The daily worker., 1925-02-14
Continued from last issue)
Trotsky Writes Again about Himsel
and Lenin

WCAO VIC tAO OhAJ OACot III 1ACN
sky's opinion, who made mistakes at
the time of the October revolution?
No, we we're not the only ones. This
book contains many sensations. But
the most sensational sentence in the
book is one referring to the October
revolution. On page so Of his LES
sons" Trotsky writes: "The rising on
the % October was of supplementary
character only" There are probably
many here present who took part in
the October events, and these will be
surprised to learn, eight years after
the October 25, 1917, that the rising
on October rs was merely of a
supplementary character" What did
is supplement- We learn that it Sup
plemented" the events which had TAX
en- place on October 3.
The main data Of the revolution are
familiar to us. But when I mentioned
events which occurred on October 8,
many will ask what happened on that
date to which the October rising was
nothing more than supplement. On
October 8, says Comrade Trotsky's
book, a resolution was passed in the
Petrograd Soviet, on the motion of
Comrade TFotsky, ending with the
sentence: "The Petrograd Workers
and Soldiers Soviet cannot be respon-
sible to the army for such strategy
on the part Of the provisional govern
ment, and especially for the removal
of troops from Petregrad."
1t need not be said that this was an
important resolution; it united the
garrison, which did not want to go to
the front, with the Petrograd Soviet.
But listen to how Trotsky describes
and estimates this event of the Octo-
Der 8: 'From this moment October
81 onwards we were actually in a
state Of armed insurrection The
issue of the rising of the October 25
was already three part pre-deter-
mined at this moment. In all
essentials an armed insurrection had
already been brought about =. Here
we had a quiet and almost Legal
armed insurrection, one which was
two thirds, IL not nine tenths, an ac-
eomplished fact From this
moment onwards we had victorious
rising DinA the capital city"
Thus it appears that October 25
was not more than slight supplement
to the great 9Th. But now the question
arises: II the victorious" insurrec-
ton was already an accomplished fact
to the extent Of nine tenths on the
October 9, what are we to think of
the mental capacity of those who sat
in the Boishevist c.. c. and decided in
heated debate, ON October 10, Whe-
ther We should proceed to an insur-
rection or not, and il SO, what then?
What are we to think of people who on
October Is gathered together as plen-
airy session of the G. G. together with
the functionaries and co-workers from
the military organizations, and still
deliberated on the prospects of the
insurrection, on the forces Of the in.
surrection, and on the date of the in.
suTrection. Had 1t not been all ar.
ranged on the 9th, quietly and legally {?
So quietly that neither the party MOI
the C. c. heard anything about it.
But this is merely a side issue.
WHAT is the party, what is the Petro-
grad Committee, or the c. C. when
Trotsky writes history of the Octo-
Der revolution2 In this history nei-
N--C@ ~~AO ~ ~ MI eAAC PoA ~ OA16L dl
all as real living powers, as collective
organizers Of the mass movement. And
there is not word to be learned
from the Lessons OF October" with
regard to what took place in Mos
COW, that not only In Petrograd, but
In Moscow and Ivanovo Vosnesensk
there was proletariat which was also
doing something. And with reference
to Lenin the book informs us: 'T.enin
who was not in Petrograd, did not full
ly estimate the Importance Of this
fact Lenin. living illegally, had
no possibility Of estimating the
thoro upheaval.S etc. We see that
not one Of us really knew anything
about the October revolution. We had
thought that II was precisely Lenin
who led the October revolution, and
that the c. c., the party, and the mill
tary organizations of the party organ
tied It, But it appears that they did
not appear on the scene'at all