The Stalin school of falsification - Marxists Internet Archive

Stalin School of Falsification - Chapter 3
into power a new ruling stratum which strives to secure its privileged position and is apt to view itself,
not as the temporary historical vehicle of revolution, but rather as its completion and its crowning work.
The epochs of ideological reaction which, more than once in history, have run parallel with economic
successes, engender the need for revising revolutionary ideas and methods; and create their own
conventional lie. Such is the content underlying the falsification of history against which this book is
directed.
Powerless to conduct policies in the spirit of the party's traditions, the epigones have busied themselves
with altering the traditions to fit the requirements of their own policies.
The so-called struggle against "Trotskyism" grew out of the bureaucratic reaction against the October
Revolution and out of the urge for national tranquillity. That the past was falsified and altered is not at all
due to personal intrigue, nor is it an outgrowth of clique squabbles, as commonly depicted by the banal
bourgeois historiographers. It is due to the workings of a profound political process, with social roots of
its own. Members of the American bourgeoisie, many of whom are the descendants of British convicts,
having acquired the requisite number of millions, feel the urge to equip them selves with a respectable
genealogy, drawn preferably from the kings of Scotland. The Soviet bureaucracy, likewise, after raising
itself above the revolutionary class, could not help experiencing the need, in proportion as it entrenched
its independent positions, for such an ideology as would justify its exceptional position and insure it
against dissatisfaction from below. It is for this reason that such colossal sweep has been attained by the
alteration, perversion and outright counterfeiting of the revolutionary past, still so recent. How- ever, the
contradictions of the economic process and of the world situation do not allow the bureaucracy to rest
peace fully on the laurels of national socialism. The convulsions of the official policy obstruct the
erection of a new theory as well as of a new tradition. With every major historical zigzag, they are
compelled to revamp history all over again. Thus far we have had three large-scale alterations.
The first was effected in the course of 1923-1926 by the so-called "Old Guard," the immutable,
unwavering and inflexible disciples of Lenin. Let us recall the staff of the basic kernel of the Old Guard:
Zinoviev, Kamenev, Stalin, Rykov, Tomsky, Bukharin, Kuibyshev. The history of the party was altered
to suit the requirements of that period, principally by Zinoviev.
In 1926, a new opposition appeared on the scene: Zinoviev, Kamenev, Krupskaya, Sokolnikov. Once
again history was reviewed, this time by the Stalin-Bukharin bloc, with the "review" so calculated as to
maintain the principal course of annihilating "Trotskyism," while demoting retroactively one section of
the "Old Guard" headed by Zinoviev and Kamenev, and at the same time exalting another section headed
by Stalin and Bukharin. During that period, Bukharin functioned as the theoretician. Yaroslavsky made
his debut as historian. But for the time being he remained the historian of the bloc between the Centrists
and the Rights. Bukharin still remained the "best theoretician" after Lenin. Rykov was still maintained as
an old and reliable Bolshevik.
In 1929, after the Stalinists broke with the Rights, theory and history underwent reconstruction for the
third time. Stalin steps to the fore as a theoretician. Yaroslavsky becomes a specialist in the sphere of
reviewing and correcting history. The theorem is within limits that are strictly con fined. It must be
proved that there existed no such thing in the past as the "Old Guard." But Stalin did exist. In addition to
Stalin there existed a number of mere opportunists and strikebreakers, who for some unknown reason
directed the Central Committee of the Bolshevik party.
Every new variant of the past served not only to supplement but also to destroy the preceding variant. As
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1937-st2/sf03.htm (2 of 4) [06/06/2002 15:05:59]