Circular letters to a friend, June 1928

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

Rumors from Moscow

Dear Friend: I have received three letters with "news," partly "rumors" circulating around Moscow. Two of the three correspondents assert that these are "the absolute truth." I am passing along excerpts from the three letters without any changes. I take no responsibility upon myself [for the accuracy of the contents]. But a great deal is highly plausible.

First Letter

It was reported as a fact more than a month ago that Kaganovich had sent a letter to Moscow (to whom is not known) in which he cursed Stalin and showed himself an ardent Rykovist. They say that after that, Stalin wanted to remove him but did not succeed in doing so.

I have heard from a great many people that the first underground Rykovist. document has come out. Nobody knows really what its content is, but the fact of its existence is considered indisputable.

They say that when several delegates from the Red International of Labor Unions (RILU) were visiting Stalin, they asked him: "What will happen now with the Opposition?" Stalin at first pretended that he didn't understand what they were talking about and then asserted that there was no Opposition, that Zinoviev, Kamenev, Pyatakov, etc., had defected and that there in his desk he [Stalin] had statements from Preobrazhensky, Radek, I. N. Smirnov, Beloborodov, and yet another person.

The overall decline in wages for Moscow province is somewhere around 25 percent; in some economic sectors, 50 percent. This information comes from a report of the Moscow Province Council of Trade Unions.

They say that Stalin offered a "bloc" to Kamenev and Zinoviev, but they declared that there could be no talk of any bloc as long as all the exiles had not been returned, in particular Trotsky. (Hm … hm …) To this Stalin replied that he could demonstrate with documents that he had voted in the Politburo against the deportation of Trotsky and that when the deportation occurred, he, Stalin, had not even been in Moscow. (He was in Siberia.)

At the CC plenum Stalin made a motion that the Higher Technical Educational Establishments be transferred to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Council of the National Economy (Vesenkha). (He made the motion in connection with the Shakhty affair.) Rykov was opposed to this motion. The votes divided roughly as follows – two-thirds were for Rykov, some abstained, and one-fourth or one-fifth were for Stalin. There is an assumption that some Stalinists didn't understand that the vote was so to speak a test case, and they voted according to conscience, not just out of fear.

When Stalin first proposed to the Politburo that Syrtsov be removed, no vote was held, because Bukharin had come down with an intestinal ailment. The second time, that is, when the vote was held, Stalin found himself alone with Molotov [in favor of Syrtsov's removal].

While Stalin was on his trip to Siberia, he brought Syrtsov back with him from Siberia and in Moscow, forced him to request his own dismissal. The question was raised in the Politburo once again, but Stalin lost again. Meanwhile, of course, he replaced Syrtsov's whole apparatus.

Before the [April] plenum a so-called party activists' meeting was held, consisting of full and candidate members of the Politburo and some members of the CC. Long debates took place there and resolutions were worked out, which were later adopted "unanimously" at the plenum. At this same meeting of the "activists" Stalin proposed that the question of restoring Zinoviev and Kamenev to party membership be brought before the plenum. This question was removed from the agenda by an overwhelming majority vote. In this connection it was reported to me as a fact that Rykov declared that if this question was to be raised, then it should be about the real Opposition, and not these scoundrels.

It was also passed on to me that the Stalinists and Rykovists speak of each other in unbelievable tones.

As a way of checking on Bukharin and M. I. [Maria Ilyichna Ulyanova, Lenin's sister], Yaroslavsky sits on Pravda [i.e., on its editorial staff].

In the Politburo now, according to the rumors, there are three groups. The third is embodied by Bukharin himself.

The Rykovists spread the rumor that Rykov wept when Trotsky was expelled from the party.

Second Letter

… On June 10, a special CC plenum will be convened, at which the Comintern program will be discussed. At this plenum a speech by Bukharin about a new "Trotskyist" danger, in the person of Stalin, is possible.

The timing of the Sixth Comintern Congress has not yet been set because, first, they want to have the actual results of the elections in Germany and France, and second, the roles of Stalin and Rykov as reporters at the congress have not yet been divided.

Rykov is demanding for himself a report on "Ten Years of Soviet Power." Stalin will not agree to that because he is afraid that through this report he'd be letting Rykov take the congress into his hands. In spite of that, Rykov is preparing the report and his secretariat talks about it openly.

People assume that the congress will have the character of an enlarged plenum, i.e., will consider only current issues that have accumulated. (Not likely. The question of the program will be on the congress agenda. – L.T.)

In Leningrad, about three weeks ago, a narrow factional meeting of activists was convened, at which Slepkov spoke, having been sent there by Bukharin. Slepkov declared on Bukharin's behalf that with the left course Stalin was leading the party and country to disaster, that Stalin's new policy was nothing but "Trotskyism," and that it was necessary to take up arms and wage the fiercest possible ideological battle against Stalin. Slepkov's speech was supported by a member of the CC, Stetsky. Among those present there proved to be an "informant," who let Kirov know immediately, and Kirov denounced the whole affair to the "higher-ups." After a few days "organizational measures" ensued in relation to Slepkov. He was removed from Bolshevik and Pravda and exiled to the post of head of Agitprop in some remote part of Yakutia.

Stetsky's fate as a CC member will depend on the relationship of forces at the plenum that has been called for June 10.

Such quick reprisals against Slepkov are explained by the fact that Stalin, owing to Rykov's illness and the fact that Bukharin was temporarily relieved of his duties in order to work on the Comintern program, turned out to be in the "majority."

The Rykov faction is obviously taking shape not only in Moscow but also in the outlying regions. In the recent period Stalin has tried to "clean out" the Moscow party organization, which has turned out to be entirely for Rykov, with Uglanov in the lead, Ryutin being the only exception. Thus, Bauman has already been removed from the Moscow Committee. After Kaganovich's letter to friends, in which he wrote that the CC under Stalin's leadership had brought about sorry results as far as grain deliveries go, and that in the future the party should orient toward Rykov as the only talented leader, Stalin wanted to remove Kaganovich and wanted to earmark Uglanov for assignment to the Ukraine in order to purge Moscow more easily. But he was told that that wouldn't do, and Stalin evidently gave in.

The relationship of forces, in the event of a discussion, would not – in the general opinion – favor Stalin. That was confirmed by the vote at the April CC plenum on the Higher Technical Educational Establishments.

The differences in the Politburo are no longer a secret to anyone, and neither side tries very hard to conceal them. Thus at the April CC plenum a statement was submitted on the spot to the presiding committee over the signatures of eight CC members inquiring about the dissension in the Politburo. They asked that both Stalin and Rykov speak on this question so that – we are told – the "dispute" would not, after the fashion of previous years, come crashing down "like an avalanche on the head" of the party. This statement was passed over in total silence, and people heard about the submission of the statement only from the remarks of those who had submitted it.

When Stalin reported on the plenum at the Moscow activists' meeting, a note was submitted to Stalin, among other notes, with the question, "Is it true that in the recent period you have found yourself in the minority on the Politburo?" To this Stalin replied, literally, "to be in the minority is no disgrace. Even Vladimir Ilyich was often in the minority." Nevertheless, he thanked the authors of the note for their sympathy.

Third Letter

… The mood among the masses, in connection with the collective agreements is obviously one of opposition. But they have a fear of being identified with the openly organized Opposition, because they are afraid their demands would be rejected under the pretext of the struggle against the Opposition. The attitude of the workers toward the official trade union organizations is scornfully hostile. On all questions, even the pettiest, the workers go directly to the secretary of the party cell, saying they want to deal directly "with the boss and not with the front man" The workers are very interested in the Opposition … Defections [from the Opposition] among workers are almost nonexistent; in the entire Moscow party organization barely three dozen or so have submitted statements [of capitulation].

There was an interesting incident at the Bogorodskaya textile mill during the meeting to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the Red Army. The person who gave the report, who had come from Moscow, proposed, after his dry report, that a bureaucratic resolution of approval be passed, sending greetings to the CC and to the "leader" Voroshilov, and so on. The secretary of the cell was foolish enough to ask the meeting whether anyone wanted to state an opinion. At that point a worker-Oppositionist stood up, an old partisan fighter in the civil war, who has great authority among the workers although he has been expelled from the party. He asked for the floor. First he proposed that everyone rise to honor the memory of those who had fallen, including Sklyansky and Frunze; and then he proposed that the meeting include in its resolution the sending of a telegram of greetings to the leader of the Red Army, Trotsky, and to include in the telegram of greetings to the CC the demand that Trotsky be restored to leadership work in the Red Army. The person who had given the report jumped up on a table and began to shout hysterically that this was obvious "counterrevolution" and demanded that this not even be put to a vote. The members of the presiding committee of the meeting, along with the secretary of the cell, were thrown into confusion, and the worker appealed directly to the meeting. He requested that workers who had fought in the civil war raise their hands, then asked them the question: "Who was the leader of the Red Army and whose orders did you recognize and carry out at the front?" Everyone answered: "Trotsky." In reply to which the official speaker tried to "argue" that the leader of the Red Army had been the CC and – Voroshilov. He was met with laughter and the vote was two thousand plus for the addition to the resolution, with two hundred opposed or abstaining. The next day the cell secretary was removed and new elections were scheduled for the bureau of the cell …

They say that after the announcement of the "left course" Kamenev and Zinoviev, when they were in Moscow, went to see Bukharin with offers to support the new course in every way. To which Bukharin replied that they should stay put and not be so hasty. "We've gotten along fine without you this far."

Zinoviev gave an "interesting" characterization of the "Trotskyist" Opposition, in a conversation with--. The Trotskyist Opposition, he said, consists of three component parts: (1) the Old Bolsheviks from way back, like Pyatakov, Preobrazhensky, I.N. Smirnov, and Serebryakov; (2) some very talented individuals educated in the spirit of Western Social Democracy, who in the past were good revolutionaries but who did not have anything in common with our party – Trotsky, Radek, Rakovsky; and (3) the bulk of the Opposition, university students for the most part, a petty-bourgeois element. Now, he said, we will bring the third group back to the party. On the whole, the first group has already defected and only "isolated individuals" remain.

--is with the Safarov tendency, and Zinoviev tried to

persuade him to hand in a statement saying that "to orient toward Safarov is simply laughable," to which the Safarov supporter pointedly replied: "Laughable maybe, but not shameful." (By now it's shameful as well, in view of Safarov's conduct. – L.T.)

At the recent congress of the RILU, before the resolution for the congress was passed, there was the following discussion in the Russian delegation. After Lozovsky read the resolution aloud, Tomsky took the floor, criticized the resolution quite sharply (although the resolution had been drafted by the Politburo), and began to introduce additions and "corrections" in an obviously right-wing spirit, which would have negated the resolution completely. The delegation was inclined toward adopting these amendments. Then Lozovsky took the floor and announced that if even one of Tomsky's amendments was passed, he would immediately withdraw from the RILU and from all official work in general. The matter was referred to the Politburo for reconsideration. Every member of the Russian delegation was called in to the Politburo separately and told not to "make a fuss"; thus Lozovsky's resolution passed …

During a visit to Moscow, the Padishah of Afghanistan, Amanulla Khan, among other places, visited the new Red Army and Navy building. There he was met, they say, by Postnikov, who explained to the shah that the portraits hanging in the halls were of various leaders of the Red Army. This one, he said, was our "savior" in the civil war; that one was "the most important leader of the civil war," and so on. Having heard these explanations and looking over the portraits, the Padishah asked the invidious question: "Why no portrait of Trotsky? Wasn't he a participant in the civil war?" Postnikov was somewhat embarrassed and mumbled that "that" would be found in "hallways further along." He dispatched the commandant of the building to contact Voroshilov for instructions by phone. The latter ordered a portrait to be hung and the Padishah was satisfied. Eyewitnesses say that the portrait stayed up for an "entire" half hour …

At the opening of the Communist League of Youth (Komsomol) Congress in the Bolshoi Theater, Oppositionist Komsomol members on the fourth balcony sent sailing down about two thousand copies of an open letter to the congress from Opposition Komsomol members. The congress was stunned. Some handed in their copies of the leaflets to the presiding committee; some did not. The mood of the congress was not "of the calmest." Especially since another incident occurred: The Social Democratic youth league sent an invitation asking the Komsomol to attend its forthcoming congress, and the CC of the Komsomol accepted it. They say that Chaplin and Shatskin submitted a protest on this point to the presiding committee, which was not made public.

In the recent period the GPU has made many arrests among Opposition Komsomol members.

In Moscow now there is one more "person who has been struck" – Agranov. The Oppositionist comrade Zage hit him in public at a movie theater – and was arrested there and then.

★ ★ ★

That's all. I pass it on for what it's worth. It sounds very much like the truth – if not all of it, then almost all. I firmly shake your hand,

Yours, L. T.