, and in this he was absolutely single-minded. To him, the ideas of Karl Marx showed the way, and for one brief moment he set the machinery in motion to achieve that end … He lived to see his work betrayed and his ideals perverted by those who seized power after him. He would be ejected from the government he helped to establish and hounded into exile and death.2 Ejected from the Soviet Union in 1929,Trotsky laboured to build a global revolu- tionary current that would defend and advance the earlier Bolshevik perspect- ives. Not at all inclined to name the movement which he led after himself, he preferred to call it ‘Bolshevik-Leninist’, although a more common tag was ‘Left Oppositionist’ – but it was the name first given to it by its opponents that really stuck: Trotskyite or Trotskyist. The term ‘Trotskyite’ was particularly pejorative, used by those hostile to the movement, having the connotation that those in Opposition in the Soviet Union from 1923 to 1928 are the three volumes composed mostly of Trotsky’s writings in this period: Trotsky 1975, 1980, 1981. Especially on the international movement, see: Alexander 1991; Frank 2010. 2 Geary 2009, pp. 3–4. See also Deutscher 2015; Serge and Sedova 2015; Le Blanc 2015b. A succinct collection of Trotsky’s writings in exile can be found in Trotsky 2012..
Recommended publications
  • Marxist Leninist Position on Death Penalty
    Marxist Leninist Position On Death Penalty Tyson is braced and letting prudishly as deplorable Kelwin orchestrates boundlessly and pargeted unceremoniously. Alarmist Edwin installs paniculately. Plectognathous Weber skewers some wases and unwind his crystalloid so insubstantially! This view not been first attacked by Plekhanov in the 10s. This document is written read the Communist Party of India Maoist and is. Lenin's Legacy The Statesman. The conclusion I undertake is reluctant on the Marxist-Leninist view equality of incomes is. Save Kulbhushan Jadhav Communist Party of India Marxist. Socialism in of its forms Marxism-Leninism in the Soviet Union Maoism. Opposition to the government is prohibited which it why Hitler killed socialists and communist prior to becoming fuhrer and placed others in. Explicit condemnation of Marxism-Leninism and its emphatic denunciation of unrestrained. Marx's Concept of Socialism Oxford Handbooks. Death penalties 2066637 sentences for 01 year 4362973 for 25 years 1611293 for 610 years and 26795 for sure than 10 years. Social Justice Critical Race Theory Marxism and Biblical. Get access to defeat mass of death penalty on the death penalty only thing. Lenin in context by L Proyect Columbia University. Same position partially as a result of making their death penalty discretionary. At our both the atoms that formed the body like those that formed the soul. The Role of Prisons in a Socialist Future. Introduced the death penalty be the khishchenie plundering or embezzlement. But turnover is stretch only if educated liberal opinion simply this not revolve about tyranny. Trotsky held steady this tree until Adolf Hitler became general of.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Guide, and to Issac and Stasya for Being Great Friends During Our Weird Chicago Summer
    Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) MUNUC 33 ONLINE 1 Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) | MUNUC 33 Online TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________ CHAIR LETTERS………………………….….………………………….……..….3 ROOM MECHANICS…………………………………………………………… 6 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM………………………….……………..…………......9 HISTORY OF THE PROBLEM………………………………………………………….16 ROSTER……………………………………………………….………………………..23 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………..…………….. 46 2 Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) | MUNUC 33 Online CHAIR LETTERS ____________________________________________________ My Fellow Russians, We stand today on the edge of a great crisis. Our nation has never been more divided, more war- stricken, more fearful of the future. Yet, the promise and the greatness of Russia remains undaunted. The Russian Provisional Government can and will overcome these challenges and lead our Motherland into the dawn of a new day. Out of character. To introduce myself, I’m a fourth-year Economics and History double major, currently writing a BA thesis on World War II rationing in the United States. I compete on UChicago’s travel team and I additionally am a CD for our college conference. Besides that, I am the VP of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity, previously a member of an all-men a cappella group and a proud procrastinator. This letter, for example, is about a month late. We decided to run this committee for a multitude of reasons, but I personally think that Russian in 1917 represents such a critical point in history. In an unlikely way, the most autocratic regime on Earth became replaced with a socialist state. The story of this dramatic shift in government and ideology represents, to me, one of the most interesting parts of history: that sometimes facts can be stranger than fiction.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Impact of Lenin's Return to Russia in April 1917
    Research Article A Revolution without Lenin? The Great Impact of Lenin’s Return to Russia in April 1917 Will Chamberlain University of Essex Abstract Much has been written on the significance of Lenin as a party leader, revolutionary, and later statesman, with much of this research primarily focusing on his words, actions, and impact. Little work, in comparison, has considered what may have happened if Lenin did not, or was not able to, return to Russia in April 1917. The consideration of what may have happened without Lenin not only further develops an analysis of his importance, but also allows an examination of other key figures who may have stepped forward in his absence, as well as the significance of events that would likely have occurred regardless of his presence. This work makes use of a variety of studies that have focused on Lenin himself, the Bolshevik party, and the revolution as a whole, as well as Sean McMeekin’s alternative study of a revolution without Lenin. Through these works an analysis of Lenin’s considerable impact in 1917 is offered, as well as an examination of the likelihood of a democratic soviet government led by the Socialist Revolutionary party and a plausible separate peace had Lenin not returned to Russia. Keywords: Lenin, Revolution, Russia, 1900s 1 This article is CC BY Will Chamberlain Essex Student Journal, 2017, Vol 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5526/esj22 A Revolution without Lenin? The Great Impact of Lenin’s Return to Russia in April 1917 Article Lenin, along with a number of other political dissidents, was residing in Switzerland when news broke of the fall of the Tsar.
    [Show full text]
  • The Thirst for Power
    “Thirst for Power” A short chapter written for a book. January 3, 1937. by Leon Trotsky Basic Translation by A.L. Preston (1970). Corrected in accord with the Russian original published in the book Prestupleniia Stalina. Basic translation copyright © 1978 by Pathfinder Press, New York. Introduction and footnotes copyright © 2002 by Tim Davenport. 1 2 Introduction This pamphlet, “Thirst for Power,” was originally one of 26 small com- ponent chapters of one of Leon Trotsky’s most interesting books, Prestupleniia Stalina [The Crimes of Stalin]. This little-known work was written on board the ship which carried Trotsky and his wife from de facto house arrest in Norway to political asylum in Mexico late in December of 1936. Along with commentary about his troubled personal situation, Trotsky’s book addressed various aspects of the first of the “Great Purge Tr ials” held in Moscow that August and marked a first formal response to the charges against him emerging from that proceeding.1 Although grand plans were announced in Biulleten’ oppozitsii, the central journal of the Trotskyists, for Prestupleniia Stalina to appear “in a short time. .in all the European languages,” the rapid pace of events in the USSR and the strategic decision of Trotsky to organize a “counter- trial” seems to have rendered this project impractical. Only two versions of the book saw print in Trotsky’s lifetime: a French edition which appeared in Paris in 1937 and a Spanish edition released in Santiago, Chile in 1938. While an Italian edition was released in 1966, it was not until the 1970 first edition of Writings of Leon Trotsky that the material was finally trans- lated into English, the language of the largest national segment of the Trotskyist movement.
    [Show full text]
  • A Companion to Andrei Platonov's the Foundation
    A Companion to Andrei Platonov’s The Foundation Pit Studies in Russian and Slavic Literatures, Cultures and History Series Editor: Lazar Fleishman A Companion to Andrei Platonov’s The Foundation Pit Thomas Seifrid University of Southern California Boston 2009 Copyright © 2009 Academic Studies Press All rights reserved ISBN 978-1-934843-57-4 Book design by Ivan Grave Published by Academic Studies Press in 2009 28 Montfern Avenue Brighton, MA 02135, USA [email protected] www.academicstudiespress.com iv Effective December 12th, 2017, this book will be subject to a CC-BY-NC license. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. Other than as provided by these licenses, no part of this book may be reproduced, transmitted, or displayed by any electronic or mechanical means without permission from the publisher or as permitted by law. The open access publication of this volume is made possible by: This open access publication is part of a project supported by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book initiative, which includes the open access release of several Academic Studies Press volumes. To view more titles available as free ebooks and to learn more about this project, please visit borderlinesfoundation.org/open. Published by Academic Studies Press 28 Montfern Avenue Brighton, MA 02135, USA [email protected] www.academicstudiespress.com CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE Platonov’s Life . 1 CHAPTER TWO Intellectual Influences on Platonov . 33 CHAPTER THREE The Literary Context of The Foundation Pit . 59 CHAPTER FOUR The Political Context of The Foundation Pit . 81 CHAPTER FIVE The Foundation Pit Itself .
    [Show full text]
  • Zinoviev (Biography + Primary Sources)
    Gregory Zinoviev was born in Yelizavetgrad, Ukraine, Russia on 23rd September, 1883. The son of a Jewish diary farmers, Zinoviev received no formal schooling and was educated at home. At the age of fourteen he found work as a clerk. Zinoviev joined the Social Democratic Party in 1901. He became involved in trade union activities and as a result of police persecution he left Russia and went to live in Berlin before moving on to Paris. In 1903 Zinoviev met Vladimir Lenin and George Plekhanov in Switzerland. At the Second Congress of the Social Democratic Party in London in 1903, there was a dispute between Vladimir Lenin and Jules Martov, two of the party's main leaders. Lenin argued for a small party of professional revolutionaries with alarge fringe of non-party sympathisers and supporters. Martov disagreed believing it was better to have a large party of activists. Martov won the vote 28-23 but Lenin was unwilling to accept the result and formed a faction known as the Bolsheviks. Those who remained loyal to Martov became known as Mensheviks. Leon Trotsky, who got to know him during this period compared him to Lev Kamenev: "Zinoviev and Kamenev are two profoundly different types. Zinoviev is an agitator. Kamenev a propagandist. Zinoviev was guided in the main by a subtle political instinct. Kamenev was given to reasoning and analyzing. Zinoviev was always inclined to fly off at a tangent. Kamenev, on the contrary, erred on the side of excessive caution. Zinoviev was entirely absorbed by politics, cultivating no other interests and appetites.
    [Show full text]
  • Hotel Bristol” Question in the First Moscow Trial of 1936
    New Evidence Concerning the “Hotel Bristol” Question in the First Moscow Trial of 1936 Sven-Eric Holmström Leon Sedov Leon Trotsky John Dewey 1. Introduction The purpose of this essay is to introduce new evidence regarding the Hotel Bristol in Copenhagen, the existence of which was questioned after the First Moscow Trial of August, 1936. The issue of Hotel Bristol has perhaps been the most used “evidence” for the fraudulence of the Moscow Trials. This essay examines the Hotel Bristol question as it was dealt with in the Dewey Commission hearings of 1937 in Mexico by carefully examining newly uncovered photographs and primary documents. The essay concludes that • There was a Bristol located where the defendant in question said it was. This Bristol was in more than one way closely connected to a hotel. • Leon Trotsky lied deliberately to the Dewey Commission more than once. • Trotsky’s son Leon Sedov and one of Trotsky’s witnesses also lied. • The examination of the Hotel Bristol question made by the Dewey Commission can at the best be described as sloppy. This means that the credibility of the Dewey Commission must be seriously questioned. Copyright © 2008 by Sven-Eric Holmström and Cultural Logic, ISSN 1097-3087 Sven-Eric Holmström 2 • The author Isaac Deutscher and Trotsky’s secretary, Jean Van Heijenoort, covered up Trotsky’s continuing contact with his supporters in the Soviet Union. • It was probably Deutscher and/or Van Heijenoort who purged the Harvard Trotsky Archives of incriminating evidence, a fact discovered by researchers during the early 1980s. • This is the strongest evidence so far that the testimony in the 1936 Moscow Trial was true, rather than a frame up.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Terror: Violence, Ideology, and the Building of Stalin's Soviet Empire Michael David Polano Wayne State University
    Wayne State University Wayne State University Theses 1-1-2017 The Great Terror: Violence, Ideology, And The Building Of Stalin's Soviet Empire Michael David Polano Wayne State University, Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/oa_theses Part of the Other History Commons Recommended Citation Polano, Michael David, "The Great Terror: Violence, Ideology, And The uiB lding Of Stalin's Soviet Empire" (2017). Wayne State University Theses. 583. http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/oa_theses/583 This Open Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@WayneState. It has been accepted for inclusion in Wayne State University Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@WayneState. THE GREAT TERROR: VIOLENCE, IDEOLOGY, AND THE BUILDING OF STALIN’S SOVIET EMPIRE by MICHAEL POLANO THESIS Submitted to the Graduate School of Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS 2017 MAJOR: HISTORY (Modern Europe) Approved by: ____________________________ Advisor Date DEDICATION TO MY MOTHER ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication____________________________________________________________________ii Chapter 1 “Introduction”_________________________________________________________1 Chapter 2 “Soviet Ideology and the Enemies of History”______________________________15 Chapter 3 “After the Flood: The Interwar Crisis and the Rise of Stalin”___________________44 Chapter 4 “The Great Terror”____________________________________________________68
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Stalin 2016
    Notes on Stalin 2016 Joseph Stalin created around his rule a formidable cult of personality that has been interpreted in many ways, as a product of Russia’s recent feudal past, as reflecting the inevitable outcome of centralized, authoritarian politics; or as a reflection of Stalin’s own psychology. Isaac Deutscher’s Stalin: A Political Biography, roots Stalin’s tyranny in the psychology of his class and ethnic background. Deutscher opens the story in 1875 at the time Stalin’s father, Vissarion Ivanovich Djugashvili, left his native village to work as an independent shoemaker in the Georgian town of Gori. He establishes three essential biographical details about Stalin. His father was born a peasant, a “chattel slave to some Georgian landlord”;1 in fact, ten years before, Stalin’s grandparents had been serfs. Like his father, Stalin’s mother, Ekaterina Gheladze, was also born a serf.2 When Stalin was born, on 6 December 1878 (Baptised Joseph Vissarionovich Djugashvili), he was the first of her children to survive—two sons had died in infancy.3 Deutscher considers Stalin’s class origins to be central to an understanding of his subsequent biography. Serfdom, he claimed, “permeated the whole atmosphere” of Stalin’s early life, weighing heavily on “human relations …, psychological attitudes, upon the whole manner of life.”4 In this world of “[c]rude and open dependence of man upon man, a rigid undisguised social hierarchy, primitive violence and lack of human dignity,” the chief weapons of the oppressed were “[d]issimulation, deception, and violence,” traits, he argues, that Stalin was to exhibit at many points of his political career.5 Second, Stalin wasn’t Russian; his nationality and first language were Georgian.
    [Show full text]
  • I. the BEGINNINGS of MILLENARIAN MARXISM Bogdanov and Bazarov A
    ROUTLEDGE LIBRARY EDITIONS: THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION Volume 9 MILLENARIAN BOLSHEVISM, 1900 TO 1920 MILLENARIAN BOLSHEVISM, 1900 TO 1920 Empiriomonism, God-Building, Proletarian Culture DAVID G. ROWLEY First published in 1987 by Garland Publishers, Inc. This edition first published in 2017 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 1987 David G. Rowley All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-138-21999-1 (Set) ISBN: 978-1-315-31269-9 (Set) (ebk) ISBN: 978-1-138-22854-2 (Volume 9) (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-38762-8 (Volume 9) (ebk) Publisher’s Note The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this reprint but points out that some imperfections in the original copies may be apparent. Disclaimer The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and would welcome correspondence from those they have been unable to trace. MODERN EUROPEAN HISTORY Millenarian Bolshevism, 1900 to 1920 David G.
    [Show full text]
  • The “Grander” Review! IB History, 2015-2016 WORLD WAR
    The “Grander” Review! IB History, 2015-2016 WORLD WAR ONE Lusitania Treaty of London, 1915 “a place in the sun” Zimmerman Telegram Berlin Conference, 1885 Treaty of Brest-Litovsk Wilhelm II WWI casualty figures Otto von Bismarck Paris Peace Conference Triple Alliance 14 Points Dual Alliance League of Nations “Reinsurance Treaty” reparations Franco-Russian Alliance Article 231 “splendid isolation” Woodrow Wilson Admiral Mahan Georges Clemenceau Tirpitz Plan David Lloyd George Entente Cordial Vitorio Orlando Triple Entente Rhineland 1st and 2nd Moroccan Crises Mandates 1st Balkan Crisis National self-determination Black Hand Annexation Crisis, 1908 Gavrilo Princep Economic Consequences of the Peace Sarajevo, June 28, 1914 Fischer Thesis Archduke Franz Ferdinand Alsace-Lorraine “blank check” Austrian Ultimatum Schlieffen Plan Trench warfare Dreadnought Big Bertha “Poor little Belgium” Joseph Joffre 1st Battle of the Marne WWI weapons/technology Battle of Verdun Battle of the Somme Sir Douglas Haig Battle of Tannenberg Paul von Hindenberg Gallipoli 2nd Battle of the Marne The “Grander” Review! Red Army IB History, 2015-2016 Czech Legion War Communism USSR AND LENIN Kornilov Affair Fanya Kaplan Alexander II Kronstadt Rebellion The People’s Will USSR, 1922 Alexander III Central Committee Sergei Witte Politburo Constitutional Democratic Party Secretariat Zemstvos NEP Mirs Stalin vs. Trotsky The Communist Manifesto April Theses Social Revolutionary Party Famine of 1921 Marxism Tambov Rebellion V.I. Lenin Social Democratic Labor Party Bolsheviks
    [Show full text]
  • Communism – the Failed Experiment, Part III |
    act ing-man.co m http://www.acting-man.com/?p=6599 Communism – the Failed Experiment, Part III | March 7, 2011 | Author Pater Tenebrarum Dear Readers, We want to thank all of you who have donated to Acting Man. We are honored by your support. All donations will be used to optimize our services f or you. Should you wish to contribute, press the button below ... (see here f or Part I and Part II) The Bolshevik Revolution 1. The Party The Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) was f ounded in Minsk in 1898, in an attempt to unite the major socialist f actions active in Russia at the time. In addition to the unif ication idea, the party was meant to provide an alternative to the 'Narodnichestvo', the populist revolutionary movement that was represented by the narodniky, the young people that had begun to swarm out into the countryside in an attempt to 'educate the peasantry' (the party representing the narodniky movement was the SRP, see f urther below). The major dif f erence between these parties consisted in the f act that the RSDLP adopted Marxism as its ideological f oundation (as noted in part II of this series, the Czar's censors had mistakenly allowed the Russian translation of Marx' 'Das Kapital' to be published in Russia on the grounds that it was a 'strictly scientif ic work'. Presumably the censor charged with reading the book got bored out of his skull and one of the great ironies of history was the result). The beginning of the party's existence was inauspicious – the nine delegates attending its f irst congress were soon all arrested by the Okhrana, the Czar's secret police.
    [Show full text]