The Stalin school of falsification - Marxists Internet Archive

Stalin School of Falsification - Chapter 13
Voroshilov quotes Stalin's letter but omits the date it was sent. That was, of course, done deliberately.
Had he given the date, Voroshilov would have been unable to ascribe the plan to Stalin. As we shall
shortly prove, Stalin's letter was sent several months after the question of the two plans had first arisen.
Voroshilov writes: "As regards operating direc tives, he [Stalin] was offered the old plan (that of Septem
ber) of dealing the main blow, etc. . . ." With this statement Voroshilov exposes himself completely. In
the first place, if during the period of Stalin's creative work on "planning" at the Southern Front, the
"September" (?) plan was already an "old" plan, then it is quite self-evident that all of the above took
place after September, i.e., already after Trotsky had raised the question of reconsidering the plan for the
second time (see document on p. 223). In the second place, the erroneous plan was adopted not in
September but two months earlier, so that there had never existed such a thing as the "September" plan.
In September there was on!y a reaffirma tion of the previously adopted plan of the Chief Command (see
Lenin's reply to the telegram of Trotsky, Lashevich and Serebriakov). As we have already stated, Trotsky
fought against the adoption of the plan of the Chief Command as early as July and August, at a time
when Stalin was with the majority of the Political Bureau. Furthermore, at the beginning of September,
Trotsky tried again -- this time on the basis of a number of conclusions drawn from experience itself -- to
obtain reconsideration of the plan. Stalin remained as hitherto in favor of-the erroneous plan. And it was
only later that Stalin proceeded to the "revaluation of values." There is an indirect proof that the date of
Stalin's letter must be assigned to October or November 1919, namely, Stalin concludes his
well-publicized letter with "threats" of resignation. We have already cited above the reply of the C.C. on
this score ("absolutely impermissible," etc.). This reply is dated November 14; therefore the deduction is
that Stalin must have written his letter of criticism, sometime early in November, and hardly prior to that
time, i.e., after a delay of some three or four months. Voroshilov, on the other hand, after a delay of ten
years, asserts on the basis of this letter that "Stalin's [??] plan was accepted by the Central Committee."
That is how history is being "refreshed"!
Having disposed of the two "general" falsifications, we pass on to the petty falsifications of Voroshilov.
Citing the telegram of the Military Council of the Southern Front for November 11, 1919, to the Supreme
Military Coun cil of the Republic with the request to affirm the organization of the First Cavalry Army,
Voroshilov adds the following comment: "The Cavalry Army was created despite and even against the
center." In the first place, what "center" is this?
Always equivocations! Is it the Political Bureau? or the Chief Command? or Lenin? or Trotsky? In the
second place, if the "center" was against the organization of the First Cavalry, why did it have to affirm
the decision of the Military Council of the Southern Front? So far as Trotsky is personally concerned, if
we take the question in its broadest aspects, i.e., the timely realization of the role of cavalry in the
manouvre-operations of a civil war, then it is sufficient to refer to a slogan, popular in its time, which
was raised by comrade Trotsky (incidentally, long before the telegram adduced by Voroshilov):
"Proletarians, to horse!" Under this same title, comrade Trotsky published an article which likewise
posed the question of large scale bodies of cavalry. One of the main tasks of the "armored train" (of the
Chairman of the Military Council) in that period was the creation of the cavalry. It would not be
inappropriate to recall that the closest collaborator of Trotsky's secretariat, I. M. Poznansky, formed
fighting mounted detachments during that period. But Poznansky himself cannot say anything, because
he is kept under lock and key by Stalin-Voroshilov.
Further on, as one of the instances of Stalin's "rescue" expeditions to the "most dangerous places,"
Voroshilov informs us of Stalin's journey to the Caucasian front which ever took place. Ludicrous as it
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1937-st2/sf13.htm (12 of 14) [06/06/2002 15:07:19]