Trotsky's Conciliationism
Trotsky's Conciliationism
Lenin stood' firmly for the organisational separation of revolutionary internationalism from both open and concealed (ie. Centrist) social-chauvinism:
"To keep united with opportunism at the present time means precisely to subjugate the working class to ‘its’ bourgeoisie, to make an alliance with it for the oppression of other nations and for the struggle for the privileges of a great nation; at the same time it means splitting the revolutionary proletariat of all countries".
(V. I. Lenin: 'Socialism and War', in: 'Collected Works', Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 230-1).
"We must declare the idea of unity with the Organisation Committee an illusion detrimental to the workers' cause".
(V. I. Lenin: 'And Now What?", in: ibid.; p. 109).
"We shall not be for unity with Chkheidze's fraction (as desired both by Trotsky, by the 0rgansation Committee, and by Plekhanov and Co.; . for this would mean to cover up and defend the 'Nashe Dyelo".
(V. I. Lenin: Letter to Aleksendro Kollontai, summer 1915, in: ibid.; p. 208).
In contrast to Lenin, Trotsky stood consistently for the unity of what he termed the "internationalist" groups, a category which included the concealed social-chauvinists of the Centre (the Organisation Committee, the Menshevik Duma fraction and the group around Trotsky).
At the beginning of 1915, "Nashe Slovo" addressed an appeal to the Bolshevik Central Committee and to the Menshevik Organisation Committee proposing a conference of all the groups which took a "negative attitude' towards socialchauvinism. In its reply, dated March 1915, the Organisation Committee said:
'To the conference must be invited the foreign representatives of all those party centres and groups which were . . present at the Brussels Conference of the International Socialist Bureau before the war'.
(Letter of Organisation Committee, March 12th., 1915, cited in: V. I. Lenin: The Question of the Unity of Internationalists", in: "Collected Works", Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 177).
Lenin commented:
"Thus, the Organisation Committee declines on principle to confer with the internationalists, since it wishes to confer also with the social-patriots (it is known that Plekhanov's and Alexinsky's policies were represented at Brussels).
We must not confer, it says, without the social-patriots, we must confer with them!"
(V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 177, 178).
Nevertheless, Trotsky continued his efforts to bring about organisational unity between the Bolsheviks end the concealed social-chauvinists of the Centre. In June 1915 Trotsky wrote an Open Letter to the editors of the Bolshevik magazine "Kommunist": , published in No. 105 of "Nashe Slovo" in which he said:
"I am proud of the conduct of our Duma members (the Chkheidze group); I regard them as the most important agency of internationalist education of the proletariat in Russia, and for that very reason I deem it the task of every revolutionary Social-Democrat to extend to them every support and to raise their authority in the International".
(L. Trotsky: Open Letter to the Editors of "Kommunist", cited in: V. I. Lenin: "Collected Works", Volume 18; London; n.d., p. 435)
Lenin commented on Trotsky's unprincipled conciliationism in various articles:
"The elements that are grouped around the 'Nashe Slovo' are vacillating between platonic sympathy for internationalism and a tendency for unity at any price with the "Nasha Zarya" and the Organisation Committee".
(V. I. Lenin: "Conference of the Foreign Sections of the RSDLP", in: Collected Works, Volume l8; London; n .d.; p.150).
"'Nashe Slovo' . . raises a revolt against social-nationalism while standing on its knees before it, since it fails to unmask the most dangerous defenders of the bourgeois current (like Kautsky); it does not declare war against opportunism but, on the contrary, passes it over in silence; it does not undertake, and does not point out, any real steps towards liberating socialism from its shameful patriotic captivity. By saying that neither unity nor a split with those who joined the bourgeoisie is imperative, the 'Nashe Slovo' practically surrenders to the opportunists".
(V. I. Lenin: "The Collapse of Platonic Internationalism", in: ibid.; p.183).
"Trotsky always, entirely disagrees with the social-chauvinists in principle, but agrees with them in everything in practice."
(V. I. Lenin: 'State of Affairs within Russian Social-Democracy", in: Ibid.; p. 205-6).
'We shall not be for unity with Chkheidze's fraction (As desired . .by Trotsky . .) for this would mean to cover up and defend the 'Nashe Dyelo'...
Roland-Holst, as well as Rakovsky . .and Trotsky too, are in my judgment all most harmful 'Kautskyists', inasmuch as they are all, in one form or another, for unity with the opportunists, . . are embellishing opportunism, they all (each in his way) advance eclecticism instead of revolutionary Marxism".
(V. I. Lenin: Letters to Aleksandra Kollontai, summer 1915, in: ibid.; p. 208, 209).
"In Russia Trotsky . . fights for unity with the opportunist and chauvinist group "Nashe Zarya'".
(V. I. Lenin: 'Socialism and War", in: ibid.; p.232).
"Martov and Trotsky in Russia are causing the greatest harm to the labour movement by their insistence upon a fictitious unity, thus hindering, the now ripened imminent unification of the opposition in all countries and the creation of the Third International".
(V. I. Lenin: 'The Tasks of the Opposition in France", in: 'Collected Works", Volume 19; London; 1942; p. 32).
"What are our differences with Trotsky?. . In brief -- he is a Kautskyite, that is, he stands for unity with the Kautskyites in the International and with Chkheidze's parliamentary group in Russia. We are absolutely against such unity".
(V. I. Lenin: Letter to Henrietta Roland-Holst, Morch 8th., 1916, in: "Collected Works", Volume 43; Moscow; 1969; p. 515-l6).
"What a swine this Trotsky is -- Left phrases and a bloc with the Right. . . He ought to be exposed".
(V. I. Lenin: Letter to Aleksendra Kollontai, February 17th., 1917, in: "Collected Works", Volume 35; Moscow, 1966; p. 285).
Kamenev’s Defence
In November 1915 eleven leading members of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, including five deputies, were arrested at a conference near Petrograd and charged with being members of an organisation aiming at the overthrow of the existing political order.
At their trial Lev Kamenev and two of the deputies declared in their defence that they did not accept the policy of the Party in so for as it enjoined members to work for the defeat of Russia in the war.
Lenin commented:
"The trial of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Fraction . . has proven first, that this advanced detachment of revolutionary Social-Democracy in Russia did not show sufficient firmness at the trial. . To attempt to show solidarity with the social-patriot, Mr. Yordansky, as did Comrade Rosenfeld (i.e., Kamenev --Ed.) or to point out one's disagreement with the Central Committee, is an incorrect method; this is impermissible from the standpoint of revolutionary Social-Democracy".
(V. I. Lenin: "What has the Trial of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Fraction Proven?", in: "Works", Volume 18; Moscow; n.d.; p. 151)
Lenin stood' firmly for the organisational separation of revolutionary internationalism from both open and concealed (ie. Centrist) social-chauvinism:
"To keep united with opportunism at the present time means precisely to subjugate the working class to ‘its’ bourgeoisie, to make an alliance with it for the oppression of other nations and for the struggle for the privileges of a great nation; at the same time it means splitting the revolutionary proletariat of all countries".
(V. I. Lenin: 'Socialism and War', in: 'Collected Works', Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 230-1).
"We must declare the idea of unity with the Organisation Committee an illusion detrimental to the workers' cause".
(V. I. Lenin: 'And Now What?", in: ibid.; p. 109).
"We shall not be for unity with Chkheidze's fraction (as desired both by Trotsky, by the 0rgansation Committee, and by Plekhanov and Co.; . for this would mean to cover up and defend the 'Nashe Dyelo".
(V. I. Lenin: Letter to Aleksendro Kollontai, summer 1915, in: ibid.; p. 208).
In contrast to Lenin, Trotsky stood consistently for the unity of what he termed the "internationalist" groups, a category which included the concealed social-chauvinists of the Centre (the Organisation Committee, the Menshevik Duma fraction and the group around Trotsky).
At the beginning of 1915, "Nashe Slovo" addressed an appeal to the Bolshevik Central Committee and to the Menshevik Organisation Committee proposing a conference of all the groups which took a "negative attitude' towards socialchauvinism. In its reply, dated March 1915, the Organisation Committee said:
'To the conference must be invited the foreign representatives of all those party centres and groups which were . . present at the Brussels Conference of the International Socialist Bureau before the war'.
(Letter of Organisation Committee, March 12th., 1915, cited in: V. I. Lenin: The Question of the Unity of Internationalists", in: "Collected Works", Volume 18; London; n.d.; p. 177).
Lenin commented:
"Thus, the Organisation Committee declines on principle to confer with the internationalists, since it wishes to confer also with the social-patriots (it is known that Plekhanov's and Alexinsky's policies were represented at Brussels).
We must not confer, it says, without the social-patriots, we must confer with them!"
(V. I. Lenin: ibid.; p. 177, 178).
Nevertheless, Trotsky continued his efforts to bring about organisational unity between the Bolsheviks end the concealed social-chauvinists of the Centre. In June 1915 Trotsky wrote an Open Letter to the editors of the Bolshevik magazine "Kommunist": , published in No. 105 of "Nashe Slovo" in which he said:
"I am proud of the conduct of our Duma members (the Chkheidze group); I regard them as the most important agency of internationalist education of the proletariat in Russia, and for that very reason I deem it the task of every revolutionary Social-Democrat to extend to them every support and to raise their authority in the International".
(L. Trotsky: Open Letter to the Editors of "Kommunist", cited in: V. I. Lenin: "Collected Works", Volume 18; London; n.d., p. 435)
Lenin commented on Trotsky's unprincipled conciliationism in various articles:
"The elements that are grouped around the 'Nashe Slovo' are vacillating between platonic sympathy for internationalism and a tendency for unity at any price with the "Nasha Zarya" and the Organisation Committee".
(V. I. Lenin: "Conference of the Foreign Sections of the RSDLP", in: Collected Works, Volume l8; London; n .d.; p.150).
"'Nashe Slovo' . . raises a revolt against social-nationalism while standing on its knees before it, since it fails to unmask the most dangerous defenders of the bourgeois current (like Kautsky); it does not declare war against opportunism but, on the contrary, passes it over in silence; it does not undertake, and does not point out, any real steps towards liberating socialism from its shameful patriotic captivity. By saying that neither unity nor a split with those who joined the bourgeoisie is imperative, the 'Nashe Slovo' practically surrenders to the opportunists".
(V. I. Lenin: "The Collapse of Platonic Internationalism", in: ibid.; p.183).
"Trotsky always, entirely disagrees with the social-chauvinists in principle, but agrees with them in everything in practice."
(V. I. Lenin: 'State of Affairs within Russian Social-Democracy", in: Ibid.; p. 205-6).
'We shall not be for unity with Chkheidze's fraction (As desired . .by Trotsky . .) for this would mean to cover up and defend the 'Nashe Dyelo'...
Roland-Holst, as well as Rakovsky . .and Trotsky too, are in my judgment all most harmful 'Kautskyists', inasmuch as they are all, in one form or another, for unity with the opportunists, . . are embellishing opportunism, they all (each in his way) advance eclecticism instead of revolutionary Marxism".
(V. I. Lenin: Letters to Aleksandra Kollontai, summer 1915, in: ibid.; p. 208, 209).
"In Russia Trotsky . . fights for unity with the opportunist and chauvinist group "Nashe Zarya'".
(V. I. Lenin: 'Socialism and War", in: ibid.; p.232).
"Martov and Trotsky in Russia are causing the greatest harm to the labour movement by their insistence upon a fictitious unity, thus hindering, the now ripened imminent unification of the opposition in all countries and the creation of the Third International".
(V. I. Lenin: 'The Tasks of the Opposition in France", in: 'Collected Works", Volume 19; London; 1942; p. 32).
"What are our differences with Trotsky?. . In brief -- he is a Kautskyite, that is, he stands for unity with the Kautskyites in the International and with Chkheidze's parliamentary group in Russia. We are absolutely against such unity".
(V. I. Lenin: Letter to Henrietta Roland-Holst, Morch 8th., 1916, in: "Collected Works", Volume 43; Moscow; 1969; p. 515-l6).
"What a swine this Trotsky is -- Left phrases and a bloc with the Right. . . He ought to be exposed".
(V. I. Lenin: Letter to Aleksendra Kollontai, February 17th., 1917, in: "Collected Works", Volume 35; Moscow, 1966; p. 285).
Kamenev’s Defence
In November 1915 eleven leading members of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, including five deputies, were arrested at a conference near Petrograd and charged with being members of an organisation aiming at the overthrow of the existing political order.
At their trial Lev Kamenev and two of the deputies declared in their defence that they did not accept the policy of the Party in so for as it enjoined members to work for the defeat of Russia in the war.
Lenin commented:
"The trial of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Fraction . . has proven first, that this advanced detachment of revolutionary Social-Democracy in Russia did not show sufficient firmness at the trial. . To attempt to show solidarity with the social-patriot, Mr. Yordansky, as did Comrade Rosenfeld (i.e., Kamenev --Ed.) or to point out one's disagreement with the Central Committee, is an incorrect method; this is impermissible from the standpoint of revolutionary Social-Democracy".
(V. I. Lenin: "What has the Trial of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Fraction Proven?", in: "Works", Volume 18; Moscow; n.d.; p. 151)
NEXT >>> 1916. The Attempt to Introduce Anarchist Ideas into the Party
.jpg)
