Letter to the National Sections, December 22, 1931

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

1. I have received issue number 5 of the organ of our Bulgarian friends, Osvobozhdenie. This issue contains truly astounding material about the mistreatment of our comrades in the prisons by the Stalinists who also are imprisoned there. It appears that a group of supporters of the Left Opposition has been formed among the prisoners in some of the Bulgarian penitentiaries. A rabid and thoroughly poisoned, that is, a purely Stalinist baiting campaign is being carried on against them, fostered by the bureaucrats outside the prisons. Undoubtedly, among the incarcerated Stalinists there are not a few honest and upright revolutionists. But when in the name of the Comintern they are told all kinds of atrocities about the Left Opposition, atrocities which they cannot verify in prison, they vent their hatred of prison on the Left Oppositionists, that is, they take the road of least resistance. The demand of the Oppositionists that these accusations be stated openly and verified leads to new slanders and physical confrontations.

In Plovdiv a few comrades were severely wounded. The Stalinists then appealed to the state prosecutor with a complaint against our comrades, who were then put into isolation cells. A letter by Comrade D. Gatschev concerning this incident, addressed to the state prosecutor on October 16, 1931, is published in Osvobozhdenie. This is an excellent document that — as the editorial board correctly states — testifies to the high proletarian morale of our imprisoned friends. In my opinion this letter must be published in the entire international press of the Left Opposition; it deserves it in every respect

The declaration begins by pointing out that its author belongs to the International Left Opposition. Then it states: "Mr. State Prosecutor, I have never requested and would never permit your interference in our factional struggles. You are the representative of bourgeois class rule against which we are fighting in order to replace it by the rule of the working class. We are a faction in the class struggle movement of the proletariat, which is a foe of the class you serve." Since his factional opponents nevertheless turned to the state prosecutor, Gatschev considered it necessary to state the facts. Further on, the tragic episode of the conflict is presented in detail. After Gatschev quotes Trotsky's article on the impermissibility of terrorist methods in the internal faction fights of the working class, he continues: "We cannot resort to provocation, terror, swindle, slander, murder, etc., in the struggle against comrades. But when we are assaulted — shall we not defend ourselves? Yes, we defend ourselves, we are not Christians." The letter ends with the following words: "The real judgment will be made by the working class. It is to it I appeal."

Similar incidents took place in other prisons. The working class must be informed as widely as possible about these facts. Our Bulgarian comrades must know that they are not alone, that there are hundreds and thousands of comrades with them in every country, and that the number of their friends is growing rapidly. It should be added that Comrade Gatschev was at one time sentenced to death.

2. I have received a group picture of twenty-three Greek comrades, Bolshevik-Leninists, "Archio-Marxists," who are incarcerated in Singros prison in Athens. This' picture gave me a clear and living idea of the composition of our Greek section. Shameless bureaucrats on the payroll had the nerve to call these proletarians — whose revolutionary spirit is written on their faces — fascists! Wherever the faction of Greek Bolshevik-Leninists has sunk firm roots in the working class the future belongs to genuine Bolshevism, to genuine Marxism. I salute our imprisoned comrades most warmly.

3. Just two months ago we received documents and material from the USSR which are characteristic of the theoretical and political work of the leading cadres of the Left Opposition. This material consists of a few hundred small sheets written with such microscopic letters (for reasons of conspirative dispatch) that it took about six weeks to decipher them with magnifying lens. This in itself speaks of their arduous revolutionary efforts. We have begun to publish this material, received after a long delay, in Biulleten Oppozitsii. A long article by Comrade Rakovsky and programmatic theses of three exiles are published in number 25-26. Every reader will be readily convinced of how far the Russian Opposition stands from any idea of capitulation. The material, which contains the internal discussions of the Left Opposition, displays the high plane on which the theoretical political level of the Russian Bolshevik-Leninists is developing. Within it a new generation of Marxists is taking shape, which will not permit extinction of the theoretical spirit of scientific communism. The less opportunity the Russian comrades have to make themselves heard, the more resolutely and intransigently all the other comrades must reply to intrigues and insinuations of all types, regardless of their source

4. The preparations for the January [Seventeenth] Conference of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union are taking place entirely under the sign of the struggle against "Trotskyism." How long ago is it that the Stalinist bureaucracy declared "Trotskyism" liquidated? (Molotov had exclaimed, "Coffin! Finished! " and so on.) Is it so long since it was established that "the Right Opposition is the main danger from now on!"? Now we have a new turn: '"Trotskyism' is the principal foe!" It is discovered that "Trotskyism" has penetrated into all institutions of learning, into the most important textbooks, and even into commentaries on Lenin's works. The Central Committee informs the organizations by telegraph that, while the Right Opposition finds support in the countryside, in the kolkhozes, etc., the "Trotskyists" raise their heads in the industrial districts. Kaganovich, the Amsterdamer, delivered a speech before the Institute of Red Professors, which fills a whole page of Pravda, on the necessity of opening up a struggle against "Trotskyism" all along the line. We will have to write a separate article on the political significance of this campaign in the near future For the time being it is sufficient to mention a few outstanding facts. The Stalinist top is compelled to draw a tighter and tighter circle around itself. Less and less can it base itself on those who repeat the general obligatory loyalty oaths. That is why it invents supplementary formulas, ever more outrageous, which finally culminate in the dogma of Stalin's infallibility.

Attempts at Marxist research in any direction whatsoever lead inevitably to a conflict with the ideology of Stalinism. A growing number of people who are not connected with "Trotskyism" in any way at all, who are, on the contrary, even hostile to it, are being accused of "Trotskyism." On the other hand it appears that the most important Marxian seats of learning in all the higher educational institutions are occupied by oppositionists who have capitulated. This fact demonstrates indirectly, but very convincingly, that a serious theoretical life exists only within the Left Opposition, so that the Stalinist bureaucracy is compelled to use renegades for the most important positions.

The fact that such a tremendous state and party apparatus is compelled, after eight years of continuous and bitter struggle against the Left Opposition, to concentrate all its forces once again for a struggle against "Trotskyism" shows the enduring vitality of our ideas. The Russian Left Opposition still has a great word to say in history.

5. I have been written that a foreign comrade, who is apparently a poor observer, has expressed himself quite contemptuously about the German Opposition. Yet it is precisely in recent times that it has experienced a serious growth and is becoming an extraordinarily important factor in the policy of the German working class. The main reasons, naturally, lie in the objective conditions. A genuine Marxian faction is able to manifest all its superiority most effectively precisely in a period when the right, centrist, and eclectic factions lose their heads completely — precisely in a period of great revolutionary tasks, of abrupt turns in the political situation, and of approaching grandiose conflicts. Only cadres which go through such a period and absorb the lessons into their flesh and blood will become genuine Bolshevik cadres. The present situation in Germany also demonstrates very graphically how important it was for the International Left Opposition to free itself at the right time from alien elements and ambiguous traveling companions. Had we not broken at the right time with Urbahns, we would not now have the possibility of finding a way to the ranks of the Communist Party. Had we not later broken with Landau, the internal life of the Left Opposition would now be paralyzed by unprincipled intrigues, quarrels, and chicanery. Certain critics of the present German Opposition should ask themselves: Did they not too long support the international faction of Landau-Naville and did they not thereby weaken the German Opposition?

6. In France, the Left Opposition is undoubtedly stagnating, and therefore centrifugal forces are developing within it. For this too there exist objective reasons. In France the communist ebb is not yet at an end. The party and the independent trade unions continue to fall apart. The party is even losing votes in the elections. Because no immediate revolutionary tasks stand before the French working class today, the Left Opposition has no possibility of manifesting its principal qualities politically: capacity for orientation and boldness in decisions. Under these conditions, the general communist ebb also seizes the Left Opposition, for the French workers in their majority still for the moment see much more what the Opposition has in common with the party than what distinguishes them.

But besides the great historical reasons indicated for the weakness of the French Opposition, there exist still other reasons of a secondary order. From the very beginning the League was composed of highly diverse elements. Many of them had repeated monotonously for years the formulas of the Russian Opposition in order to attach some importance to themselves and to cover up their own impotence It is enough to recall that so conservative, cowardly, and empty a bourgeois as Paz imagined himself in all seriousness to be the representative of the Left Opposition. Now this creature has tumbled into the Socialist Party. And that's where he belongs. Yet we did have comrades in our ranks who thought that we broke with Paz too early and too sharply. The Lutte de classes group, which for a few years moved from one ideological haven to another, joined the Left Opposition. It is highly probable that with a rapid development of the League and its recruitment of workers, many an intellectual of La Lutte de classes would have been educated, tempered, and become not a bad revolutionist However, under the conditions of a standstill, the Lutte de classes group finally showed only its negative qualities. The largest part of its membership left the League in order to learn independently and to lead the French proletariat They surely have all the qualifications for this. Unfortunately the members of the Lutte de classes group who still remained in the League apparently have not grasped to this day the lessons of these two years: they vacillate, maneuver, sit around, and sniff the air, instead of rolling up their sleeves and occupying themselves with the daily small tasks at hand. The situation is still further complicated by the terrible vacillations and mistakes of the Jewish group. With the weakness of the League, this in itself small group plays no subordinate role Under the conditions of the development and growth of the League, the Jewish group ought to become the League's voice for propaganda among the Jewish workers. But this one of its functions is scarcely fulfilled by the group, in which there undoubtedly are workers devoted to the cause. On the contrary, it became a support for two or three comrades who seek to give some kind of direction to the League, the International Secretariat, and the whole International Opposition. Up to now, nobody knows anything about this "direction," for, apart from confusion, the authors of this "direction” have till now brought nothing into the life of the Opposition. They were with Paz against us, they made their orientation in the League dependent upon conditions of a subjective character, they supported Molinier-Frank against Rosmer-Naville, they made a bloc with Naville and afterwards with Rosmer, they created confusion and confused themselves, they derailed the Jewish group, and brought in nothing but decomposition.

A few times I proposed, because of the specific conditions in France, to introduce into the League's statutes the following propositions as for example: every member of the League who has not, within the period of a month, fulfilled the current work from day to day, such as the conducting of classes for young workers, street sales of papers, collecting of money, attendance at meetings, establishment of contact, etc., be expelled from the League. The League needs no ballast! It has been proven by the whole experience of the labor movement, and by the experience of the League in particular, that precisely those intellectuals and semi-intellectuals who are unproductive and reluctant to roll up their sleeves like to engage in maneuvers and intrigues, poisoning the life of the organization and preventing the entry of workers into it.

7. The Spanish section has made certain advances and established contacts which permit it to hope for new successes. But it is clear that measured by the scale of the grandiose revolutionary movement of the Spanish masses the successes of the Spanish Opposition are quite small. This is explained, however, primarily by the fact that before the revolution the Spanish Opposition did not actually exist It was formed in the fire of events, and time was lost and wasted with experiments whose hopelessness was clear in advance (Catalonia). The extreme weakness of the Spanish Opposition at the beginning of the revolution expressed itself in the fact that, regardless of the exceptionally favorable situation in the country, our Spanish comrades up to recently were unable to issue a weekly paper. Help from abroad did not suffice or did not arrive in time. El Soviet of Barcelona was suspended. It must be said that the reasons which the Spanish Opposition gives to explain the suspension of El Soviet are to be considered completely unacceptable. Instead of saying clearly and openly: "We have no means, we are weak, send help!" the Spanish comrades declare that they do not want to submit to censorship. If revolutionists are not in a position to shake off the censor, then they must on the one hand adapt themselves to it legally, and on the other hand say to the very end all that is necessary in the illegal press. But to disappear from the scene by pointing to the censorship and to one's own revolutionary pride means to conduct a decorative but not a Bolshevik policy. The Spanish revolution has now entered into a period of lull preceding the showdown between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat How long this period will last cannot be foretold. At all events the Spanish Opposition now has the possibility for more systematic and planned preparatory work. No time should be lost and cadres must be developed. The theoretical monthly organ Comunismo is one of the most important weapons in this connection. A serious bulletin for internal discussion must be created. The education of cadres is unthinkable on the basis of national questions alone. If the Spanish comrades have devoted very little time to international questions in the course of the past year, this could be explained by the youthfulness of the Opposition and the turmoil of the revolutionary events. These undoubtedly were the reasons why the intervention of the Spanish Opposition in international questions was extremely infrequent and bore an episodic character that was not always a fortunate one.

8. The American League has been developing slowly up to now, with periods of retreat, but in general organically. The great advantage of the American League over the French was the fact that the former in contrast to the latter was from the very beginning a homogeneous group which was not expelled from the party in 1923-24 but in 1928. The slowness of the growth of the League is to be accounted for primarily by the lack of great shifts in the American working class in recent years. As I have already written elsewhere, it may be presumed that the crisis in America creates premises for revolutionary work on a broad scale for the first time. It is to be hoped that, thanks to the preceding systematic education of cadres, the American League will enter the new period well enough prepared, although it should not be concealed that the real test for the cadre is still ahead.

The American League took less part in the life of the ILO than was desirable The explanation for this is surely the distance At any rate it is desirable that the Central Committee of the League as a whole attentively follow the internal questions of the ILO, since the excessive concentration of these questions in the hands of one comrade have up to now not yielded the desired results.

9. This letter is in no respect either a systematic survey of individual sections or a systematic presentation of the individual questions. It is the task of this letter to exchange opinions with the comrades, even if only in a very cursory form, about a few questions and phenomena which appear to me to be important and interesting in the light of the ILO. Thus, for example, I now leave aside the Chinese, Czechoslovakian, Belgian, and other sections, partly because of the lack of necessary information, partly because many questions which affect these sections are not yet sufficiently clear to me In conclusion I want to say that the need to have recourse to this letter lies in the fact that we have not yet succeeded in creating an International Secretariat This fact is explained partly by a general cause, the relatively slow growth of the national sections, and partly by special circumstances, the personal composition of the Secretariat and the atmosphere in which it in part found itself and which in part it itself created in Paris. It is needless to repeat here what I have already written countless times to the Secretariat and primarily to the full-time secretary. I will, therefore, try to send my letter of October 6 of this year to all the sections. From that time on, matters did not improve but became worse. It is quite clear to me that without a reorganization of the Secretariat matters will not improve.

In what direction should the reorganization proceed? This question is easiest to answer if one reveals the shortcomings of the old organization. Its principle was: creation of a Secretariat on the basis of personal selection and not along the path of delegations from the national sections. It seemed to some comrades and also to me that such a core of comrades, who were chosen as candidates because of their personal qualifications, would display a certain independence toward the national sections and possibly have a fruitful effect upon them; unfortunately, such a result was not obtained. Perhaps because among us there are cadres not yet sufficiently prepared for such a responsible task. At any rate, the result was that the functioning of the Secretariat became dependent on the moods of a single comrade who was not connected with any organization or under any discipline. The Secretariat became a source of constant surprise and in recent months even an instrument of a sub-faction, whose platform and aims are not known to anybody. Such a situation is obviously intolerable.

It is clear that the Secretariat must relate more to the national sections. The Secretariat must be a constantly functioning institution; consequently its members must be in one or at the most two cities which are connected with adequate means of communication. In the latter case, it is necessary to establish a constantly functioning bureau located in one city. But all the members of the Secretariat must be official delegates of their corresponding national sections which in turn bear the responsibility for their delegates. Because of the practical impossibility of drawing in delegates from all sections, it is therefore desirable to draw in delegates from the most important sections for collaboration in the Secretariat. Such an organization does not of course in any way protect the Secretariat against mistakes, but it assures it against some of the most dangerous trends: personal moods and vacillations. In setting up the Secretariat it is important to take into account the specific weight of the country in question and of the official party, as well as the size of the corresponding Opposition section. Thus, for example, despite the small size of the country, the Greek section is numerically the largest, after the Russian, and the most proletarian in composition. The participation of its official representatives on the Secretariat would therefore be most desirable.

P.S. If it is true that Germany is at the present time the key to the international situation, the conclusion follows that the main link of the ILO now is the German section. It lacks financial and technical means. If a weekly paper is especially needed anywhere, then it is in Germany. The demand for the Opposition press in the circle of the German workers increases rapidly. There is no doubt that a weekly paper would have wide circulation. All the sections must set themselves the task: to help the German section issue a weekly organ.

P.P.S. When I had concluded this letter, I noticed that on the one hand it contains information which is meant for publication and on the other hand whole paragraphs or parts of them which are intended exclusively for the information of the members of the organization. I do not doubt that the leading bodies of the national sections themselves will distinguish without difficulty the parts of this letter that are to be utilized for the press. As for me, I took complete liberty to touch upon very delicate questions because the letter as a whole is intended solely for a comradely internal examination.

L. Trotsky