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

muulSl rarity.
Comrade Trotsky was most decided
ly opposed to this slogan, which he
considered as narrow slogan, insult
ed for mass propaganda. Is that per-
chance an anticipation" of the Len
mist standpoint?
2. Defeatism and the fight against
It. The second distinguishing criter-
ion Of the Bolshevik attitude was the
slogan that the revolutionary social
democrats 1--WE would now say Com
munists) must, in the imperialist war,
before all desire the defeat of their
own government. Comrade Trotsky
characterized this attitude as an in
verified nationalism, or nationalism
with a minus sign. Now, however, the
deep meaning of this feminist attitude,
whose roots form the chief source of
the Bolshevist idea, is now perfectly
clear. Yes, the chief source. One
only needs to read, for example, the
recently published polemic between
Lenin and Plechanov over the draft
program of the Russian social demo
cratic labor party Lenin's collected
works No. p in order to perceive this.
In this polemic with Plechanov. Len
in finds fault with the Plechanoy
draft on the ground that this is a text
book and not declaration of war;
there we read about capitalism in
general, whilst we require war against
Russian capitalism-that is the es-
sence of this polemic on the part of
Lenin. Why did Lenin insist upon this
Precisely because he was fighter and
not declaimer. The slogan of the
defeat Of ones own government was a
declaration of war on every form of
pacifism, even when it was hidden un-
der the feather bed of noble phrases,
on every one who advocated the de-
Tense of the fatherland, even when it
was hidden under the cleverest mask.
This was the most decided break. A
real severance of all connections with
ones own bourgeois state. 1t was pre-
cisely such an attitude which deter
mined in reality, in actual practice.
the International standpoint Of Boil
sheVism. This was the second differ
ence of principle between Trotsky and
the Bolsheviki.
3. Unity with the renshevist frac-
tion of Teheidse. Even during the war
Comrade Trotsky still advocated unity
with such elements as the Tcheidse
fraction, and he did not have the cour-
age to declare for definite organic
atory break which was the necessary
preliminary to correct policy. 1t
was not without reason that Lenin
greatly feared that many comrades
would be misled by Trotskyism.. It
is interesting to note that Trotsky,
even in May, 1917, did not perceive his
earlier errors. Thus we read on page
$50 Of the book in question:
"On the 7th of May, 1917, there
was opened the city conference of
the United Social Democrats tBol-
sheviki and Internationalists). The
conference greeted Comrade Trotsky
who was present as a guest. In reply
to this greeting Comrade Trotsky
declared that for him, who always
stood for the unity Of the social
democratic forces (heavy type by
the "Pravda') unity is not an end in
itself, that this formula must be CIV
en- revolutionary content. etc.
page $500
From this it is perfectly clear that
Comrade Trotsky does not only not
condemn his fight for the unity Of
the liquidators. but makes this ire
mendous fatal error almost the basis,
so to speak. Of unity with the Boil
sheviki, this time fortunately being
prepared to give the formula revolu-
tionary content.
Unfortunately the same faulty es-
timation OF his own mistakes in the
organizatory question is also observed
at present, Git was clearly revealed by
Comrade Trotsky in the last years