Letter to Albert Glotzer, July 18, 1932

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

Hope for CLA Unity

Dear Comrade Glotzer:

Received your last letter. I do not yet have an adequate estimate of the importance of the differences which have recently arisen. In any case, I hope, and it is without doubt the hope of the whole European Opposition, that the most important achievement of the last plenum — the restoration of unity — will not be sacrificed.

As far as the Frey group is concerned, I can understand the reservations of our American friends. Almost all sections have these same reservations. I myself am not at all sure that things will develop smoothly. But I think that we cannot pass up the opportunity to put this to the test again. For the sake of argument, let us assume the worst: Once again Frey feels uncomfortable in our midst and leaves our ranks. One can say with assurance that this time he won’t tear his whole group away from us. And then we will have a select nucleus for the Left Opposition in Austria.

I’ve received three copies of the China book [Problems of the Chinese Revolution]. It is a first-rate publishing effort. I remember very well how hesitant and even skeptical I was about Comrade Shachtman’s plans for this book. I am very glad that the comrades who read English now have the opportunity to follow the entire course of our struggle on this question after the events. It would be possible to put together a neat little volume on the Anglo-Russian Committee. I am not sure, however, that I have the most important materials here. Moreover, there are too many important current questions now facing us to devote too much time to the past.

Comrade Shachtman is devoting a series of articles to the development of the Left Opposition. Unfortunately I haven’t read all the articles carefully, but in general it seems to me that this study is very useful and important. It should be made into a pamphlet and translated into other languages.

Eastman was here a week ago. We discussed various questions. His attitude toward dialectical materialism alienates him from our world outlook to a very high degree, despite his active political sympathies for the Left Opposition. Even though he has rejected philosophy, he has a philosophy of his own — more or less eighteenth-century French rationalism translated into the language of Anglo-Saxon empirical-utilitarianism (engineering mind). Despite our strong sympathy for Eastman, we will have to draw a sharp line on this most important of questions when the occasion presents itself.

Most cordial greetings.

Yours,

L. Trotsky