The Stalin school of falsification - Marxists Internet Archive

Stalin School of Falsification
conclusion that the Soviet state was necessary. Under this slogan we have developed and grown. We
have elaborated a number of slogans relating to the economic struggle, etc. Our party has grown. We
have had the support of the masses.
LENIN: I cannot make a report but I shall give some in formation upon a question which is of great
interest to all. That is, the question of the crisis in the party, which broke out [openly] at a time when the
party was already in power.
The polemic waged by Rabochi Put,[37] and my speeches against Kamenev and Zinoviev are no news to
all those who have been following the life of the party. Formerly, Delo Naroda[38] used to say that the
Bolsheviks would be afraid to take power. This compelled me to take up my pen in order to show the
bankruptcy and the infinite stupidity of the Social Revolutionists. I wrote Will the Bolsheviks Retain
Power.[39] The question of the armed insurrection was raised at the October 1 session of the Central
Committee. I had fears of opportunism from the side of the Internationalist Fusionists,[40] but these were
dissipated. However, certain [old] members of the Central Committee came out in opposition. This
grieved me deeply. Thus, the question of power has been posed for a long time. Couldn't we now
renounce it
because of the disagreement on the part of Zinoviev and Kamenev? The insurrection was [objectively]
necessary. Comrades Zinoviev and Kamenev began to agitate against the insurrection, and we began to
look upon them as strike breakers. I even sent a letter to the Central Committee with a proposal to expel
them from the party.
I expressed myself sharply in the press when Kamenev made his speech in the All-Russian Central
Executive Committee of the Soviets.[On August 4 (17), 1917, Kamenev made a speech at a session of the All-
Russian Central Executive Committee of the Soviets on the subject of his arrest. On August 6 (19), he also spoke on the
subject of the Stockholm International Socialist Conference, which the Conciliationists proposed to convene in the summer
of 1917 for the purpose of expediting the conclusion of peace by the Socialist parties exerting pressure upon their
respective Governments] I should not like [now, after the victory. On August 6 (19), Kamenev spoke in his own name in
favor of participating in the Conference despite the decision of the Central Commit tee of the party not to participate in the
Stockholm Conference. -- L. T.] to assume a severe attitude toward them. I take a favorable attitude toward
Kamenev's negotiations in the Central Executive Committee with a view to conciliation be cause we are
not opposed to it in principle. [Neither Lenin nor I objected at the outset to the negotiations for a coalition with the
Mensheviks and the Social Revolutionists on the condition that the Bolsheviks were assured of a stable majority, and that
these parties were to recognize the Soviet state, the land decrees, the peace decree, and so on. We were convinced that
nothing would come of the negotiations. But an objective lesson was needed. -- L. T.]
However, when the Social Revolutionists declined to participate in the Government, it was clear to me
that they did so after Kerensky rose up in [armed] opposition. Some de lay occurred in Moscow (i.e., the
seizure of power in Moscow). Our [Rights] became pessimistic. Moscow, if you please, is incapable of
taking power, and so on. And so they raised the question of conciliation.
The insurrection poses new tasks. Other forces, other qualities are required. In Moscow, for instance,
there were many cases of cruelty on the part of the Junkers, shootings of captive soldiers, etc. The
Junkers, sons of the bourgeoisie,
understood that with the advent of the people's rule, the rule of the bourgeoisie came to an end, for even
at the Conference we outlined a number of such measures as the seizure of the banks, and so on. The
Bolsheviks, on the contrary, were often much too soft. Now if the bourgeoisie had triumphed, it would
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1937-st2/sf08.htm (4 of 13) [06/06/2002 15:06:44]