The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1925-02-07
Continued from last issue) i.


changes Of the historical epoch. Ant
the forms and methods of menshevisn
have changed accordingly. What has
remained unchanged is the wild
feminist struggle against menshevism
Lenin's ability to distinguish the true
character Of menshevism in very
changing form, and to recognize the
essential hostility of menshevisI
against the Bolshevist theology and
the development of the Bolshevist
Party. Everyone knows this, or at
least it may be assumed that every
one ought to know it. Everyone com.
prehends that those who are not fully
conscious that Bolshevism signifies a
systematic struggle against menshe-
vism, understands nothing whatever
OF Bolshevism, nothing of the history
of Bolsheyism, and nothing of the rea-
SONS why Bolshevism has been victor
ious; But everyone does not know
thohgh it has been assumed till re-
Gently that everyone was bound t.
know 1t, that precisely as Leninism or
iginated, grew, and conquered in a
constant and systematic struggle
against menshevism; it originated,
grew, and conquered in constant and
systematic struggle against Trotsky-
ism.
Why? Because Trotskyism, during
the whole of the period in which our
party was preparing for the decisive
class struggle of the proletariat
against the bourgeoisie, and in which
Leninism was the source Of the teach
ing Of the proletarian revolution and
welded the party together as leader
OF the reyolution-during the whole of
this time Trotskyism played no other
role than that of an agent Of menshe-
vism, CLOSING over Of menshevism
a masking Of menshevism.
Everyone who studies the history
OF the party in the works OF the party
in the works Of Lenin-and we have
not, nor shall we ever have, a better
and profounder textbook on the his
tory Of the party and the revolution,
or one richer in matter and the con-
illusions to be drawn from twill be
inevitably convinced that during the
whole Of his struggle for the party
and for the revolution, and during the
whole OF his struggle against the men,
sheviki, Lenin regarded Trotsky (tak-
ing the line followed by him for de-
cades in its totality, and his separate
actions) exclusively as an agent of
mensheyism, as a servant of menshe-
vism, as tool employed by menshe-
vism for the purpose of gaining infiu-
ence in this or that section of the
working class. To Lenin, Trotsky
and Trotskyism were characteristic
and not accidental phenomena, caused
by the pressure exercised by the bour-
geoisie, in precisely the same manner
as the other phenomena hostile to the
really proletarian party, the many
other groups and sub-groups, fractions
and sub-fractions, whole and semi
tendencies, which the working class
have had to combat when creating
their own party.
To Lenin, Trotsky was entirely I'M
interesting as a personality after the
year 1903. For Ienin and for the
party he has been the typical embodi-
ment Of one Of those historical cur
rents which have run counter to the
creation Of the Bolshevist Party, and
to the development of Bolshevist ideo-
logy, the theology Of proletarian revo-
luton Sapd RoIshevist proletarian or
gariization. + To Lenin, Trotsky was
thes'wordy embodiment Of an element
hostile to the proletariat, an element
showing talent at times and at other
times entirely superfiuous and extrav-
agant; he regarded Trotsky as little
as a personality as he regarded Mar
toV, Tschernov, and Axelrod as per-
sonalities. To him these we're again
simply the embodiment of certain so.
cial phenomena. This systematic
struggle against Trotskyism and anti
Bolshevist current is to be found in
every volume of Lenin's works up to
the time when Trotsky Joined our
party. At this point there is an In.
terruption, followed by the resumption
OF this struggle-in another form.
The Period OF the First Revolution
T sf(19o5).
Up to the time of the End Party
a. 4. 49,