Letter to the Central Committee of the Spanish Left Opposition, March 7, 1932

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

The International Relations of the Spanish Section

Dear Comrades:

Lately I have received from Spain several letters and documents that bring out the existence of certain misunderstandings between the Spanish comrades and the majority of the International Left Opposition. The best thing to do in such a case is to attempt to clarify these misunderstandings in time, in such a way that the temporary and minor misunderstandings are set apart from the important and principled ones.

1. Comrades Lacroix and Nin had a conflict with the French Comrade Molinier over a purely practical question. I was and still am of the opinion that Comrades Lacroix and Nin, who are entirely uninformed about the situation, raised an erroneous charge against Comrade Molinier in these practical questions. For my part, I hurried to clarify this misunderstanding. After that, I considered this incidental question as settled, since there were no political or principled questions involved.

The views of Comrades Lacroix and Nin concerning Comrade Molinier are their personal affair and there is no need to refer to this question.

2. Because of this, Comrade Lacroix is in error when he thinks that we have a difference with him in regard to Comrade Molinier. No, the difference (if it is not a misunderstanding) concerns the relation of the Spanish Opposition to all debated issues of the International Left Opposition; that is, it concerns the principled and fundamental questions of the Left Opposition. This is the only question that interests me.

3. Experience has proven that within the ranks of the Left Opposition in the different countries there are elements who are entirely at variance with us. The example of Gorkin alone shows that simply to recognize the fundamental principles of the Left Opposition is not sufficient. Organizations and revolutionists are controlled in their work, that is, through applying their principles. Because of this, very small events may throw a clear light on this or that person or group in the sense that a small symptom often reveals a great infirmity.

In this respect, I want to give an example. In Germany, as you know, a left socialist party, Sozialistische Arbeiter Partei [SAP — Socialist Workers Party], has arisen. Its leaders recognize the proletarian dictatorship and the Soviet system. Urbahns, who was once with us, mistook this recognition as proof of the communism of this new party. Otto Bauer and Leon Blum, the notorious mercenaries of French imperialism, are called "comrades" in the papers of this party. An opponent may object that the word "comrade" is rather small in comparison to the proletarian dictatorship and the Soviet system. Well, it is my opinion that the recognition of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the Soviet system is in the way of mere phrases with these leaders of the SAP, and the small expression "Comrade Leon Blum" completely betrays their real feelings. It is necessary in politics to understand how to orient oneself in regard to such small signs, and all the more so when they do not lead to greater events that could become the actual proof.

4. Rosmer, Naville, Gerard, and others in France, Landau in Germany, and Overstraeten in Belgium were in agreement with all the "principles" of the Left Opposition. But in practice they were in agreement with nothing. Rosmer, Naville, and others have systematically opposed the ideas of the Left Opposition and each attempt to draw closer to the party, to the trade union, and to the international organization, and have thereby hindered the success of the Left Opposition. The struggle against them extended over more than a year and a half. They have supported the elements at variance with us in the different countries, simultaneously building their own faction and paralyzing our work. The break with this group, which was at variance with us, proved to be unavoidable, and I did not hesitate one moment to proceed to this break despite the fact that I was intimately connected with Rosmer through a personal friendship of more than fifteen years.

5. Are the Spanish Oppositionists acquainted with the course of this struggle with Overstraeten, Urbahns, Landau, Rosmer, Naville, and others? I have in mind here not only the leaders of the Spanish Opposition, but the organization as a whole. If the Spanish Oppositionists remain unacquainted with this struggle, then that must be considered a great shortcoming. We cannot develop true revolutionists without giving the young communists the chance to follow the day-to-day elaboration of the Bolshevik policies not only in the Spanish section but in the other sections of the International Opposition as well. Only in this manner can we gain experience, build and strengthen the revolutionary consciousness. This is precisely the most important part of the democratic party regime that we strive to establish.

6. In elaborating my question as to whether the Spanish Oppositionists are informed of the course of the international ideological struggles, I am compelled to again refer to small evidences, which to my mind have a great symptomatic meaning. While Landau had already put himself outside our ranks, while Rosmer had already deserted our organization, nevertheless both were mentioned in your review (Comunismo) as contributors. That startled me very much. What would you say if the French or German Opposition papers carried Gorkin as one of their contributors? That would be an act inimical to our Spanish friends. I put the question to Comrade Lacroix and I received a reply that this whole matter was merely one of a technical misunderstanding. Please be assured that I did not intend for one moment to exaggerate the importance of the error. But I had to come to the conclusion that our Spanish friends are not yet sufficiently attentive to the life of the International Opposition. Undoubtedly you agree that just as socialism cannot be built in one country, a Marxist policy cannot be pursued in one country alone.

7. In regard to this, new evidence has presented itself that gives reason to fear that this matter is more serious than it originally appeared. That showed itself particularly clearly in the question of the constitution of the International Secretariat. This question did not only appear yesterday. There is a long story to that. There are innumerable documents on this question, particularly those written by myself. I am once more compelled to ask if these documents are known to the Spanish comrades? Are they translated into Spanish?

It is true that I have myself met some comrades in the ranks of the Left Opposition who speak of the internal ideological struggles in a belittling sense, calling them "quibbles, intrigues." Such comrades have not learned in the school of Marx and Lenin. In order to prepare ourselves for the great struggles, we must learn to be steadfast and uncompromising in all the current principled questions, even when they are of a minor character. It is most frequently the case that those comrades who call the principled struggles "intrigues" are precisely the ones who display the ability for real intrigues when someone steps on their corns. A lack of concern about principled questions and an exaggerated sensitivity in personal questions characterize many of those who landed by accident in the ranks of the Left Opposition.

8. One of these accidental persons is undoubtedly Comrade Mill. Due to the absence of Russian-speaking comrades in other countries, the Russian Opposition was forced to resort to Comrade Mill, who was little known to it, as its unofficial representative in the International Secretariat. Comrade Mill accepted this representation. I was in constant correspondence with Comrade Mill. A big volume could be bound together from my letters to him. All the answers of Comrade Mill have shown me not only that he lacks even elementary revolutionary training and understanding of the meaning and importance of the organization, but also that he does not want to learn and cannot learn the ABC of communist policy. Mill repeats very glibly the general phrases about socialism in one country, but when a definite political line has to be defended he changes his course under the influence of some sort of intangible mood.

In the course of several months, Comrade Mill participated in the struggle against Landau and Naville, and their leader, Rosmer. One had to assume that Mill understood the meaning of this struggle, which led to a break with a whole series of groups and persons. But that did not at all prevent Mill from proposing a bloc by letter to Rosmer against the leadership of the French League and against the Russian Opposition. This manner of acting, if we are to take matters seriously, is treachery. A man who is capable of such political somersaults does not deserve to be recognized as a revolutionist. Are you in accord with this, comrades, or not?

9. I conducted a correspondence with the International Secretariat through Comrade Mill in Russian in order to save time. Comrade Mill systematically concealed those of my letters from the secretariat that contained proposals, remarks, and criticisms that did not appeal to him, and on the contrary drew on isolated parts of my letters that he could use against the Secretariat, thereby systematically misleading them.

10. The Russian Opposition broke with Mill. The French condemned him strongly. The German Opposition considered his manner of acting to be impermissible. The Belgian Opposition condemned Mill, and the Italian Opposition in the person of Comrade Souvo, a member of the IS, condemned the bloc of Comrade Mill with Rosmer. Are these facts known to the members of the Spanish Opposition or aren't they? I hope that they are. How then explain the fact that the Central Committee of the Spanish Left Opposition has established the candidacy of Mill as their representative in the International Secretariat?

A step of this sort takes on the character of a hostile political demonstration against the Russian, French, Belgian, and other national sections whose decisions most probably will not be delayed. It is clear that if you have any serious differences with us, you not only have the right but are duty-bound to express them by means of words as well as deeds. In this case you must express yourselves clearly and openly.

11. Your support of Comrade Mill appears inexplicable as well for the following reasons: Comrade Mill wrote two letters from Spain in which he threw the Left and the Right Opposition into one pot and in this manner led the entire Left Opposition astray. It is hard to conceive of a more scandalous confusion, especially on the part of the permanent secretary. When I protested against his letters, Comrade Mill replied that he had been misled by Comrade Nin. Isn't it clear that Mill thereby only emphasized his complete inability to judge elementary political questions by himself?

I have proposed to collectively draw up an international manifesto on the Spanish revolution. Despite my repeated demands, Comrade Mill did not even lift a finger in this important matter because his entire attention was consumed by the factional struggle and by the behind-the-scenes combinations against the most important sections of the Opposition. These are the facts.

How then, comrades, are we to explain the circumstance that you have so demonstratively expressed your lack of confidence in the French, Russian, German, Belgian, and other sections of the Left Opposition? You must probably have deep grounds of principle for this. Our principled considerations I have explained above, and not for the first time. Now I am awaiting with the greatest interest and attention your principled considerations.

12. I will mention just one more episode. You have voted against the entrance of the representative of the Russian Opposition, Comrade Markin, into the International Secretariat on the basis that he belongs to the Molinier-Frank faction — that Comrade Markin belongs to the same faction to which I belong; but we work in complete solidarity with them. What basis have you then to attempt to deprive the Russian Opposition of its representation in the International Secretariat? You must have very serious reasons for this. Please explain them. We will direct all our attention towards them.

In his last letter, Comrade Lacroix asked me not to return to the question of the French comrade Molinier with whom he has had the conflict mentioned in point 1. I am perfectly in accord and I believe that we can entirely leave aside the small and personal episodes that have no principled or political significance.

In his letter, Comrade Lacroix says that the International Conference must solve the disputed questions. That is also quite correct. But the International Conference must be prepared for by a discussion of the most important political and organizational differences in all the sections. Therefore, I turn to you, dear comrades, with this letter, of which I am sending copies to the leaderships of all the national sections. I do not doubt that with our united forces we will be able to lay aside the misunderstandings and find a common language with you.

With communist greetings,

L. Trotsky