Soviet historians begin to reveal truth about Trotsky

Scan page 19

Soviet historians are beginning to inform the public of the true role of Leon Trotsky as the co-leader with Lenin of the Russian Revolution. In the process, they are giving a more accurate picture of many of Trotsky's ideas.

At the same time, however, establishment historians who are Great Russian nationalists (chauvinists) and anti-Semites remain entrenched in official positions. These historians continue to promulgate fabricated slanders against Trotsky.

This was the news that was brought back by Professor Mark von Hagen of Columbia University's Harriman Institute from a conference of American and Soviet historians held in the Soviet Union Oct. 9 through Oct. 22. The conference focused on the history of the 1920s in the Soviet Union.

Von Hagen—who hosted a seminar at the Harriman Institute at which Esteban Volkov, Pierre Broué, Carl Finamore, and Paul Siegel spoke on Oct. 23—is a specialist on the Soviet Civil War (1918-1921). He is the author of "Soldiers in the Proletarian Dictatorship," which will be published by Cornell University Press in February.

Among the subjects of the papers read by Soviet scholars at the conference were presentations about Trotsky in the October Revolution, the Left Opposition in the 1920s, the Left Oppositionist Evgenii Preobrazhensky, and Nadezhda Krupskaya (Lenin's companion) as an oppositionist. These presentations, according to Von Hagen, were quite objective and sympathetic to the Left Opposition.

Present at the conference was the daughter of the Left Oppositionist Leonid Serebriakov. Other recent signs of the relaxation of taboos on Trotsky are the publication of extracts from his "The New Course" and "The Stalinist School of Falsification" (with the announcement that they will be published as books) and the publication of extracts from Broué's monumental biography of Trotsky. There was also a Soviet TV documentary on the murder of Trotsky in 1940 by a Stalinist agent.

Danger of co-optation

Von Hagen stated, however, that a positive presentation of Trotsky is often accompanied by a co-optation of him by those associated with the reform wing of the bureaucracy.

Trotsky's revolutionary opposition to the theory of "socialism in one country" is depicted as advocacy for integrating the Soviet Union into the capitalist world economy, and he and Bukharin are being lumped together as opponents of Stalin without the important political differences between them being explained. He is also being linked with the Mensheviks, who are being studied by Soviet historians with new interest and sympathy.

Von Hagen does not believe, nevertheless, that the historians' treatment of Trotsky is proceeding in accordance with a predetermined plan. Glasnost has acquired a life of its own, and historians are achieving a greater degree of autonomy from the political leadership.

Historians-the majority being mediocre hacks long accustomed to obediently following the dictates of the state-at first lagged behind the literary artists and journalists who sought to recover the historical past. There are now, however, new historians and formerly shunned older historians who are intent on raising professional standards, ministering to the great popular interest in the suppressed past, and explaining the present by exploring its historical roots.

Battleground of debate

The study of history has become a battleground between conservatives and reformers. Thus Victor Danilov, who was interviewed by me in Socialist Action [July 1989 issue], engaged in a lecture tour of the country to answer the charge by local party leaders and historians that collectivization came about through the ideas of two Jews, Trotsky and Kaganovich, while Stalin saved the Russian peasantry by stopping the collectivization drive on discovering the ruthlessness with which it was being conducted.

Though the facts are clear that Trotsky opposed Stalin's forcible collectivization and that Stalin halted it only after it had plunged the country into disaster, this meant nothing to the conservative historians.

Likewise, at the historical conference attended by Von Hagen, a Colonel Ponomarev read a paper in which he contrasted a cruel Trotsky with a humane Lenin. Trotsky, asserted the colonel without providing a shred of evidence, was excommunicated from Judaism by his father (whose relations with Trotsky have hitherto been described as amicable). Thus, even his own father, even his fellow Jews—whom Ponomarev regarded with distaste-disowned him!

Despite these canards by the conservative historians and the frequent destroying of the strength of his revolutionary ideas, Von Hagen is confident that—given the momentum of the changes in the historical profession— Trotsky's "The Revolution Betrayed" and other key works will be published before 100 long and that the power of his ideas will have a great impact.

downright evil perpetrated by the U.S. government in that war will see his or her own ideas confirmed. But I dare say, other viewers with other-and even opposite-interpretations of that war can find "evidence" for their cases too. So what we're left with is merely the very general idea that "war is hell."

Similarly-and I don't think this is unrelated-Kovic finds his solution at the end of the movie in the Democratic Party. It's as if Kennedy, Johnson, and all those Democratic congressmen had clean hands! This part of the movie made me sick.

But so much for the film's negatives. Its truths are nonetheless devastating. Never have I seen the cynicism of American rehabilitation hospitals so exposed. Kovic's bewilderment when confronted by the lack of support on the homefront is heartbreaking. The emptiness of the new life wounded vets faced is overwhelming. And this movie pulls no punches in showing the police and government brutality antiwar protesters were met with.

It is trite (and yet so painfully true!) that the young and the innocent bear the burden of war's sufferings. The achievement of "Born on the Fourth of July" is to powerfully remind us of this lesson. When will we ever learn?

Bob Davis's mystery novel "Kimura," set in the Vietnam War period, has just been published by Walker Books.

I l one year for $8.