Letter to Jan Frankel, January 15, 1933

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

The International Preconference

Dear Jan:

1. I am enclosing the draft of the resolutions for the preconference. The French translation is moving at a good pace. There is reason to expect that by tomorrow or the day after (at the very latest) the French text will be sent to Paris in several copies.

There remains the question of the German translation: You will have to worry about that because there is no way we could manage to do it here.

2. The enclosed text has parts of different kinds. The whole introductory part is programmatic in character and should go into the platform in revised form, and until the platform has been worked out and adopted this should serve as a surrogate platform.

The second part of the text (on the Italians, the Spanish, the Frey group, the Germans) is, so to speak, conjunctural in character and consists of a series of separate resolutions.

A strict distinction must be made between these two parts. There may be objections at the preconference to adopting the first part too hastily, since it is to a certain extent programmatic in character. Caution on this point is quite appropriate and proper. On the other hand, we must have theses for a platform, even if they are very brief. (If we had had such a document in the past, it would have been much simpler dealing with Well.)

How to get out of this difficulty? I propose the following way. Since my theses represent nothing new, but simply formulate the views we have in common; and since doubts and objections could not apply to the essence of the ideas but only to formulations, to one or another imprecise statement, omission, etc., it would be best if the preconference could approve these theses as a basis and leave it to the Secretariat to give the theses a final editing, subject to approval by all the sections. I myself would propose a number of additions and corrections to the theses. Other sections would probably do likewise. We could probably have a final text as early as March.

It is a different matter with the second part, that is, the practical resolutions. They should be adopted by the preconference in finished form. It would therefore be desirable to immediately establish a commission to examine the appropriate questions and also, logically, to edit the appropriate resolutions. My draft resolutions should be passed on to each such commission through the proper channels.

3. As before, I think that the main task of the preconference is to elect a Secretariat and sketch out a plan for preparing a full conference. But I must admit that in my preliminary conversations with you I might have outlined the work of the preconference in too limited and narrow a way. The latter cannot help but reflect back on the most urgent questions in the various sections. On the other hand, in order to prepare a conference, platform theses, even if they are most elementary in character, are necessary. That is why I decided to lay other work aside and spend the time to draft the enclosed resolutions. Please discuss my proposals with Witte and the other comrades and come to some preliminary agreement about them.

4. I do not know where and when the preconference will be held. I do not know whether Sch. from the Russian section will be able to take part in it. If he cannot go, Wer. should take it upon himself to represent the Russian section. Please pass that on to him. This letter, i.e., this part of it, should be regarded as a “mandate” to that effect.

5. A storm is still raging here. Heavy snow drifts are reported in the Balkans. I fear postal communications may be interrupted for several days. If the French text is delayed as a result of this, it will be necessary to translate the enclosed into French once again. The German translation must be done immediately, to give the German comrades who are interested a chance to familiarize themselves with it.

6. The behavior of the Executive Committee of the French League makes me more and more perplexed, not to say angry. The whole policy line depends on the mood, or the state of the liver, of one, two, or three comrades. I will try to list the exploits of the French Executive Committee on the international arena: (a) prolonged and senseless defense of the Spanish; (b) a bitter and senseless dispute with the Secretariat, with demonstrative publicity; (c) a bitter and criminal conflict with the Belgian section without the slightest basis in principle; (d) prolonged, capricious, and senseless defense of participation by the Bordigists in the conference and preconference; and (e) criminal .passivity on the German question. What does this all mean? Ray [Molinier] writes me that “there is no need to take this too tragically.” What that really means is, “Don’t take us too seriously.” But I cannot help but take the founding Executive Committee of a section seriously.

Yours,

L. Trotsky