The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1925-02-12
Leninism or Irotskyism

/ COHNlCllOu, NOT JHaL lie Was gong 10
learn anything from Bolshevism, but
that he was going to reach the party
from Trotskyism, and substitute Len
inism by Trotskyism. In Trotsky's
book, WAR and Revolution" we read:
There were three points in which
the newspaper, Nasche Slovo (Trot-
sky's organs l.. K) had not yet ar
rived at an agreement with the Social
Democrat (organ of the G. c. Of the
Bolsheviki, conducted by Lenin and
Zinoviev L. K) even after the form
err had finally passed into the hands
of the left wing of the editorial staff.
These points referred to1defeatism, to
the struggle for peace and to the
character of the approaching Russian
revolutions, Nasche Sloyo rejected de-
featism (Which Lenin. had held from
the beginning of the war to be the
fundamental principle. of really revo-
lutionary internationalism. L. K.)
The Social Democrat rejected the slo-
gan of the struggle for peace. :.
and opposed it by the slogan of civil
war (rejectetd by Trotsky. L. K)
Nasche Slovo finally supported the
of our party to conquer power in the
name of the socialist revolution. The
Social Democrat maintained the stand
point of the democratic dictatorship
of the proletariat and peasantry."
A few lines before Trotsky informs
us that the differences" existing be-
tween the Social Democrat and the
Nasche Slovo, considerable at first,
had diminished. Not only Trotsky,
but Martoy, was at one time a mem
Der of the editorial staff of the Nasche
Slovo; Martov. however, resigned his
post later on account of the remorse-
less criticism exercised by Comrade
Lenin, and of the increase of revolu-
tionary Communist elements among
the editors. After the paper had
| finally passed into the hands of the
left wing of the editorial staff, that
| is, into Trotsky's hands, these three
| points of dispute remained: the ques.
ton of defeatism, the question of civil
war or peace, and the question of the
character of the impending Russian
revolution.
Lenin stood for the defeat of the ma
tional bourgeoisie, he impressed upon
the workers the necessity of the de-
feat of their own" bourgeoisie-
Trotsky was opposed to thisl
Lenin stood for civil war-Trotsky
opposed it,
Lenin stood for the democratic die
tatorship of the proletariat and peas
antry- opposed it! Here, as
Lenin pointed out, he caused great
confusion with his left phrase on
permanent revolution" In this last
point Trotsky gave the impression of
being more left than Lenin. He was
not content with the mere dictator
ship of the proletariat and peasantry,
but demanded permanent revolution.
Here we have merely a further ex-
ample of what Lenin impressed upon
us for so many years with regard to
Trotsky: a right policy with regard
to daily questions of actual practice,
but skilfully disguised in the phrase
ology of the left
A fourth difference must however
be added to these three, one not men
toned by Comrade Trotsky: the diff
ference in the question of the Second
and Third Internationals Lenin, at
the head of the Zimmerwald left, stood
for immediate rupture with the Sec
ond International and with Kautsky,
and for the founding of the Third In
ternational. Trotsky, and the pro-
Kautsky center were against this.
But only few months after the ex-
istence of these differences had been
definitely ascertained, Trotsky joined
the Bolshevist Party.
1.-THE March revolution" he writes,
has wiped out all these differences"
Truly? All of them? And how?
Trotsky does not say. Yet the party
has right to put this question, since
Comrade Trotsky has obliged us to
occupy ourselves with his history.
Are we to understand the declaration
that the revolution has erased all
differences in such manner that we
may assume Comrade Trotsky to have
become convinced of his having been
mistaken on all these important
points? That he has adopted the
viewpoint of the Bolsheviki? Com
rade Martinov, one of the best of the
menshevist theoreticians, declared
candidly: 81 have served the working
class for thirty years in the way which
| held to be the best. Today l see
that have been in the wrong. His
tory confirms the correctness of Len.
ms standpoint with regard to the
Russian revolution, and join Lenin."
But Comrade Trotsky has given the
party no such answer.
(To be continued.)