Trotskyism and Titoism

[khlib]

I was wondering if anyone had any information about the intersections between Trotskyism and Titoism. What did Trotskyists think of Tito and the SFRY (especially in regard to "socialism in one country")? What did Tito think of Trotsky? Please also point me towards any sources or books that might deal with this topic.

[Omsk]

Titoism is opposed to Trotskyism,Trotskyites consider Titoists to be Stalinists,and call Titoism consumer Stalinism.The similarity is the fact that both Titoists and Trotskyites were against Stalin and the Soviet state.Tito ordered the arrest of Trotskyites in order to please Stalin,and was against them while he was associated with Stalin and the Comintern.He was an opportunist,so until 1948 he was against them,and after that,he didn't think much about that movement,because he had his hands full with the problem of the informbuiro.Titoists were mainly against Stalin,but before the Tito-Stalin split,they were directly allied.Read this,its published 1939,Tito wrote it.

[QUOTE]For the purpose of performing its subversive activities in different organizations of the working class and in the other democratic parties and organizations, Trotskyism operates in different shapes, but always with one goal – to clear the road for the fascist-imperialist bandits.

When they conduct espionage and implement sabotages, diversions and other verminous activities in the USSR, the Trotskyist bandits and their disciples act for defeat of the USSR, for destruction of the country of socialism, the bastion of the international proletariat, the protector of the small nations and the biggest champion of peace. In China, the Trotskyists perform espionage service at the Japanese headquarters. There, those bandits change their clothes with the uniforms of the 8th Popular Army, kill and rob the peasants and the commanders of the 8th Army, deliver military plans to the Japanese conquerors and are trying by all means to make difficult the liberation struggle of the Chinese people. In Spain, the Trotskyists were the soul of the Fifth Column, they caused mutinies in the rear of the Republican People’s Army whenever Franco faced dangers on the front. And nowadays, lastly, when the generals [José] Miaja, [Segismundo] Casado and others were preparing treasonable surrender of the Republican Spain to the butcher Franco, the Trotskyists were the first who have helped that surrender and have targeted the Communists, who resisted that treason. They were operating as devoted servants of Franco, Mussolini and Hitler; they have helped the enslavement of the Spanish people.

During the occupation of Czechoslovakia the Belgrade Trotskyists were against the defense of Czechoslovakia. Now, in general, Trotskyists in every country have taken the mask of “pacifism” and conduct tireless struggle against the organizations of the resistance to the Fascist conquerors. In Slovenia and in other regions of our country, in these hard hours, they spread panics among the people, kill the faith in people that is capable to defend itself. Allegedly, they are against the bloodshed, but in reality they thus prepare the ground for the Fascist bandits to destroy freedom and independence of whole peoples without resistance. Espionage, diversions, provocations, murders, sabotages, denunciations – these are the forms of activity of the Trotskyist bandits. Breaking apart the single front of the working class, breaking apart the Popular Front and preventing the assemblance of the popular masses for defense of its independence – these are the tasks the Trotskyist bandits have received from their masters – the Fascist conquerors.

But the Trotskyists don’t operate so transparently that everyone can instantly read their intention. The first thing they do is camouflage themselves with revolutionary phraseology. If they are camouflaged in the Party or around the Party, then they in words accept the party line and declare their faithfulness to it, but they are doing so to conduct their job more easily: spreading demoralization in the Party, espionage for the enemy, denunciations of distinguished comrades, support and stimulation of unhealthy ambitions among various unhealthy elements, creation of factionalism with an intention of weakening the Party in that way etc.

Look here also http://www.marxists.org/archive/tito/index.htm

[Искра]

Tito on Trotskysim (http://www.marxists.org/archive/tito/1939/x01/x01.htm) (1939)

Trotskyist on Tito (http://www.marxists.org/archive/mandel/1951/07/yugoslav.htm) (1951)

You have to understand that Tito was a Stalinist (hardcore one before 1948), so he pretty much hated Trotskyists. There's new book published in Serbia about Trotskyism and forward of that book was written by well known Serbian Trotskyist P. Išimirović who was in prisoned in Yugoslavia because he was Trotskyist.

Here's his article on that book: http://pavlusko.wordpress.com/2011/12/04/sve-sto-se-mogli-pozeleti-da-znate-o-trockizmu-a-niste-imali-koga-i-gde-da-pitate/ (Serbian)

And also, here's his foreward to that book about Trotskyite purdges within CPY: http://pavlusko.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/borba-protiv-trockizma-u-kp-jugoslavije/ (Serbian)

btw. don't take everything this guy writes as granted, because he's little bit crazy.

[khlib]

Kontrra, do you know of anything written after the Tito-Stalin split by Tito, Edvard K, or any other SFRY ideologue about the question of "socialism in one country"? How did Titoists feel about the "world socialist revolution" after they had developed a brand of socialism that differed from that of the USSR?

[Искра]

I haven't read anything on "Trotskyist" matter. I know that Tito tried to contact anarchists from CNT in early 50's (I've read it in anarchists papers Direktna akcija), but I don't know anything about connections with Trotskyism. Also, I found one partisan pamphlet with Tito quoting Stalin on how important is to purdge Party from Trotskyism.

Regarding "socialism in one country" you can find something interesting in that article by Musić I posted in Yugoslav Study Group (it's part of that book Ours To Master and Own), where he's explaining the nature of Yugoslav self-managment and it's connection with 1936 and Spain. He made a claim that Yugoslav inteligentisa was inspired by anarchists but they didn't want to recognise that, because that would ruin their "state socialist" paradigm, so instead of saying that self-managment could be new stap in "international socialism", they insisted that self-managment is only "national" project of Yugoslav socialism.

But basicaly, Yugoslavia followed Stalinist idea of "socialism in one country" and they just made certain differences regarding economical organisation of production and ownership.

[khlib]

After the Tito-Stalin split, did most Titoists reject the Bolshevik revolution as leading naturally to Stalinism?

[Искра]

After the Tito-Stalin split, did most Titoists reject the Bolshevik revolution as leading naturally to Stalinism?
No. They would never reject Bolshevik revolution. Actually only anarchists and some council communists reject Bolshevik revolution. Titoists reject Stalinism only after 1948. If they rejected Stalinism as Stalinism, right from the begining, they would have to reject certain aspects of their regime.

I just got interesting book by Tito, called Jugoslavenska revolucija i socijalizam. There you can read that he only rejects Stalinism after WW2.

[black magick hustla]

tito was a butcher of trotskyists, really along the same line of scum as togliatti, spanish cp, etc

[khlib]

Do you know of any English language books about Titoism from a more theoretical and less historical perspective? I cannot find anything!

[Искра]

No. I'm from Croatia so I really don't have to seek a lot to get a book on Tito. Anyhow, I doubt that Titoism is covered so good, because it was isolated here and it wasn't intenrational movement, so probably really few people care about it. I'm writing something on Titoism and I could get it translate and send you.

[Искра]

tito was a butcher of trotskyists, really along the same line of scum as togliatti, spanish cp, etc
From 1937 to 1939 he was butcher of all anti-Stalinist leftists in Spain who were trying to escape to France. Literaly, as he was high rank NKVD agent.

[khlib]

I can read it in Croatian, I could even translate it for you if you'd like, and then you could double-check my understanding of Croatian (if you wanted to have an English translation available). I would prefer English because it would be a bit quicker, but I have a decent grasp of Croatian.

[Искра]

Cool. I'll contact you when I'm done.

Anyhow, if I find anything usefull I'll post it probably in Yugoslav Study Group. I literally don't know what to offer you, because I never found any decent study of Titoism. Actually, only works on Titoism come from Marxist-Leninist perspective (especially Hoxha) and they are quite schisophrenic and idiotic. Other works come from liberal/nationalist perspectives and they suck also. If you could find Praxis #3-4 from 1971 that would be good, because it's dedicated to Marxist criticism of Yugoslavia.

[mrmikhail]

Ted Grant (a Trotskyist) wrote a few articles on Tito, I'll link them to you for a read, the first is in the late 40s the second is in the mid 60s:

Behind the Tito-Stalin Clash (http://www.tedgrant.org/archive/grant/1948/07/yugoslavia.htm)

Yugoslavia: The meaning of Tito’s “reforms” (http://www.tedgrant.org/archive/grant/1966/07/yugoslavia.htm)

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Some of the leading forces of "Trotskyism" thought Tito was an "unconscious Trotskyist," to the point where the Fourth International sent fraternal greetings to the Communist Party of Yugoslavia in 1948 and asked to meet with them.

http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/fi/yugoslavia/yugo01.htm

[Искра]

Ted Grant (a Trotskyist) wrote a few articles on Tito, I'll link them to you for a read, the first is in the late 40s the second is in the mid 60s:

Behind the Tito-Stalin Clash (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.tedgrant.org/archive/grant/1948/07/yugoslavia.htm)

Yugoslavia: The meaning of Tito’s “reforms” (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.tedgrant.org/archive/grant/1966/07/yugoslavia.htm)

Hm, they are nothing special. Still, I posted them in group where I'm making a reading list on Yugoslavia.

Anyhow, this is imho the best article so far on subject of Yugoslavia: Musić, Goran: Yugoslavia: Workers’ Self-Management as State Paradigm; In: Ness, Immanuel and Azzelini, Dario: Ours to Master and Own: Workers' Control from the Commune to the Present (http://www.mediafire.com/?276xoccx81w3e78) (you can here download whole book, with various good articles on self-managment in history).

[Искра]

Some of the leading forces of "Trotskyism" thought Tito was an "unconscious Trotskyist," to the point where the Fourth International sent fraternal greetings to the Communist Party of Yugoslavia in 1948 and asked to meet with them.

http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/fi/yugoslavia/yugo01.htm
This is cool! :) What happened later? Do you know more?

[mrmikhail]

Hm, they are nothing special. Still, I posted them in group where I'm making a reading list on Yugoslavia.


Indeed, they mainly focus on the split and reasons behind it, then the later "reforms" and reasoning behind it, but they do have a Trotskyist view of Tito within them

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

This is cool! :) What happened later? Do you know more?

Yeah, but there is a lot to talk about on that subject and I don't think it's worth expending the energy on it here to be honest.

There's a collection of documents @ http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/fi/yugoslavia/index.htm

And you can probably find a lot more with Google.

[Искра]

Thank you. I'll read them when I get time.

I'm finishing my article on self-managment (I started it long time ago, but because of some reasons I haven't touched it for more than half of year), so I appreciate all usefull sources and stuff. Basically I've allready all I need, but still you never know :)

[mykittyhasaboner]

i think Mandel's (a Trotskyist) observations on the Yugoslav economy are pretty good.

http://www.ernestmandel.org/en/works/txt/1967/yugoslav_economic_theory.htm

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

It would be interesting to be able to read some of the source material that is not in English. However, this booklet, from Prometheus publishing (of the sparts) is not bad at all: No. 4: Yugoslavia, East Europe and the Fourth International: The Evolution of Pabloist Liquidationism. It is a critique of the FI's reactions to Tito.

[Искра]

i think Mandel's (a Trotskyist) observations on the Yugoslav economy are pretty good.

http://www.ernestmandel.org/en/works/txt/1967/yugoslav_economic_theory.htm
I posted that yesterday, along with Croatian translation of this text (which will soon been in Serbocroatian part of MIA)

It would be interesting to be able to read some of the source material that is not in English. However, this booklet, from Prometheus publishing (of the sparts) is not bad at all: No. 4: Yugoslavia, East Europe and the Fourth International: The Evolution of Pabloist Liquidationism. It is a critique of the FI's reactions to Tito.
NHIA posted this: http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/icl-spartacists/prs4-yugo/index.htm

I have to say that just by looking and what did Trotskyites wrote on Tito, firstly from praising it and later to "anlysis", I have to say that I even dislike them more.

[Искра]

My branch of Trotskyism never praised Tito, always saw him as a Stalin like figure, and Yugoslavia as a DWS.
I wonder what would Yugoslav version looked like:

http://www.indymedia.ie/cache/imagecache/local/attachments/migration/img_up/up_3/460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_37123_1.jpg

But I have long ago came to, after much reading, dislike you "left communistites"Good for you. Now, remind me what does your oppinion of Left-Communism have to do with this thread. Ah yeah, nothing - just like my picture of spartacist :D

[Commissar Rykov]

I wonder what would Yugoslav version looked like:

http://www.indymedia.ie/cache/imagecache/local/attachments/migration/img_up/up_3/460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_37123_1.jpg
Good for you. Now, remind me what does your oppinion of Left-Communism have to do with this thread. Ah yeah, nothing - just like my picture of spartacist :D
The IMT aren't Sparts.:confused:

[Искра]

The IMT aren't Sparts.:confused:
I know. But this is funny and NIHA and I posted Spart text on Yugoslavia.

[khlib]

Guys, this is a great thread with lots of good sources and links. It could be a valuable resource for people interested in the subject in the future. Let's not muddle this thread with a silly tendency fight.

[Smyg]

Goddamn sectarians.

[Искра]

I'll be good boy :) even I wanted to replay him in Russian :p

Anyhow, I've just read 2 interesting "articles" by Tito on split with Stalin. It has nothing to do with Trots, but...

In his interview for Borba (Yugoslav Pravda) from 29th November 1951 Tito used really interest phrase when talking about Stalinism. He called Soviet functionaries “bureaucratic class”. I believe that this is term used by Trotskites to describe “classes” of “deformed workers states”. At least Bruno Rizzi is using this term. Also, talking about Yugoslav “revolution”, except pointing out 4 phases of “Yugoslav revolutionary action”, which actually have nothing to do with socialist revolution, but rather with bourgeoisie coup d’etat, Tito stated that Yugoslav revolution is guided trough “light” of Marxism-Leninism which is “freed from the slavery chains of Soviet bureaucrats and informbiro’s dogmatists”. I’m writing this, just to prove, for those who yet do not realise, that Titoism is just Yugoslav national “form” of Stalinism – Marxism-Leninism.

It’s not so unusual to read Tito or Kardelj talking about “light guidance of scientific method of Marxism-Leninism”. For example in his essay from 3rd November 1952 Tito is repeating same stuff about "Stalinist revisionism" and Yugoslav version of ML. But what’s interesting in this essay is that he’s trying to merge market economy with Marxism. For example he talks about “unproductive people” and how “workers change their relationship with means of productions because they are no more wedge workers but producers and autonomous managers”. Now this is really funny, because it sounds like Tito is quoting Proudhon. Marx would probably rip of all of his hair answering to this one haha. Also, Tito is talking about PRISES for PRODUCTIVE people. And there are some commune fantasies etc.

[Omsk]

An interesting part of a speech by Tito,1948.

What, in my view, ought to be relations between socialist countries in the given stage of socialism in the world? Marxism-Leninism has given the theoretical solution for creating socialism as a system, as a new social formation. This system is now being implemented in the Soviet Union, in Yugoslavia and other people's democracies, according to the given conditions, as a new social system. But it has not yet been possible to study theoretically the question of relations between countries which are building socialism. Lenin says, in his works, and this was later brought to pass in the USSR, that it is possible to create socialism in a single country. In saying this he had in view, in the first instance, the Soviet Union, but nowhere has be said that this is not possible outside the Soviet Union. 1 will not talk of other countries; I can, however, say that this has seemed quite possible here in Yugoslavia, although it is denied by various wiseacres, who thumb tirelessly through the scientific works of Marx, Engels, and Lenin, in order to find quotations to corroborate their own erroneous points of view. Further, there are certain kinds of scribblers who shake their heads and shout inanely: it can't be, so it can't be. It is because they say so and wish it to be so. Well, reality is stronger than inane desires, facts are stronger than various allegations, however perverse and pigheaded they may be. Nevertheless, we are successfully and surely building socialism, not out of sheer obstinacy but for historical necessity; we are building socialism, profoundly convinced that it will not only be of value to our peoples but will be an example to other nations.

I found it on MIA,and later read the whole thing in a biography of Tito.Titoism is,if you ask me,one of the worst 'versions' of a buirocratic political ideology,completely revisionist and a consumer Stalinism.

[khlib]

I don't think you can talk about "Titoism" until after 1948. Before then, it was simply "Stalinism."

[mrmikhail]

Guys, this is a great thread with lots of good sources and links. It could be a valuable resource for people interested in the subject in the future. Let's not muddle this thread with a silly tendency fight.

I apologise to you, my posts on the matter have been removed so as not to detract from the point of this thread.

[Искра]

I don't think you can talk about "Titoism" until after 1948. Before then, it was simply "Stalinism."
Yes, that's true, but Marxist-Leninists who reject Titoism, or those who call themselves anti-revisionists, tend revise history. They like to put things in the way that they always knew that Tito or Mao were revisionists, but they were not as bad as they are now and there was hope etc. Just look at writings of Hoxha. He’s like an ultimate prophet. Where was his fucking crystal ball when he outlawed religion from Albania?