From the speech of I. V. Stalin. December 4, 1936
Stalin. I wanted to say a couple of words that Bukharin absolutely did not understand what was happening here. Not understood. And he does not understand in what position he found himself, and why the question was raised at the plenum. Doesn't understand this at all. He hits on sincerity, requires trust 7 . Okay, let's talk about sincerity and trust.
When Kamenev and Zinoviev declared in 1932 that they renounced their mistakes and recognized the party's position as correct, they were believed. They believed it because they assumed that an ideological struggle is characteristic of a communist - former or present - this ideological former or real communist is fighting for his idea. If a person openly said that he adheres to the party's line, then, according to the well-known traditions established in Lenin's party, the party believes - it means that the person values his ideas and he really renounced his mistakes and took the party's position. They believed - they were wrong. They were wrong, (Comrade Bukharin. Yes Yes.)
When Smirnov and Pyatakov announced that they renounced their views, openly declared this in the press, we believed them. They also proceeded from the fact that people grew up on the Marxist school, obviously, value their position, their ideas, they are not hidden, they are fighting for. They believed, the Order of Lenin was given, they moved forward and made a mistake. Is that correct, Comrade Bukharin? (Bukharin. True, true, I said the same thing.)
When Sosnovsky submitted a statement that he renounces his mistakes, substantiated it, and substantiated it well from the Marxist point of view, we believed and really told Bukharin: “You want to take him to Izvestia, good, he writes well, take it, let's see what happens. " We were wrong. Then believe in the sincerity of people! We came to a conclusion: the former oppositionists cannot be taken at their word. (Animation in the hall. Voices from the seats. Right, right!)
You cannot be naive, and Ilyich taught that being naive in politics means being a criminal. We do not want to be criminals. Therefore, we came to the conclusion: you cannot take a word from any former oppositionist.
A few facts. Pyatakov, when his wife was arrested, they wrote a telegram, he was somewhere in the south, I think, in Kislovodsk. From there he replied briefly that he could not find arguments against his wife, but since Moscow considered it necessary to arrest her, then it must be so I arrived. We all gave testimony to him to read. He said that Zinoviev, Kamenev and Mrachkovsky were slandering him in their testimony. Others, just arrested or involved in the process, said so. He came to us and said: “Well, what can I say against these people, how can I justify myself? They lie, they want to ruin me. " We tried to tell him: “Okay, but you acted as a public prosecutor against the Socialist-Revolutionaries. Act as a public prosecutor against them " 8.- "OK, with pleasure". He was preparing. But we thought it over and decided that it would not work. But this test began to convince us for a minute that, perhaps, the person was right. What does it mean to put him up as a public prosecutor? He will say one thing, the accused will object to him, they will say: “Where did you get into, the accusers. You worked with us, didn't you ?! " What would that lead to? This would turn the process into a comedy and disrupt the process.
Therefore, Pyatakov was told: “No, although we raised the question of you to go as a public prosecutor, but this case will not work. " He became sad: “How can I prove that I am right? Let me, I will personally shoot all those whom you condemn to be shot, all this dirt, all this bastard. What more proof do you need? Announce in the press after the verdict and after the verdict is executed that the execution of the verdict was carried out by comrade Pyatakov. This circumstance also should have shaken us somewhat. But, on the other hand, we have never announced who is carrying out the sentence. And they decided: to declare - no one will believe that we did not force him to do it. We said that this case will not work, it's embarrassing, no one will believe that you volunteered for this business, and not under duress. And besides, we never announced faces who carry out sentences. “What should I do, give me a way out. Let me write an article against the Trotskyists. ”-“ Okay, write. ” Wrote, defeated Trotsky and Trotskyists 9 .
And what has turned out now, you look! After that we at least interviewed 50 people. After all, they turned Pyatakov's insides inside out. He turned out to be a monstrous man! Why did he go to act as a public prosecutor? Why did he go so far as to shoot his comrades himself? It turns out that their rule is this: if your fellow Trotskyite is arrested and began to extradite people, he must be destroyed. You see what a hell of a thing it is. Then believe in the sincerity of the former oppositionists! You cannot take the word of the former oppositionists even when they undertake to shoot their friends with their own hands.
Until recently, until yesterday, Radek kept writing me letters. We delayed the case of his arrest, although there were as many slanders as we wanted from different sides. Everyone, from top to bottom, slanders Radek. We delayed the case of his arrest, and then arrested him. Yesterday and the day before yesterday I received a long letter from him, in which he writes: a terrible crime is being committed. He is a sincere man, devoted to the Party, who loves the Party, loves the Central Committee, and so on and so forth, they want to let him down. This is wrong. You can shoot or not, that's up to you. But he would like his honor not to be shamed. What did he show today? Here, Comrade Bukharin, what happens. (Bukharin. But he would like his honor not to be disgraced. And what did he show today? Here, Comrade Bukharin, is what we have. (Bukharin: But I cannot admit anything today, or tomorrow, or the day after tomorrow. Noise in the hall.) I am not saying anything personally about you. Maybe you are right, maybe you are not. But you can't come out here and say that you don't trust, don't believe in my, Bukharin's, sincerity. This is all old news. And the events of the last two years have clearly shown this, because it has been proven in practice that sincerity is a relative concept. And as for trust in former oppositionists, we gave them so much trust... (Noise in the hall. Voices from the audience. That's right!) We should be flogged for that maximum trust, for that boundless trust that we gave them.)
Here is your sincerity and here is your trust! That is why we are raising this question at the plenum of the Central Committee. But because Bukharin may be offended and indignant, must we hide it? No, in order not to conceal this, the question must be raised at the plenum. Moreover, the former oppositionists took an even harder step in order to preserve at least a grain of trust on our part and once again demonstrate their sincerity - people began to commit suicide. After all, this is also a means of influencing the party. Lominadze committed suicide, he wanted to say that he was right, in vain he was interrogated and in vain he was subjected to suspicion. What turned out to be? It turned out that he was in a block with these people. Therefore, he killed himself in order to cover his tracks.
So this political murder is a means of former oppositionists, enemies of the party to bring down the party, to thwart its vigilance, to deceive it by suicide for the last time before dying and put it in a stupid position.
Furer, What letter he left also after the suicide, after reading it you can directly cry. (Kosior. No matter how it is.) And a person who is more or less politically experienced will understand that this is not the case here. We know Furer what he was capable of. And what happened? “He is right, he loves the party, he is pure, but at the thought that someone in the party might think that he, Furer, once merged with the Trotskyists, his nerves cannot stand it, his honor does not allow him to live ". (Kosior. They slandered him!) But what happened? It turned out - you could not imagine worse.
Tomsky: I would advise you, Comrade Bukharin, to think about why Tomsky committed suicide and left a letter - "clean." But you can see that he was far from clean. Strictly speaking, if I am clean, I am a man, a human being, and not a wimp, not to mention that I am a communist, then I will shout to the whole world that I am right. That I would kill myself - never! But here everything is not clean. (Voices from the audience. Correct!) The man committed murder because he was afraid that everything would be revealed, he did not want to be a witness to his own worldwide disgrace. And Furer, and Lominadze... (Mikoyan. And Khandzhyan.) And Khandzhyan, and Skripnik, and Tomsky. Here you have one of the very last, sharp and easiest means by which, before death, leaving this world, you can spit on the Party for the last time, deceive the Party. Here you have, Comrade Bukharin, the background to the latest suicides. And you, Comrade Bukharin, want us to take your word for it? (Bukharin: No, I don’t want to.) Never, under no circumstances. (Bukharin: No, I don’t want to.)
And if you don't want this, then don't be indignant that we raised this issue at the Central Committee plenum. Perhaps you are right, it is hard for you, but after all these facts that I have talked about, and there are a lot of them, we must sort this out. We must sort this out objectively and calmly. We want nothing but the truth, we will not let anyone perish from anyone. We want to get to the bottom of the whole truth objectively, honestly, courageously. And we cannot be intimidated by either tearfulness or suicide. (Voices from the audience. That's right! Prolonged applause.)
Notes:
7. Opposing this assertion of Stalin, Bukharin wrote to him on December 15 the following: "You said at the plenum:" Bukharin strikes here for sincerity. " You're wrong: I don't hit anything. I am in such a state of mind that this is already half-life ... I am dying because of scoundrels, because of human bastards, because of disgusting villains ”(APRF, f. 3, op. 24, d. 262, l. 27) ...
8. This proposal was made to Pyatakov by Ordzhonikidze.
9. Pyatakov G. Mercilessly to destroy despicable murderers and traitors.— Pravda, 21.VIII. 1936.
.jpg)
No comments