Page THE MILITANT Saturday, July 26, 1930 What the New Masses Refused to Print Concerning the «Defenders» of the October Revolution By TROTSKY Dear Friend: have received a copy of the New York magazine the New Masses containing artIcles about my autobiography and about the suicide of Maiakovsky. do not regret the fifteen minutes have spent getting acquainted with the American Left intelligentsia. Magazines like this are to be found in several countries. One of their most important tasks is said to be the defense of the Soviet Union. This is a wholly praiseworthy undertaking, regardless of whether the Messry. Defenders fulfil it from inward conviction or as is sometimes the case from less lofty motives. Dut it would be foolish to exaggerate the importance of this defense. These groups, sufficiently variegated their composition, busy themselves on one side with Iringes of the bourgeoisie, on the other with the fringes of the proletariat, and ofter no guarantee whatever as to their own futuro. As the majority of pacifists strug.
glo against war only in times of peace, 80 these radical defenders of the Soviet Union, its titular friends from the ranks of Bohemia, will fulfil their mission only so long ag this does not demand real courage and genuine devotion to the revolution. These qualities they do not possess.
And where indeed should they get them?
Their radicalism needs a protective coloration. For that reason it finds its chief expression in the defense of the Soviet Union defense of a state possessing power, wealth and authority. It is a question of defending what exists and is already achieved. For such defense it is not at all necessary to be a revolutionist. You can quite well remain a mixture of anarchist and conservative. But at the same time you can seem revolutionary, deceiving others and, to some extent, yourself. We have seen this in the example of Barthe bourgeoisle and the social democracy?
come yesterday. They have accepted every change in the governmental course as patriotic officials accept a change of uniform.
Thore are always potential Chinovniks sitting around Bohemia. These people are courtiers of the Soviet power, not soldiers of the proletarian revolution.
The workers state, as a stave, may have need of such characters for temporary goals, although have always thought that the near sighted epigones greatly exaggerate the weight of these groups just as they exaggerated the value of the defense of Purcell or the friendship of Chiang Kal Shek. As for these characters themselves, am ready to acknowledge that it 19 better to be a courtier of the Soviet power than of the oil kings or the British secret service. But the proletarian revolution would not be the proletarian revolution If it allowed its ranks to be confused with this problematical, unreliable, fickle and wavering brotherhood.
Their moral triviality assumes cynical and sometimes insufferable form when they, in the character of friends of the family. Interfere in the inner problems of Communism. To this testifies the aforementioned number of the New Massey (a paradoxical name by the way for an organ of Bohemta. These people, you see, think that my autobiography will serve the bourgeoisle against the prolotariat, while New Masses, Mondo, and other publications of this kind, are obviously necessary to the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. This aberration is easily explained: Fooling around the fringes of two hostile classes and revolving continually on their own axes, the Barbusses of all countries naturally get mixed up as to where is the bourgeoisie and where the proletariat. Their criteria are simple. Since the work of the Loft Opposition decisively criticises the domestic policy of the Soviet Union and the world policy of the Comintern, and since the bourgeois newspaper writers exult in this criticism and try to make use of it why, the conclusion is perfectly obvious: The courtiers are in the camp of the revolution, and we, the Left Communfits, in the camp of its enemies! This is the usual depth of the political thinking to be found in Bohemia The bourgeoisie would be stupid 1f they did not try to use the inner disagreements in the camp of the revolution. But was this question first raised in my autobiography? Wasn the expulsion from the Party of the President of the Comintern, Zinoviev, and one of the presidents of the Soviet government, Kamenev, a gift the bourgeoisie? Did not the exile and subsequently the banishment, of Trotsky give the bourgeois press of the whole world a welcome theme for agitation against the October revolution? Was not the denunciation of the head of the government, Rykov, and the head of the Comintern Bucharin, as bourgcois liberals used by These facts, brought to the attention of the whole world, were far more helpful to the bourgeoisie than the theoretical reflections or historical explanations of Trotsky. But what interest has tbe anarcho conservative Bohemia in all this? It takes all the foregoing events, because stamped wth the ofll.
cal tamp, as once for all given and eternal.
Criticism of the Stalin regime is impossible to them, not because the Stalinists are right, but because the Staliniste are today the government. repeat. These are courtiers of the Soviet power, and not revolutionists.
For revolutionists, the question is decided by the class line, the content of ideas, the theoretical position, the historical prognosis, and the political methods, of each of the opposing sides. If you think, as we think and as we have proven on a world through the experiment of the last si. yoars that the policies of the Stalin faction are weakening the October revolution, that they dostroyed the Chinese revolution, that they are preparing the defeat of tbe Indian revolution and undermining the Comintern, then and only then our policy is justified. The bourgeoisie will grab up the fragınents of our true and necessary criticism of course! But does that change in the slightest degree the essence of a great historical problem? Has not revolutionary thought always developed by the road of rushless inner drugglo, at whose fire the reaction always tried to warm its fingers? remark in parenthesis, however, that the whole bourgeois press, from the New York Times up to the Austro Marxist Ar.
beiter Zeitung, in its political estimate of the struggle of the Left Opposition with Stalinist Centrism, stands incomparably Dearer to the Centrists and never conceals it. You could publish a whole anthology of press clippings to prove this. Thus, in Hypocrisy for Art Sake in the New Masses busso and the French paper Monde, which Correspondence between Max Eastman, Walt Carmon, Mike Gold addition to all the rest, the Friends and belongs to the same category ng New Mass.
es. From the standpoint of time, their The following letters are virtually selfradicalism 18 chiefly directed toward the explanatory. They aroge out of a letter sent past. From the standpoint of space, it is to Michael Gold, editor of the New Masses, directly proportional to the square of the by Comrade Max Eastman. In this le ter distance from the scene of action. In re comrade Eastman enclosed the article by lation to their own country, these bold Trotsky (printed in this issue of the Miliboys always were and always will be in tant) and demanded the rication of the finitely more cautious and evasive than in latter in the New Masso, in view of the rela on to other countries especially those slanderous attacks made by Gold and Earl in the East.
Browder against the Opposition in general, The best ropresentatives of this type, and Trotsky and Rakovsky in particular, excelling the rest by many heads both in in a previous issue of that periodical. The gifts and character, is undoubtedly Maxim firet reply to Eastman letter was in the Gorky. He sympathized for years with affirmative from Wit Carmon, managing the Bolsheviks and considered their ene editor of the New Nesnes, followed by a mies his enemies. This did not prevent cowardly negative reply from the editor, bim from appearing at the time of the Gold, which is answered by comrade Eastproletarian revolution in the camp of its man. The three letters are printed below.
enemies. After the victory of the revolu. Ed.
tion he long remained in the camp of its enemlos. He reconciled himself with the NEW MASSES Soviet Republic when it became for him 112 East 19 st. New York, an unalterable fact that is, when he could July 7, 1930 reconcile himself with it without depart Max Eastgan, ing from his essentially conservative out Chilmark, Mass.
look. Thero 18 Irony in the fact that Gorky Dear Max Eastman: warred against Lenin at the greatest period This will acknowledge receipt of your of Lenin creation, but now long after pote and article by Leon Troteky. We are wars, gets along very peacefully with Sta certain to use this in the coming issue.
lin. What can we expect of the pencil Mike Gold is not in town. Back in a few Bized Gorkys?
days. You will probably bear from him The essence of these people from as well on his return.
the Left wing of the bourgeois Bohemia 13 Yours, that they are capable of defending the revWALT CARMON olution only after it is accomplished and has demonstrated its permanence. In deNEW MASSES fending the yesterday of the revolution 112 19 St. New York, they adopt an attitude of conservative hogJuly 16, 1930 thlity to all those who are laying the Dear Max: road to its tomorrow. The future can only m sorry, but really don think we be prepared by revolutionary methods, me should print this in New Masses. We rethods as foreign to the cong rvative Bo viewed Trotsky book, because it was lithemia as were the ideas and slogans of erature. but all of us here agree that the the dictatorship of the proletariat on the mag. shouldn become an organ of politiday before the Actober revolution. These cal discussion and if we give up a lot of gentlemen remain, accordingly, true to space to this Trotsky fight from now onthemselves and to the social classes which we immediately lose our function as created them and feed them. Furthermore, literary vehicle in spite of a formal veering to the Left, Sorry to the new masses. their conservativMIKE GOLD 1em bag really grown stronger since they are leaning their backs against not the July 18, 1930 October revolution, no! but against Dear Mike Gold: great state as an institution. independent Your pretense that you will not publish of its guiding ideas and of its olicy. They Trotsky rejoinder to your cheap attack were with Lenin and Trotsky by no meang on him because your magazine is too litall of them, by the way after that they erary is an insult to my intelligence. The were witL Zinoviev, after that with Bu article to which Trotsky makes this recharin and Rykov, now they are with Sta joinder was written by an active head of Min. And tomorrow? Upon that they will the Workers Party and was a political atexpress themselves when tomorrow has be tack from the first word to the last defenders of the revoluNon, having noMoreover it was a abandonment thing in common either with the old or of the policy of your pawirich bad been tho new masser, crudely distort the genuto pussy foot on this whole issue of the ine picture of the distribution of political Left Opposition. You refused to let me write sympathy and antipathy among the bourabout it as a member of your Executive geoisio and the social democrats.
Board, even with an angwer by a Stalinist Lying, by the way, 18 a necessary acin the same number. When resigned, the complishment in a courtier. In the article pussy foot policy was carried to the point about Maiakovsky, as turned over the of not printing my letter of resignation. leaves of the magazine, hit upon the name When stated this fact in a communication of Rakovsky. read eight or ten seeto The Nation, suggesting that this was not tences, and although am accustomed to a shining example of brave thinking. inuch, nevertheless what read made me you replied Justifying yourself on the gasp. It is related here how Maiakovsky ground that We none of us used the mag haded war. hated war. what a vulgar azine to express our opinions. quote formulation of the relation 10 war of a this confession of yours from memory. revolutionist. and how, in contrast to Moreover about a year ago when met thet, Rakovsky, at Zimmerwald was going you on 7th Ave. and asked how the mag to take off his coat and punch Lenin and azine was getting on, you volunteered the Zinuviev. in the jaw for their revoluinformation that, We re through with the tionary struggle against war. Rakovsky is Party, we ve learned that much anyway.
camed here for no purpose wbatevr X(Here too am quoting from memory but rt for that of spreading th scandalous my memory is good. It struck me strange lie. It is necessary to spread iu becau that you should offer me this piece of in Rakovsky 18 in exilo and it 19 necessary side information, when all previous negotiato justify his being there. And so the tions with me had been conducted under Coutier becomes a contemptib sinndcrer.
the pretense that the magazine was inde He spreads this stupid scandal instead of pondent of the Party a free revolution siating once he has named Rakovsky in ary magazine as it advertised itself. Upon Purection with the war with what VOeflection wondered whether this gratuilutionary courage Rakovsky struggled tous declaration of independence might not against war uncer a hail storm of pergemean that you are now directly subsidized cution, glander, assault and polic: proseby the International. fons. Exacy for that strugglo kakov.
Whether because you are subsidized, or sky was thrown into prison by the Rou.
because you depend upon the party for ranian oliuchy and was saved from the sales, tho fact is that in publishing these 1ste of L9. linebt and Rosa Luxenburg attacks on Trotsky and Rakovsky you have only by the revolutionary Russian dry, at last shown your political colors. You That is enough. If the October revoare now overtly what you were before unlution had depended upon its future cour der cover, a Stalinist organ. And yet you tiers, it would never have appeared in have the brass to tell me that you wont the world. And if its further destinies publish Trotsky rejoinder because you depended upon their defense. the revoluare too literary.
tion would be condemned to ruin. The proletarian vanguard can guarantee the And you have the folly to add, All future of the country of the Soviets, and of us here agree etc. although you know prolong the road of the world revolution, that ten days ago receivel a letter from only by a correct policy. We minut work your associate Walt. Carmon stating what out that policy, establish it theoretically: any coulageous and tudependent editor and defend it with tooth and nail against having viciously attacked one man and the whole world, and if necessary chanat slandered another would state tbat We the very highest insultutions which have are certain to use this in the coming is raised themselves up (or rather stat themsue.
selves down) on the back of the ser What bappened during these ten days? revolution. But of those questions we need Do you really expect any grown per not speak in connection with the doson to believe that having attacked a poli revolutionary courtiers from the of tical leader with a page and a hall of vitup the petty bourgeois Bohemia. them oration writen by a political opponent, you enough bay been said.
refuse to publish a brief rejoinder because Your you are literary? Even people who re LD. TROTSKY. Continued on Page 8)
Prinkipo, June 10, 1930,