Trotsky cited Rizzi's contention in La Bureaucratisation du Monde that Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, the USSR and even Roosevelt's New Deal in the USA were all aspects of a common trend towards a bureaucratised post-capitalist world. That, he said, is what serious and rigorous opponents of Trotsky's own views on the USSR were already saying. Trotsky argued that if the USSR, as it was, nationalised property and all, survived the looming war, giving way to neither capitalist restoration nor a new working-class revolution, then it would have to be seen as a new form of class society. Trotsky's position at the end was that it was too soon to decide, and wrong to do so on the eve of the decisive test of war. Trotsky was as outspoken in his castigation of Stalin's action in Poland, and even Finland, as any of those who opposed his political position.
Draper reads later developments and positions anachronistically backwards.
They explicitly shared it. What they rejected was defence of the USSR in the war with Finland, where the USSR, Hitler's partner in the recent partition of Poland, was acting as an imperialist power. Others drew the indicated conclusions. H ere, too, in the separation of the evaluation of the class character of the USSR from his political conclusions, Trotsky was the innovator. The same political conclusions could follow from different class designations.