The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-12-20

suo lypCS OF OClODef OppOFJlul5Il. IH6
,ornection between the Russian Oc-
ober and the present Comintern lead
srship is therefore completely set up.
Let us, however, examine the facts
little more closely. The first defeat
was the result of the fact that the Bull
garian party had dealt with the pea
iantry quite incorrectly, and did not
know how to estimate their move
league as whole, or its left wing.
They rather adopted the standpoint:
Down with the king, up with a work
ers' government" AT the decisive
moment, when it was necessary to
take the Leadership into their hands
and to mount up on the crest Of a
powerful peasants wave, the party de-
clared itself neutral, claiming that the
fight was between the town and the
rural bourgeoisie, which was no con-
Germ of the proletariat These were
the consideration" of the C. P. of
Bulgaria. They have been commit
ted to writing. and can be now proved
by documents. II we wish to have an
analogy with our October 1--WE should,
by the way, be more cautious with
analogies), it would be much more
apt to take the Kornikov days (Ker-
ensky-S tambuliski. Kornilov-Zankov)
Here, according to the statement of
Comrade Trotsky himself. too much
support was given to Kerensky, and
the distinction between the fight
against Kornilov and the defense Of
Kerensky was not understood In Bull
garia, however, the exact opposite err
ror was committed.
Wherein therefore lie the Lessons
of October?
Apart from this, the comrades who
are at present members of the e.
c. c. I. adopted during the Kornilov
days a thoroly correct attitude, and
the whole e. C. c. l. exercised thoro-
ly correct criticism Of the C. P. Of
Bulgaria and urged them on.
The second defeat in Bulgaria is q
fact, and Comrade Trotsky describes
the conditions under which it took
place. VIII you be so good, Comrade
Trotsky, to say, whether in this case
you support the old formula of Plecha-
nov during the time of the menchevist
decay: zone should not have taken
up arms? Was it necessary or not
for the Bulgarian Communists to take
up arms?
Yes or no?
Comrade Trotsky does not reply to
this. According to our opinion, it was
necessary to take up arms, as only by
this means was it possible to main
tain contact with the peasantry who
were entering the struggle with ele-
mentary force. But there was no time
for preparation. That is the true pic
ture Of the events. The Lessons" of
Comrade Trotsky have nothing in the
least to do with it.
Point 2. Germany.
Still more interesting is the ques-
ton Of the defeat of the German pro-
ietariat in October last year.
we have seen there in the second
half Of the past year a classical
(heavy type by the "Pravda") de-
monstration Of the fact that a most
extraordinary favorable revolutions
airy situation Of world historical i'm
portance can be missed"
According to the opinion Of Comrade
Trotsky therefore, the failure here
consisted in the fact that classical"
moment was missed. 1t was neces-
sary at all costs to take up the de-
cisivc struggle and the victory would
have been ours. Here Comrade
Trotsky draws complete analogy
with the October revolution in Rus
STA. There as here, we were pushed
forward. In Russia. under the pres
sure Of Lenin. we decided upon action
and were yictorious--in Germany.