Letter to the National Committee of the Communist League of America, October 20, 1932

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

On Field and Weisbord

To the National Committee, Communist League of America

Dear Comrades:

I am replying herewith to your letter of October 7 concerning the question of Field.

1. It appears that you give the Field question a certain connection with the Weisbord question. I will therefore begin with the latter.

The Weisbord group addressed itself formally to the International Secretariat, with the request for its intervention. Weisbord, on his own initiative, came to me. The International Secretariat asked for my opinion in regard to this question and I had no formal possibility of withholding such an expression of opinion and could see no political reason for doing so. Naturally I held it to be my duty, in this especially delicate case, to do everything possible to strengthen the position and the authority of the League as against the Weisbord group. Since then I see no grounds to regret anything that was done in Prinkipo. The Weisbord group had to recognize the erroneousness of its own position on the most important questions as against the League. This is a considerable political gain. Moreover, your reply to the Weisbord statement can only strengthen your position and authority. I noticed that already, for example, with Comrade Field; he recognized that your reply was tactful and correct Over what can you then complain in this case?

2. The case of Field is an entirely different one — simpler and more complicated. Simpler because this is a case of a single comrade; more complicated because our practical objectives appear not to harmonize entirely.

After conversations with Comrade Glotzer, after articles bearing upon this in The Militant, and after personal conversations with Comrade Field, I have received the following specific impression: the collaboration of Comrade Field in the League is not made more difficult or impossible because you look upon him as a somewhat politically or morally unworthy person or as an alien type, but rather because Field, who during his past has not yet developed the capacity for a leading role in a revolutionary organization, nevertheless is pushed onto that road because of his intellectual qualities. This contradiction, which in general does not happen so seldom, can be overcome in a big organization. But as the League remains yet a small pioneer organization, it thereby feels itself compelled to take sharper measures to protect its own existence. This is about the way the case appears to me.

On the other hand, it seems to me that Comrade Field can be of considerable service to the Left Opposition as a whole because of his expertise in economic and statistical data. We need someone who follows the facts of the world economy thoroughly from day to day and who is in a position to render an account of these facts to himself and to others. I have already for some period of time looked around for such an economic expert in the Left Opposition. But without result. I hardly believe we can find another with the qualifications of Field.

I have of course taken into account the importance of the fact that Comrade Field is expelled from the New York branch. But such a formal act as the expulsion not only must be judged formally but also politically. One can expel someone because he is a spy, another because he is totally corrupted, a third because he represents a principled enemy tendency. But someone can also be expelled even though he is honest and fully worthy, because under the existing conditions he disturbs the unity of the organization and threatens its ability to act In this latter case (and that is the case of Field) it would perhaps have been better from the very beginning to call upon the assistance of the international organization in order to neutralize such a comrade as far as the national organization is concerned and nevertheless to not lose him. This is not a complaint but rather a proposal for the future.

These are the general considerations from which I have proceeded. The case of Landau, Gorkin, etc., which you cite and utilize with great polemical skill (which I personally enjoyed), is not comparable to this case. Landau was not expelled; he attempted to expel the majority of his own organization. When this was objected to, he constituted his own faction. Two rival "Left Oppositions" struggled for the affiliated membership. In this case, to accept Landau would mean to betray our German organization.

Gorkin left the Left Opposition in order to engage in an aggressive collaboration with the most suspicious political organizations; also with the Right Opposition. According to the charges of the Spanish comrades, Gorkin also engaged in personal dirty deals (money questions).

The Weisbord group can in a certain sense be considered a rival organization. Comrade Field is not at all a rival. Also Comrade Field did not establish connections with the Musteites or the Lovestoneites against the League. This really is a big difference. That he went over the heads of the League leadership is, from an organizational standpoint, not correct. That he went to Europe, seeking the way to the Left Opposition, does not speak against Field but for him. This proved that he meant it seriously.

All this induced me, after quite serious consideration, to send the contributions by Field on America to the sections as material for discussion. His contributions contain important thoughts and proposals and deserve to be read and discussed. And even if it should come to an international decision in the case of Field, these contributions could nevertheless serve as important material for the information of the sections.

The fact that the article of Comrade Field appeared in the Opposition press without a previous agreement with you was really not correct. For this I will assume the major responsibility and I am ready, if you consider it useful, to submit a corresponding apology to all of the sections.

I maintain however that the question of Field must be decided individually, not only from the standpoint of the organizational conflict in New York, but also from the standpoint of the international organization.

I will be very thankful if you will translate this letter into English and make it available for all the members of your leadership.

With the best and most friendly greetings and wishes.

Yours,

L. Trotsky