The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1925-02-07

di dCIOu, tuere was DlLL6r Struggle
between two tactics only, between two
political trends only, between two
schemes of Russian revolution only,
between menshevism, which under-es-
ttmated or neglected the peasantry
and aimed at an understanding be-
tween the working class and the bour-
geoisie, and Bolshevism, which called
upon the peasantry to support the
working class, both in its struggle
against czarism, and in it's struggle
against the bourgeoisie on behalf Of
the dictatorship Of the proletariat and
the peasantry. This struggle between
Bolsheviki and mensheviki during the
first revolution, essentially a struggle
for the direction to be assumed by the
revolution, as also the whole of the
first revolution itself; contained all the
elements Of the struggle ended in the
second revolution in 1917. The Par
vus-Trotsky theory played no part
whatever in either the first or the sec
ond revolution, 1t remained the EN-
PITY phrase foreseen by Lenin, and had
nothing to- do with the actual course
taken by the class struggle. 1t has
not been preserved in the living events
of the actual struggle, but solely in
the dusty files of old menshevist
newspapers. Therefore Lenin never
lost word, during the revolution. in
the refutation of this theory.
The Period Of counteE- Revolution.
The tide of revolution ebbed. The
party reorganized for difficult and tedi-
GUS work in the atmosphere of coun-
ter-revolution. The cleft phrases" en-
tirely lost effect. The foundations for
new tactics had to be saved-the ban
ner of the revolutionary tactics of the
proletariat and the principles of their
ter-revolutioDary pogroms, the destruc-
| Illegal organization-from the coun-
| ton Of proletarian organizations, the
orgies of apostasy, the atmosphere OF
exhaustion in the working class, and
the treachery and malicious Joy at the
failure of the revolution. The banner
OF the revolutionary policy of the
working class, dsrided and trodden in
the dust by all the rnensheviki. had
to be defended. At this moment, the
most difficult Of all for the Bolshevist
Party, since the whole atmosphere en-
gendered by the crushing of the revo-
| luton took effect against the Bolshe-
Wiki and aid was given an all sides
to menshevist and liquidatory tenden-
cies Oiquidatory both with regard to
party and the revolution)--at this mo-
ment Comrade Trotsky, who at the
time of the rising revolution CON-
bined with Parvus in wanting ito be
absolutely more revolutionary than
the Others" should obviously have
rushed to the help of the Bolsheviki.
At least this was the course taken by
Plechanov, who had been our op-
ponent in principle from 1905 till
1907; the old revolutionist could not
bear to stand aside, and in the face
of general apostasy he rushed into the
fight side by side with the Bolsheviki,
under the slogan of General Differ
entiation," that is, a general separa-
tion OF proletarian revolutionists from
the menshevist liquidators." Trotsky
acted differently.
During this period of beginning
counter-reyolution, .Comrade Trotsky
stepped forward for the first time at
the London party Congress. At this
congress the Bolshevfki were fighting
against the mensheyist liquidators, es-
pecially against the fraction of the
second Drma, headed by men now
well known to us. Dan and Zeretelli.
The Bolsheviki criticised this Dnma
fraction as a fraction which, repre-
seDting the menshevist standpoint.
was attempting to- tread the path Of
West European social democratic par
liameDtarism. We are only too well
aware that this is dollhouse in which
the most poisonous fruits Of treachery
against the working class find the
most fertile soil. The Bolsheviki
criticized severely the very first step
being taken in this direction.
Comrade Trotsky Of course defend
led the menshevist fraction against the
attacks Of the Bolshevid. Lenin char
acterized his standpoint as follows:
"Trotsky spoke on behalf OF the
1 Center; he expressed the views of the
4 fodorati0n' (Tha Elaboration IL tI,a