Trotsky and Stalin: the personal aspects of the conflict

[Die Neue Zeit]

I did some reading last night on Trotsky's activities during the alleged power struggle between him and Stalin, and some unusual things came up.

For all the talk of alternative history and Trotsky being the successor, in actual fact it would seem that Trotsky really didn't care about being Lenin's successor, despite the Testament. According to Carr's book on the Bolshevik revolution, and also cited in Gregory's The Political Economy of Stalinism (http://books.google.com/books?id=hFHU5kaXhu8C&pg=PA154&lpg=PA154&dq=%22political+economy%22+stalinism+trotsky+gospl an&source=bl&ots=ijYXI-I7S-&sig=XK4nsgfXYBsDnGDqyH3MItNVnhQ&hl=en&ei=QsbOSumGDoTWsgPattS3Dg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false), Trotsky was in fact more interested in heading Gosplan. This is consistent with his writings in that period, all about technocratic management's role in building socialism. Despite Gregory's evaluation of Gosplan as a potential power base, the position of Gosplan head was anything but a "Lenin's successor" type of position, even if it were more autonomous from party apparatchiks (hello, Kosygin).

Second, Trotsky was expelled from the AUCP(B) because he organized a May Day counter-demonstration, running counter to the official party demonstration. Leaving aside questions of transparency, vocal dissent after decisions are made, and so on, how can this organizing be anything but a break in unity of action?

[spiltteeth]

Well, the fact is NOONE wanted Stalin's position. At the time it seemed like a dull, bureaucratic desk job.
Of course it put Stalin in perfect position to take power, but no one thought that at the time.

[FSL]

The title seems misleading (or I 'm not understanding it all too well), are you suggesting that many people are falsely looking for the good and the bad guy there when there in fact where political differences among the two?


Leaving aside questions of transparency, vocal dissent after decisions are made, and so on, how can this organizing be anything but a break in unity of action?

It is just that, you don't break party line. Many people will probably cry "DEMOCRACY!!!" but there were some clearly defined principles in all leninist parties. Lenin even wrote on the freedom to criticize and on how -despite it sounding great- it is often used to introduce reactionary thoughts in progressive parties.

[FSL]

Well, the fact is NOONE wanted Stalin's position. At the time it seemed like a dull, bureaucratic desk job.
Of course it put Stalin in perfect position to take power, but no one thought that at the time.


Yes, and so many awful things happened. Land and businesses were nationalized, the Solzhenitsyns were in prison instead of being funded by the state while promoting fascism etc etc

[narcomprom]

Yes, and so many awful things happened. Land and businesses were nationalized, the Solzhenitsyns were in prison instead of being funded by the state while promoting fascism etc etc
I'd suggest to read A.S. before calling him a fascist or praising Stalin. The dictum here is "know thy enemy". A vulgar and informed defense is doing more harm than good.