Letter to Max Shachtman, August 2, 1931

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

Irresponsible Types

Dear Comrade Shachtman:

Thanks for the last two pamphlets I have received. I have no objections to changing the title of the Spanish pamphlet. On the contrary, it is far better than the original. I am very pleased that the pamphlets are going so well.

Briefly on Naville. You mention that his critical article on the strike has remained unanswered. I must admit that I haven’t read it. Naville has covered himself for a long time by not taking firm positions on the most important questions since he was always connected with the group that was on the wrong track. He remained constantly on the watch and came forward with his critical articles in order to puff up the real tactical errors committed by the other side and thereby mask himself. But a search for the principled line in every single case should not be carried too far. There are elements and grouplets that have none and no need for any. They like to circle around the revolution and fence with ideas and play a role. There is also a social basis for this: capitalist society produces quite a few nuances of the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia with purely formal qualities, without deeper social roots and without a well developed feeling of responsibility. Unfortunately we have to confirm over and over again the fact that many have thrown in with us not because we are a Marxist opposition, but because we are an opposition in general, and they are either not able or not inclined to subordinate their hollow capabilities to the discipline of a serious cause. For example, it is impossible to evaluate the Landau clique, the Mahnruf, by its platform. This clique paints with platforms of the most varied colors. It is not possible to fight it on the basis of particular ideas, but only on the basis of lack of ideas. This also seems to be the case with Naville. With his little circle he wanders from communism to Revolution Surrealiste, from Revolution Surrealiste to Opposition, oscillates between the right and the left, joins us without fundamentally joining with us, stays in the League but in collaboration with Gourget and Landau. He wins no one over, on the contrary he loses some of his closest friends on the way. Now Gourget is incensed at him and wants to pull back.

You ask about Rosmer’s political position. He hardly has one. He is, however, in league with Naville and Landau, and he got entangled in a very bad situation. He wrote a highly unpleasant letter to the Belgian Opposition, in which he complained about “Zinovievist” methods. At the request of the Belgian comrades, I had to answer directly and thus had to come out from my withdrawn position. This makes the situation more difficult, but it was really not my fault.

I read The Militant rather superficially now, because I am totally absorbed in my book. But for the last three weeks I have always been glad to get my hands on a fresh copy of The Militant. The weekly Militant looks quite good.

As soon as the second volume of the History is finished, I will start with problems of the international situation. I hope I will then be able to send you a piece about the United States.

With warm regards,

L. Trotsky