Another view of Stalin

Home > Other > Another view of Stalin > Page 32
Another view of Stalin Page 32

by Ludo Martens


  `Twelve to fifteen millions of the privileged --- there are the ``people'' who organize the parades, demonstrations, and ovations .... But apart from this ``pays lйgal'' as was once said in France, there exist one hundred and sixty millions who are profoundly discontented ....

  `Antagonism between the bureaucracy and the people is measured by the increasing severity of the totalitarian rule ....

  `The bureaucracy can be crushed only by a new political revolution.'

  .

  Ibid. , p. 149.

  `(T)he economy is planned on the basis of nationalization and collectivization of the means of production. This state economy has its own laws that are less and less tolerant of the despotism, ignorance and banditry of the Stalinist bureaucracy.'

  .

  Trotsky, La capitulation de Staline (11 March 1939). La lutte, p. 216.

  Since the re-establishment of capitalism was impossible in Trotsky's eyes, any opposition, be it social-democratic, revisionist, bourgeois or counter-revolutionary, became legitimate. It was the voice of `one hundred and sixty millions who were profoundly discontented' and aimed to `protect' the collectivization of the means of production against the `new aristocracy'. Trotsky became the spokesperson for all the retrograde forces, anti-socialist and fascist.

  Bolshevism and fascism

  Trotsky was one of the first to put forward the line that Bolshevism and fascism were twins. This thesis was quite popular, during the thirties, in the reactionary Catholic parties. The Communist Party was their sworn enemy, the fascist party their most important bourgeois opponent. Once again, here is Trotsky:

  `Fascism is winning victory after victory and its best ally, the one that is clearing its path throughout the world, is Stalinism.'

  .

  Trotsky, Caпn Dugachvili va jusqu'au bout (April 1938). L'appareil, p. 238.

  `In fact, nothing distinguishes Stalin's political methods from Hitler's. But the difference in results on the international scale is remarkable.'

  .

  Trotsky, La capitulation de Staline, p. 216.

  `An important part, which becomes more and more important, of the Soviet apparatus is formed of fascists who have yet to recognize themselves as such. To equate the Soviet rйgime with fascism is a gross historic error .... But the symmetry of the political superstructures and the similarity of totalitarian methods and of psychological profiles are striking ....

  `(T)he agony of Stalinism is the most horrible and most odious spectacle on Earth.'

  .

  Trotsky, Nouvelles dйfections (17 March 1938). La lutte, pp. 161--162.

  Trotsky here presented one of the first versions of the essential theme of CIA and fascist propaganda during the fifties, that of `red fascism'. By using the word `fascism', Trotsky tried to redirect the hatred that the masses felt towards the terrorist dictatorship of big capital, against socialism. After 1944--1945, all the German, Hungarian, Croatian and Ukrainian fascist leaders that fled to the West put on their `democratic' mask; they praised U.S. `democracy', the new hegemonic force and the main source of support for retrograde and fascist forces in the world. These `old' fascists, faithful to their criminal past, all developed the same theme: `Bolshevism is fascism, but even worse'.

  Note further that at the time that European fascism had already started its war (wars in Ethiopia and Spain, annexation of Austria and Czechoslovakia), Trotsky was affirming that the `most horrible and most odious spectable' on Earth was the `agony of socialism'!

  Defeatism and capitulation in front of Nazi Germany

  Trotsky became the main propagandist for defeatism and capitulationism in the Soviet Union. His demagogic `world revolution' served to better stifle the Soviet revolution. Trotsky spread the idea that in case of fascist aggression against the Soviet Union, Stalin and the Bolsheviks would `betray' and that under their leadership, the defeat of the Soviet Union was inevitable. Here are his ideas on this subject:

  `The military ... status of Soviet Russia, is contradictory. On one side we have a population of 170,000,000 awakened by the greatest revolution in history ... with a more or less developed war industry. On the other side we have a political regime paralyzing all of the forces of the new society .... One thing I am sure: the political regime will not survive the war. The social regime, which is the nationalized property of production, is incomparably more powerful than the political regime, which has a despotic character .... The representatives of the political regime, or the bureaucracy, are afraid of the prospect of a war, because they know better than we that they will not survive the war as a regime.'

  .

  Trotsky, On the Eve of World War II (23 July 1939). Writings, vol. 12, p. 18.

  Once again, there were, on one side, `the 170 million', the `good' citizens who were awoken by the Revolution. One might wonder by whom, if it was not by the Bolshevik Party and Stalin: the great peasant masses were certainly not `awoken' during the years 1921--1928. These `170 million' had a `developed war industry'. As if it was not Stalin's collectivization and industrialization policies, implemented thanks to his strong will, that allowed the creation of an arms industry in record time! Thanks to his correct line, to his will, to his capacity to organize, the Bolshevik rйgime awoke the popular forces that had been kept in ignorance, superstition and primitive individual work. According to the provocateur Trotsky's rantings, the Bolshevik rйgime paralyzed that society's forces! And Trotsky made all sorts of absurd predictions: it was certain that the Bolshevik rйgime would not survive the war! Hence, two propaganda themes dear to the Nazis can be found in Trotsky's writings: anti-Bolshevism and defeatism.

  `Berlin knows to what extent the Kremlin clique has demoralized the country's army and population through its struggle for self-preservation ....

  `Stalin continues to sap the moral force and the general level of resistance of the country. Careerists with no honor, nor conscience, upon whom Stalin is forced to rely, will betray the country in difficult times.'

  .

  Trotsky, Staline et Hitler (12 March 1938). L'appareil, p. 234.

  In his hatred of Communism, Trotsky incited the Nazis to wage war against the Soviet Union. He, the `eminent expert' on the affairs of the Soviet Union, told the Nazis that they had every chance of winning the war against Stalin: the army and the population were demoralized (false!), Stalin was destroying the resistance (false!) and the Stalinists would capitulate at the beginning of the war (false!).

  In the Soviet Union, this Trotskyist propaganda had two effects. It encouraged defeatism and capitulationism, through the idea that fascism was assured victory given that the USSR had such a rotten and incompetent leadership. It also encouraged `insurrections' and assassination attempts to eliminate Bolshevik leaders `who would betray in difficult times'. A leadership that was categorically destined to fall during the war might well fall at the beginning of the war. Anti-Soviet and opportunistic groups could therefore make their attempts.

  In both cases, Trotsky's provocations directly helped the Nazis.

  Trotsky and the Tukhachevsky plot

  In the chapter dedicated to the Tukhachevsky military plot, we showed that a large anti-Communist opposition truly did exist among the cadres of the Red Army. Trotsky's attitude towards this reality is enlightening.

  Here are Trotsky's written positions about the Tukhachevsky affair:

  `I must here state what were my relations with Tukhachevsky .... I never considered the Communist convictions of this officer of the Old Guard to be serious ....

  `The generals struggled to defend the security of the Soviet Union against the interests of Stalin's personal security.'

  .

  Trotsky, L'armйe contre Staline (6 March 1938). L'appareil, pp. 197, 201.

  `The army needs capable, honest men, just as the economists and scientists, independent men with open minds. Every man and woman with an independent mind comes into conflict with the bureaucracy, and the bureaucracy must decapitate the one section at the e
xpense of the other in order to preserve themselves .... A man who is a good general, like Tukhachevsky, needs independent aides, other generals around him, and he appreciates every man according to his intrinsic value. The bureaucracy needs docile people, byzantine people, slaves, and these two types come into conflict in every state.'

  .

  Trotsky, On the Eve of World War II, p. 19.

  `Tukhachevsky, and along with him the cream of the military cadres, perished in the struggle against the police dictatorship hovering over Red Army officers. In its social characteristics, the military bureaucracy is naturally no better than the civil bureaucracy .... When the bureaucracy is viewed as a whole, it retains two functions: power and administration. These two functions have now reached an acute contradiction. To ensure good administration, the totalitarian power must be eliminated ....

  `What does the new duality of power mean: the first step in the decomposition of the Red Army and the beginning of a new civil war in the country?

  `The current generation of commissars means the control of the Bonapartist clique over the military and civilian administration and, through it, over the people ....

  `The actual commanders grew up in the Red Army, can not be dissociated from it and have an unquestioned authority acquired over many years. On the other hand, the commissars were recruited among the sons of bureaucrats, who have no revolutionary experience, no military knowledge and no ideological capital. This is the archetype of the new school careerists. They are only called upon to command because they are `vigilant', i.e. they are the army's police. The commanders show them the hatred that they deserve. The rйgime of dual command is transforming itself into a struggle between the political police and the army, where the central power sides with the police ....

  `The development of the country, and in particular the growth of its new needs, is incompatible with the totalitarian scum; this is why we see tendencies to resist the bureaucracy in all walks of life .... In the areas of technology, economics, education, culture, defence, people with experience, with a knowledge of science and with authority automatically reject the agents of Stalinist dictatorship, who are for the most part uncultivated and cynical uncouth like Mekhlis and Yezhov.'

  .

  Trotsky, Les dйfaitistes totalitaires (3 July 1939). La lutte, pp. 166--169.

  First of all, Trotsky had to recognize that Tukhachevsky and those like him were never Communists: previously, Trotsky himself had designated Tukhachevsky as candidate for a Napoleon-like military coup d'йtat. Furthermore, for the needs of his unrelenting struggle against Stalin, Trotsky denied the existence of a bourgeois counter-revolutionary opposition at the head of the army. In fact, he supported any opposition against Stalin and the Bolshevik Party, including Tukhachevsky, Alksnis , etc. Trotsky led a united front policy with all the anti-Communists in the army. This clearly shows that Trotsky could only come to power in alliance with the counter-revolutionary forces. Trotsky claimed that those who were fighting Stalin and the leadership of the Party within the army were actually struggling for the security of the country, while the officers who were loyal to the Party were defending Stalin's dictatorship and his personal interests.

  It is remarkable that Trotsky's analysis about the struggle within the Red Army is identical to that made by Roman Kolkowicz in his study for the U.S. Army (see page ). First, Trotsky opposed the Party measures to assert political control over the Red Army. In particular, Trotsky attacked the reintroduction of political commissars, who would play an essential political rфle in the war of anti-fascist resistance and would help young soldiers maintain a clear political line despite the incredible complexity of problems created by the war. Trotsky encouraged the elitist and exclusivist sentiments within the military against the Party, with the explicit aim of splitting the Red Army and provoking civil war. Next, Trotsky declared himself in favor of the independence, hence the `professionalism', of officers, saying that they were capable, honest and with an open mind, to the extent that they opposed the Party! Similarly, it is clear that anti-Communist elements like Tokaev defended their dissident bourgeois ideas in the name of independence and of an open mind!

  Trotsky claimed that there was a conflict between the `Stalinist' power and the State administration, and that he supported the latter. In fact, the opposition that he described was the opposition between the Bolshevik Party and the State bureaucracy. Like all anti-Communists throughout the world, Trotsky slandered the Communist Party by calling it `bureaucratic'. In fact, the real danger of bureaucratization of the rйgime came from the parts of the administration that were in no sense Communist, that sought to get rid of the `stifling' political and ideological control of the Party, to impose themselves on the rest of society and to acquire privileges and benefits of all kinds. The political control of the Party over the military and civil administration was especially aimed at fighting these tendencies towards bureaucratic disintegration. When Trotsky wrote that to ensure a good administration of the country, the Party had to be eliminated, he was the spokesperson for the most bureaucratic tendencies of the state apparatus.

  More generally, Trotsky defended the `professionalism' of the military, technical, scientific and cultural cadres, i.e. of all the technocrats who tried to rid themselves of Party control, who wanted to `eliminate the Party from all aspects of life', according to Trotsky's precepts.

  In the class struggle that took place within the State and Party in the thirties and forties, the front line was between the forces that defended Stalin's Leninist line and those who encouraged technocratism, bureaucracy and militarism. It was the latter forces that would gain hegemony over the Party leadership during Khrushchev's coup d'йtat.

  Provocations in the service of the Nazis

  To prepare for the Nazi war of aggression, Stalin and the Bolsheviks had to be overthrown. By defending this thesis, Trotsky became an instrument in the hands of the Hitlerites. Recently, during a meeting at the Free University of Brussels (ULB), a ranting Trotskyist yelled: `Those are lies! Trotsky always stated that he unconditionally defended the Soviet Union against imperialism.'

  Yes, Trotsky always defended the Soviet Union, assuming that destroying the Bolshevik Party was the best preparation for defence! The essential point is that Trotsky was calling for an anti-Bolshevik insurrection, from which the Nazis, and not the handful of Trotskyists, would profit. Trotsky could well preach insurrection in the name of a `better defence' of the Soviet Union, but he clearly held an anti-Communist line and mobilized all the anti-socialist forces. There is no doubt that the Nazis were the first to appreciate this `better defence of the Soviet Union'.

  Here are Trotsky's exact words about `a better defence of the Soviet Union'.

  `I cannot be ``for the USSR'' in general. I am for the working masses who created the USSR and against the bureaucracy which has usurped the gains of the revolution .... It remains the duty of a serious revolutionary to state quite frankly and openly: Stalin is preparing the defeat of the USSR.'

  .

  Trotsky, A Political Dialogue, pp. 156, 158.

  `I consider the main source of danger to the USSR in the present international situation to be Stalin and the oligarchy headed by him. An open struggle against them ... is inseparably connected for me with the defense of the USSR.'

  .

  Trotsky, Stalin After the Finnish Experience (13 March 1940). Writings, vol. 12, p. 160.

  `The old Bolshevik Party was transformed into a caste apparatus ....

  `Against the imperialist enemy, we will defend the USSR with all our might. However, the gains of the October Revolution will serve the people only if it shows itself capable of acting against the Stalinist bureaucracy as it did previously against the Tsarist bureaucracy and the bourgeoisie.'

  .

  Trotsky, Lettres aux travailleurs d'URSS (May 1940). La lutte, pp. 301--302.

  `Only an uprising of the Soviet proletariat against the base tyranny of the new parasites can save what is still l
eft over in the foundations of the society from the conquests of October .... In this sense and in this sense only, we defend the October Revolution from imperialism, fascist and democratic, from the Stalin bureaucracy, and from its ``hired friends''.'

  .

  Trotsky, The Twenty-First Anniversary (14 November 1938). Writings, vol. 11, p. 111.

  From these citations, it is clear that the words `we support the USSR against imperialism' were pronounced by an anti-Communist who had to say them if he wanted to have the slightest chance of being listened to by the masses who were ready to defend the socialist rйgime to the bitter end. But only politically blind people could be confused by the meaning of this `defence'. In fact, this is how traitors and enemies prepare defence: `Stalin will betray, he is preparing defeat; so Stalin and the Bolshevik leadership have to be eliminated to defend the USSR.' Such propaganda perfectly suited the Nazis.

 

‹ Prev