A review of 'A Critical activities and to sabotage the anti-
Japanese national united front. If to reassess Trotsky, today we are
Biography of Trotsky' does that not mean that we must also reassess related questions in modern Chinese and CCP history?
In our country, such past events are still fresh in the memory of cadres of middle age and above, including at least some intellectuals who are active in teaching, research and jour-
WE ARE PUBLISHING below a translation of the part of an article referring to Trotsky that appeared in the revue Shijie Lishi (World History), No. 7, in 1985. The author, Zhu Tingguan, born in 1924, is the chief editor of Shijie Lishi. ZHU TINGGUAN
Comrade Li Xianrong's Critical Biography of Trotsky is his second study of a historical personality. His first was A Critical Biography of Bakunin, published in 1982
To make an assessment of Trotsky is an audacious enterprise, for Trotsky occupies a difficult position in the field of world historical research. Now that we have criticized Stalin's cult of personality and in particular
Stalin's mistakes the scope of and in the of counterrevolutionaries, of historical to continue defending, without the slightest amendment, the assessment made of Trotsky in the assessment does not correspond to the
However, it is not easy to assess objectively a complex historical figure like Trotsky. A prerequisite for such an assessment would be adequate reliable historical materials. The Soviet Union has not materials on which to base study. Some historical documents including Trotsky's have been collected in Western coun tries, and various historical data have been put forward or cited in numerare of value, but the reliability of others still needs to be ascertained, and even if they are reliable, con-
Once the historical documents have been assembled, the next step is to make a concrete and objective historical analysis them. This requires a rather broad historical framework. In writing a biography of Trotsky it is not enough simply to narrate his actions; they must be placed in the broader context of
International Viewpoint 19 May 1986 groups of people and a series of historical events. For example how should we assess the Trotskyist faction and the Trotsky-Zinoviev alliance? Our evaluation would also involve figures in opposition to Trotsky such as a related assessment of Stalin. Trotsky cannot be viewed in isolation from these people, factions and events - nor can research on individuals be thoroughly out without setting limits to a detailed research on a welter of historical issues. If precept is ignored, study of a particular figure can ever be completed.
When we say that in the past the assessment of Trotsky did not square with the historical facts, that does not mean that we can simply conclude mistakes, the assessment of Trotsky was of necessity seriously mistaken. Even less can we conclude that since be unequivocally branded as an enemy, we must reverse assessment that Stalin's merits exceed his faults. Any assessment must Theory can only convince if it is wellfor a time, the word Trotskyist was almost synonymous
"renegade," There were reasons why this was so. after the first national revolutionary war, the Chinese Trotskyists linked with Chen Duxiu. Chen, who was upholding a right-opportunist line, the ranks of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) to liquidationist clique in opposition to the CCP's correct line and the revolustruggle led by the party. Later, in the war of resistance against Japan, some Chinese Trotskyists like Ren Zhuoxuan (Ye Qing), Zhang Mutao and Liang Gangiao nalism. For a long time most of these people believed implicitly the formal proclamations emanating from the Soviet Union. True, their knowledge and state of mind today have naturally changed greatly from what it was before the begins about this will inevitably get some people's
Recently, in academic circles in our country, some articles and studies have already begun an assessment of issues relating to Trotsky. Although not all have been able to speak their freely, nonetheless, views have been aired, and a book on this question will certainly interest. It will not, however, be easy the approval of the great majority of readers. Assessment of Trotsky linked to political problems
The Trotsky question is constantly used as a reproach by people in the capitalist countries who are dissatisfied with the socialist system and the communist movement. Some of these people are dissidents from the Soviet Union. There are also some disciples of Trotsky active in the political arena. In some countries they are active under the banner of Trotsky's Fourth International. The question of how to assess Trotsky is also linked to different views existing in the contemporary munist movement. In sum, we are not just dealing with an academic question, but with a historical issue connected in a complex way to political problems.
To say that Trotsky should be reassessed is not at all to say that the verdict on Trotsky should be reversed Our aim is to conscientiously clarify the truth about numerous issues in the early history of the Soviet Union so that we can better learn from them. However, mentally we will still be working under an invisible pressure. Will we be guilty of heterodoxy and deviation, of formulating completely new and original points of view?
In short, we will need to be courageous in dealing with theoretical
17
Ustooga
008 question has removed a major road block. If we can now really resolve the question of Trotsky, we can make corresponding progress on other historical figures and controversies.
Breakthroughs of this sort are of great importance not only for the field of world history. The questions of the victory of socialism in one country, permanent revolution, the question of socialist accumulation and its tempo, the methods of socialist transformation and construction, and in particular the historical experience of the inner-party struggle in the USSR, are all of enormous contemporary significance. They can serve us in many ways as a mirror for understanding and overcoming the "leftist" danger and for smoothly carrying out
To make a reassessment is not to negate all the theories of the Stalin
Crusading for the thoughts of Chairman Mao (DR) problems; we must dare to truth from the facts; we must uphold the truth; we must dare to take some risks; we must not be afraid of making about sarcastic comments. Needless to say, none of our historians wants to make mistakes, but there are probably fears of "leftism. " This is an difficulty that the writer has to face.
conditions, Trotsky's life that more or less correin the early history of the Soviet Communist Party and the Soviet state. In the first few years after the victory of the October revolution he was extremely prominent. Simply to negate him with one stroke is to disrespect history and will not help later revolutionaries to absorb the lessons of history.
Much can be learned by studying his political proposals and theoretical standpoint, his contributions and his mistakes, his gradual passage from being a founder of the Soviet state to his degeneration into an anti-Soviet political exile, from being an important leader of the CPSU to the standard-bearer for splitting the international Communist movement.
A correct resolution of the problem of how to assess Trotsky will help deepen our understanding of many important controversies in the early Soviet Union about how to build socialism. It will help achieve a new major breakthrough in our understanding of the history of the transitional period in the USSR. Although we are at present engaged in socialist construction with special Chinese characteristies, under new historical conditions, with many explorations and creations and many new roads and meth18 ods, we still should not underestimate of absorbing the experiences of other coun Whether they occur in or in other countries, victories, setbacks, the experiences and lessons on the road to socialism are the common spiritual property of commuof development of or adequately proved practice of any one country alone. This is especially true of China. At present we developments in science, technology and management, even from the capitalist countries - everything useful to us. Why, then, should we neglect and put to one side the historical experience and lessons of the socialist practice of other countries? "...to fight superstition, to liberate thought"
In the past, our research on the of the early years of Soviet Union seemed to run into a off the style of The History of the Communist Party (Bolshevik) of the superstition, for a while we followed a tortuous
Since 1978, through the impetus of the party's orientation toward liberating thought and seeking truth from the facts, our research into the history of the USSR's transitional period has progressed significantly. The discussion on the Bukharin period; it is to give some basis in historical fact to that reassessment. We have not yet adequately mastered the historical materials. However, if we stick to a few big issues, especially political and issues intimately building socialism, and do not get bogged down in a mass of detail, will find most of the essential materials are still available. As for political considerations, if we mainly confine ourselves to the period when Trotsky was still alive, in particular the period before his banishment, and set aside the activities of his followers in various countries, there is no reason why this issue should not become a topic of research in the field of historiography. It will soon be half a century since Trotsky was assassinated, and the overwhelming majority of those who worked with or disputed with him, who condemned or supported him, are now dead. Cannot such an issue be discussed by historians?
The main thing is that we need people who Progress in historical science requires that we take up the our predecessors left off. It demands that we assimilate the fruits research of others, so that historical and specialist knowledge accumulates and research acquires increasing depth striving of large numbers of people. This is not in the slightest to deny that individual historians can make independent contributions.
Writers of world history have the task of correctly introducing and appraising a historical figure such as Trotsky to the people, the same responsibility they have in relation to other historical data that correspond to contemporary needs. This will be our small contribution to socialist modernization and construction. We
International Viewpoint 19 May 1986
should accept this social responsibility and work actively to promote it. consider that his book portrays for the most part accurately Trotsky's evolution from young revolutionary to professional revolutionary, and his passage from central leader of the CPSU and the Soviet state to political exile. It summarily describes the sequence and main political and development, from his inclination to Marxism, to his later denial of the possibility of building socialism in one country and his championing of the theory of permanent revolution. The book, in chronological order, describes and assesses Trotsky's polipractice. It approves of the Bolshevik Party during Lenin's Iskra period, his preparation and launching of the Petrograd armed uprising during the October revolution, his creation and strategic command of the Red Army during the
At the same time the book analyzes and criticizes Trotsky's improper behaviour in trying to bring about a conciliation of the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks, his position of neither war nor peace at Brest-Litovsk, his initiation of the controversy over the trade unions, his failure to attend Lenin's funeral and his continuous work to express himself. There are also his mistakes in carrying numerous factional activities.
the author never says so point-blank, in his book he views the controversies that occurred after Bukharin on the one hand, and Trotsky on the other, as differences within the Bolshevik leadership on how to the party. If sides had acted properly these
International Viewpoint 19 May 1986 contradictions need not have become exaggerated. This is an important historical lesson.
Several measures that Trotsky took caused the nature of the contradicto be gradually changed. He violated the Tenth Congress's ban on factions. He allied himself with Zinoviev, published factional manifestos signed by a group and publicly opposed the political line decided by the majority of the Central Committee. Later Trotsky and others carried the differences to some grassroots organizations and masses, adopted conspiratorial methods and organized demonstrations. Such methods of struggle are not normal in a country under proletarian leadership. Differences of political line became exacerbated by organizational antagonisms and resulted in irreconcilable contradictions. Stalin's mistakes in historical retrospect, Stalin sometimes handled the situation improperly. He resolve the problem of leaders like Trotsky who held different political views. In this he differed totally from Lenin who was magnanimous toward people who made mistakes.
He set a very bad precedent the seeds of the later broadening of the campaign to eradicate counterrevolutionaries. After Trotsky had been expelled from the USSR, the nature of the contradiction changed. It was no longer an issue within the CPSU or a controversy within the Soviet leadership. By then Trotsky's political activity, whatever he himself proclaimed, in reality could not but seriously damage the Soviet state and the entire international Communist
Comrade Li Xianrong's description and analysis of these issues are closer previous statements. Still, some comrades may feel that he does not go deep enough in exposing the truth of history, or they may have different views on the content of assessment, so views are not necessarily homogene-
On this, we can continue to delve deeper into the truth to achieve better and more accurate understanding of early Soviet history and the people involved in it.
I think that A Critical Biography of Trotsky is based on adequate historical materials, it is well struc tured, well written and clearly arranged. It reflects Comrade Li Xianrong's command of narrative style sup plemented by analysis and comment, with fair judgments.
If one were to point to weaknesses, it would be that in his research and writing his thought is not yet suffiliberated. His narrative and analysis seem rather inadequate on the political and theoretical
Trotsky proposed or strongly supported during the New Economic Policy period, such as the essence of "tightening the screw," the cance of his stress on turning the trade unions into a state apparatus ment, the idea of socialist primitive accumulation that in essence extorts from the peasants. Some issues raised the book will inevitably arouse controversies. This will be a good phenomenon. We should not ask too much but should give enthusiastic support to this academic study which constitutes the first work that assesses the life of Trotsky at length.
For the above considerations, I offer my humble opinion. I wait for criticisms from readers on my inadeHua Guofeng pays homage to Mao (DR)
19