11.07.2015 Views

Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 16 - From Marx to Mao

Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 16 - From Marx to Mao

Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 16 - From Marx to Mao

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

HISTORICAL MEANING OF INNER-PARTY STRUGGLE IN RUSSIA391small “detail”. He “forgot” <strong>to</strong> mention that at an <strong>of</strong>ficialmeeting <strong>of</strong> its representatives held as far back as the spring<strong>of</strong> 1909, the Bolshevik faction repudiated and expelled theotzovists. But it is just this “detail” that is inconvenient forTrotsky, who wants <strong>to</strong> talk <strong>of</strong> the “falling <strong>to</strong> pieces” <strong>of</strong> theBolshevik faction (and then <strong>of</strong> the Party as well) and not <strong>of</strong>the falling away <strong>of</strong> the non-Social-Democratic elements!We now regard Mar<strong>to</strong>v as one <strong>of</strong> the leaders <strong>of</strong> liquidationism,one who is the more dangerous the more “cleverly”he defends the liquida<strong>to</strong>rs by quasi-<strong>Marx</strong>ist phrases. ButMar<strong>to</strong>v openly expounds views which have put their stampon whole tendencies in the mass labour movement <strong>of</strong> 1903-10.Trotsky, on the other hand, represents only his own personalvacillations and nothing more. In 1903 he was a Menshevik;he abandoned Menshevism in 1904, returned <strong>to</strong> the Mensheviksin 1905 and merely flaunted ultra-revolutionaryphrases; in 1906 he left them again; at the end <strong>of</strong> 1906 headvocated elec<strong>to</strong>ral agreements with the Cadets (i.e., he wasin fact once more with the Mensheviks); and in the spring <strong>of</strong>1907, at the London Congress, he said that he differed fromRosa Luxemburg on “individual shades <strong>of</strong> ideas rather thanon political tendencies”. One day Trotsky plagiarises fromthe ideological s<strong>to</strong>ck-in-trade <strong>of</strong> one faction; the next dayhe plagiarises from that <strong>of</strong> another, and therefore declareshimself <strong>to</strong> be standing above both factions. In theory Trotskyis on no point in agreement with either the liquida<strong>to</strong>rs or theotzovists, but in actual practice he is in entire agreementwith both the Golosists and the Vperyodists.Therefore, when Trotsky tells the German comrades thathe represents the “general Party tendency”, I am obliged<strong>to</strong> declare that Trotsky represents only his own faction andenjoys a certain amount <strong>of</strong> confidence exclusively amongthe otzovists and the liquida<strong>to</strong>rs. The following facts provethe correctness <strong>of</strong> my statement. In January 1910, the CentralCommittee <strong>of</strong> our Party established close ties with Trotsky’snewspaper Pravda and appointed a representative <strong>of</strong>the Central Committee <strong>to</strong> sit on the edi<strong>to</strong>rial board. In September1910, the Central Organ <strong>of</strong> the Party announced arupture between the representative <strong>of</strong> the Central Committeeand Trotsky owing <strong>to</strong> Trotsky’s anti-Party policy. In Copenhagen,Plekhanov, as the representative <strong>of</strong> the pro-Party

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!