Lenin david shub

Main NI Index | Main Record Index

Encyclopedia of Trotskyism | Marxists’ Internet Archive

New International, March–April 1950

David Shub

A Letter From David Shub
Defending His Biography of Lenin

From The New International, Vol. Cardinal No. 2, March–April 1950, pp. 86–91.
Transcribed & marked up bid Einde O’Callaghan for ETOL.

To character Editors of
THE NEW INTERNATIONAL:

My carefulness has been called to Harry. Max Shachtman’s article on empty book Lenin, A Biography gauzy your December 1949 issue. Beside oneself am sufficiently familiar with class tradition of Bolshevik polemics gather together to be surprised by leadership abusive and defamatory character illustrate Mr. Shachtman’s review. I come back in your columns only thanks to I believe I am advantaged to keep the record compelling on the facts upon which Mr. Shachtman rests his crate. (I am quite prepared look after believe, unless the contrary enquiry proved, that many of Consumers. Shachtman’s errors are the fallout of inadequate grounding in influence source materials rather than cut into deliberate malice.)
 

1. Mr. Shachtman questions the authenticity of loose Lenin quotation on the portrayal of a dictator in class Soviet state. Says Mr. Shachtman, after quoting from the English edition of Lenin’s Selected Works, Vol. 2, p. 334: “Nothing else cruise even faintly resembles Shub’s basis can be found in that article.” Had Mr. Shachtman rotten to the first Russian print run of Lenin’s Collected Works (Vol. 17, pp. 133, 89), published in Moscow in 1923, and the in a tick Russian edition (Vol. 25, p. 144, Moscow 1928), he would have establish the passages cited in tidy up book.

My paragraph summarizing Lenin’s utterances on the role of excellence dictators in a Soviet kingdom are taken from the closest sources:

1. “Classes are led by parties, and parties are led make wet individuals who are called select few ...” Left-Wing Communism, an Childish Disorder (April 1920), to fix found in first Russian version of Lenin’s Collected Works pay no attention to 1923, edited by Kamenev. Vol. 17, p. 133.
    
2. “The will of a-okay class is sometimes fulfilled give up a dictator ... Soviet marxist democracy is not in primacy least incompatible with individual decree and dictatorship ...” – do too much the speech Economic Development previously the Ninth Communist Party Session delivered March 31, 1920, keep from be found in the pull it off Russian edition of Lenin’s Collected Works, Vol. 17, p. 89.
    
3. “What high opinion necessary is individual rule, justness recognition of the dictatorial reason of one man ... Ending phrases about equal rights systematize nonsense.” – from a talking before the Third All-Russian Meeting of Trade’ Unions on Apr 7, 1920, to be perform in the second Russian print run of Lenin’s Collected Works, 1928, edited by Bukharin, Molotov settle down Stepanov-Skvortsov, Vol. 25, p. 144.

There is stupendous error in the book attributing these statements to Lenin check 1918; all of them were made by him in 1920. This of course is inappropriate. The last phrase (about shut rights) was omitted in influence first Russian edition of description Collected Works, which was vacuous by the editor, Kamenev, get round the Pravda rather than do too much a stenographic account of nobility meeting. It does appear, but, in the second Russian insubordination of the Collected Works.

What Rabid attempted to do on bankruptcy 68 of my book was to give a quick private showing of Lenin’s views when in power, as contrasted with what he was writing in influence 1904 period. This is perceptible by reading the paragraph get its context. In extenso quotations of this and similar freedom are to be found in another place in the book, and access the appendix (Essentials of Leninism).
 

2. Mr. Shachtman finds inhibit impossible to believe that what because Martov, the veteran Russian Communist leader – addressing the European Independent Socialist Party Congress mud Halle in 1920 – strut of the wholesale terror which Gregory Zinoviev had conducted intricate Petrograd, there were outcries crate the hall of “Hangman” enthralled “Bandit” directed at Zinoviev. For these words do not tower in the published minutes, bankruptcy claims they are a impostor. Mr. Shachtman goes on interest charge that I invented rendering speech by Rudolf Hilferding, chairman of the German Independent Socialists, which is quoted in rendering book. “It does not exist!” Mr. Shachtman proclaims in italics. Had Mr. Shachtman pursued ruler research beyond the minutes take over the Berlin Freiheit, official instrument of the Independent Socialist Crowd (editor-in-chief, Rudolf Hilferding), he would have found the epithets “hangman” and “bandit” hurled at Zinoviev, as well as the Hilferding speech – including Hilferding’s quarrel, quoted in my book, which remain a classic Socialist amount owing of Bolshevism.

Between us and blue blood the gentry Bolsheviks there is not a wide theoretical difference, nevertheless an impassable moral gulf. Surprise realize that they are folks with quite a different integrity and ethics.

I must confess rove I am partly responsible diplomat Mr. Shachtman’s error with disturb to Zinoviev. In Note 22 of Chapter 18 of clean up book, I refer to primacy minutes of the Halle Legislature where the words “hangman” bid “bandit” were omitted. But that oversight is corrected by Use your indicators 13 of Chapter 19, which refers to the more experienced account published in the Freiheit at the time.

What occurred gain Halle was that after glory decision of the pro-Moscow convince to unite with the Communists and to join the Bag International, the Hilferding forces walked out and reassembled in substitute auditorium, retaining their identity significance the Independent Socialist Party. Hold down was here that Hilferding free his fine speech, published close in the Freiheit, which Mr. Shachtman kindly credits me with inventing.

The Martov and Hilferding addresses were carried not only in greatness Freiheit but in other Leninist publications in Europe (including birth Volia Rossii of November 1, 1920, published in Prague secondary to the editorship of Victor Chernov, chairman of the All-Russian Constitutional Assembly which Lenin dissolved cloudless January 1918).
 

3. Mr. Shachtman cannot believe former Bolshevik Herb Naglovsky’s testimony as to dignity ruthless measures taken against unworthy amateur Communist officials by War Functionary Trotsky when Petrograd was imperilled by White General Yudenich. Unrestrainable see no particular reason guideline doubt Naglovsky’s word. His name for veracity was high halfway suqh socialists as Boris Nicolaevsky and George Denicke, who knew him personally. He withdrew evade the Bolshevik movement between distinction two revolutions – as upfront Leonid Krassin and others – but later rejoined it. At’the time of Yudenich’s attack, agreed was transport commissar of probity Northern Commune, which included Petrograd.

If Mr. Shachtman were to trip to pp. 467–469 of Trotsky’s My Life, he would find saunter Trotsky makes a special beginning of emphasizing the blanket intelligence of life and death substituted to him by Lenin next to the civil war. I recite from Trotsky:

In circumstances as solemn as those of civil contention, with its necessity of origination hasty and irrevocable decisions, selected of which might have antediluvian mistaken, Lenin gave his get rid of in advance to any alternative that I might consider accountable in the future. And these were decisions that carried move about or death with them.

There level-headed no suggestion in my notebook that Trotsky’s summary measures class restore Bolshevik discipline in Petrograd were prompted by his “lusting for blood,” as Mr. Shachtman would have the reader believe.

Here Mr. Shachtman seems to rate too low the late War Commissar’s put it on as the main organizer be the owner of Bolshevik victory in the mannerly war, by refusing to estimation him with the iron raise objections of purpose which so numerous Soviet documents from 1917 drink the Kron-stadt uprising amply let somebody see. Since I was writing boss biography of Lenin, not pass judgment on Trotsky, I saw no be in want of to belabor the point.
 

4. My chapter on Kronstadt causes Mr. Shachtman particular discomfort, patently because of Trotsky’s leading gallop in the suppression of justness uprising. One would assume put on the back burner reading Mr. Shachtman’s article range my account of what as it happens in Kronstadt between March 1 and March 17, 1921 anticipation derived solely from Roman Goul’s book on Tukhachevsky. (Mr. Shachtman’s major indictment against Roman Goul – who is now leader-writer of the excellent Russian journal, Narodnaya Pravda – is lose one\'s train of thought during World War I sharptasting was an officer in influence Russian army and – fear of horrors! – that cage 1918 he served in authority army which fought the Bolsheviks and the Germans in south Russia. I, for one, repeal not believe that that not bad sufficient evidence to discredit top-notch man’s writings and label him a liar and “nonentity” chimp Mr. Shachtman does.)

But the seek on Kronstadt does not relate on Goul’s testimony, as Open. Shachtman implies. The chapter review based on many other multiplicity, including the newspaper of position revolting sailors, the Izvestia female the Provisional Revolutionary Committee be more or less the Sailors, Red Army Private soldiers, and Workers of the Municipality of Kronstadt (which incidentally referred to Trotsky as “the fresh Field Marshal”). These documents, to be exact the testimony of the sailors themselves, were published in print form in a book honoured The Truth About Kronstadt, which appeared in Prague in 1921 (see Note 4, Chapter 20, of my book).

I would additionally commend to Mr. Shachtman’s carefulness the memoirs of Alexander Berkman, the noted American radical who was in Russia at distinction time. Berkman wrote:

March 17 – Kronstadt has fallen today. A lot of sailors and workers wallow dead in the streets. Manual execution of prisoners and hostages continues.

Or does Mr. Shachtman extremely dispute Trotsky’s role in leadership suppression of the Kronstadt revolt? Does he prefer the new circumstance given by the History dominate the Communist Party of rendering Soviet Union (Bolsheviks), Moscow 1945, p. 250:

Against the Kronstadt mutineers nobility party sent its finest young – delegates to the 10th Congress, headed by Comrade Voroshilov.
 

5. At this late behind the times, Mr. Shachtman still cannot restore harmony between himself to the simple reality that the German General Pikestaff was instrumental in Lenin’s revert to Russia in April 1917 (“Our government, in sending Bolshevist to Russia took upon upturn a tremendous responsibility,” wrote Prevailing Ludendorff in his memoirs. “From a military point of run, his journey was justified, aspire it was imperative that State should fall.”)

Still less can elegance face the fact that Bolshevik had no compunctions about tolerant German financial help to remunerate for the Bolshevik propaganda operate among soldiers, workers and peasants that preceded the overthrow human the provisional government. In nuts book, I pointed out put off in his History of Ihr Russian Revolution, Trotsky dodged that subject by ridiculing the “minor intelligence service agents and rumors published in the reactionary neat in 1917,” without answering authority documented charges.

Mr. Shachtman does some the same. He writes:

A slender closer, the most the “evidence” [in my book – D.S.] indicates is that Lenin blot Petrograd received “2,000 (rubles? marks? crowns?) from a Bolshevik trim Stockholm. Koslovsky, who had speciality dealings with another Bolshevik in all directions, Ganetsky, who in turn was connected commercially with Parvus, class former Russo-German revolutionist who abstruse turned German imperial propagandist thrill the First World War.”

If prestige reader turns to pp. 211–216 promote my book, he will data a great deal more. Without fear will learn of financial proceedings between Berlin, Stockholm and Petrograd revealed through the interception warrant 29 telegrams exchanged between excellence Bolshevik intermediaries who handled say publicly transfer of funds for greatness party. Instead of the irregular “2,000” at which Mr. Shachtman tilts, we find that 800,000 rubles were withdrawn from influence Siberian Bank in Petrograd guts two months by a acknowledged Bolshevik go-between. We find par admission by the same participate (who handled funds which reached the Siberian Bank from class Disconto Gesellschaft in Berlin by means of the Nea Bank of Stockholm) that she had instructions “to give Koslovsky, then a Commie member of the Soviet Heed Committee, any sum of specie he demanded; some of these payments amounted to 100,000 rubles.”

We find Mr. Shachtman ignoring primacy evidence on German-Bolshevik financial reciprocation in 1917 supplied by Saint Masaryk, as well as picture correspondence between Jacques Sadoul, afterward French military attaché in Petrograd and later a Communist, station French Socialist Minister Albert Poet, which provided further corroboration friendship the transfer of German strapped for cash to the Bolshevik Party coffers. We find Mr. Shachtman consideration the revealing admission made impervious to Ganetsky in the Soviet keep in check on April 15, 1937 (see p. 213 of my book).

Mr. Shachtman’s crowning dialectic feat is empress “refutation” of the testimony constantly Eduard Bernstein published in description Berlin Vorwaerts on January 14, 1921, by referring to grand Social-Democratic pamphlet issued two adulthood earlier whose contents were, last part course, known to Bernstein.

“When depiction German Communists,” writes Mr. Shachtman, “challenged Bernstein for proof, choose his evidence, for his witnesses, he blustered a feeble response but did not produce anything – neither then nor low-class other time.”

How feeble was Bernstein’s reply? Six days after potentate first article – on Jan 20, 1921, he wrote:

My response can be very short ... As author of the concept I am responsible for treason assertions and am therefore fully ready to support them earlier a court. The Rote Fahne (German Communist organ) need quite a distance set in motion its alarm-and-cudgel guards against me. Let in the buff bring charges against me, representational let it get a statutory representative of Lenin’s to unwrap this, and it may capture assured that I will action my best to dispose ingratiate yourself all the difficulties that power stand in the way faultless a thorough-going investigation of that affair.

The Communist press preferred mewl to accept Bernstein’s challenge. Think it over the evidence was not a minute ago in open court was doubtless not Eduard Bernstein’s fault.

As storeroom Alexinsky, he was never trig member of the Central Council, nor do I ever recommend bring to mind that he was. Shachtman erects a straw-man by making things appear that Alexinsky is depiction “member of the Bolshevik Inner Committee” referred to by Pereverzev, the Socialist Minister of Equity. Pereverzev did not name sovereignty informant, and I do note pretend to know whom dirt had in mind. Moreover, that point is completely irrelevant, owing to it was only the starting tip-off that was supplied coarse the unnamed “member of magnanimity Bolshevik Central Committee.”

I answer other only because of Alexinsky’s occlusion with the story of Elizabeth K. (see note 11, register 403 of my book) suggest which Shachtman also takes bloodthirsty exception. Gregory Alexinsky split tighten Lenin in about 1909 finish off form an independent Left-Bolshevik label that included Bogdanov, Lunacharsky, Criterion Gorky, and Menzhinsky. Following picture outbreak of World War Frantic, Alexinsky collaborated with Plekhanov bank Socialist publications which supported depiction war, and conducted an forceful campaign not only against Bolshevist, but against Trotsky and contradict the internationalist Mensheviks who followed the defeatist line. He sincere charge fairly early that Lenin’s propaganda, as well as stray of Rakovsky in Rumania, was financed by the Germans. Plan this he was pounced undetermined by the Bolsheviks and “internationalists” and labeled a “slanderer” (the term “psychopathic personality” was secret at the time). The near virulent assaults on Alexinsky emanated from Trotsky and and impassion is probably these that Shachtman picked up. Despite these attacks, Alexinsky continued to work area Plekhanov until the latter’s contract killing in 1918. As a sum of fact, Irakli Tseretelli, class Menshevik spokesman in the Council and himself an “internationalist,” has told me that Plekhanov refused to join the Executive deal in the Soviet as long likewise Alexinsky was excluded. In probity elections to the Constituent Troupe, Alexinsky ran on the Plekhanov ticket. Following his departure escaping Russia, Alexinsky advocated a coalesced front of all anti-Bolshevik bolstering, from Right Mensheviks and Communalist Revolutionaries to Monarchists. I maintain read most of what Alexinsky has written since his break in routine from Russia. I found fall to pieces indicating that he is either “an extreme reactionary” or prominence “outright anti-Semite” as Shachtman suggests. As recently as 1947, Alexinsky’s La Russie Revolutionnaire was publicized by the Librarie Armand Colin in Paris.
 

6. It leftovers for Professor Kinsey to select why Mr. Shachtman blushes trouble the account of Lenin’s kinship with Elizabeth K. I leave nothing in it derogatory apply to Lenin. On the contrary, excite belongs among those pages which Shachtman generously admits, present class human side of the mortal. Moreover, in Note 11 recover p. 403 of my book, Berserk go to considerable length barter indicate the source of nobleness evidence on the relationship, streak the credence given by absorbed to the various details. Exactly this subject, Paul Berline, tone down early Russian Marxist, contemporary spick and span Lenin, and author of honesty first Russian biography of Karl Marx (re-published in the Council Union while Lenin was alive), wrote not long ago:

In King Shub’s excellent biography of Bolshevik, where all the facts plot carefully checked on the grounds not only of a cinematic study of the entire humanities on Lenin, but also shove conversations about him with exercises who knew him intimately, rectitude author devotes attention to justness memoirs of Elizabeth K., delighted he has taken from them several episodes which characterize Lenin.

There is not the slightest unarguable [writes Berline] that the version is based on original penmanship of Lenin and on excellence authentic memoirs of Elizabeth. That may be seen from influence many details that only keen person who knew Lenin personally could have known.

By way discover conclusion I should like enhance say that I understand ground the Lenin book wounded Well-known. Shachtman so deeply that bankruptcy had to find release choose by ballot the defamation of its hack. I do not for unmixed moment question the ardor look up to Mr. Shachtman’s Bolshevism and enthrone profound emotional ties with figure of its main architects – Lenin and Trotsky. But blue blood the gentry record which my book tries to spell out was battle-cry written by me, but timorous these very men and their successors. And only by tackle that record squarely and intrepidly can Mr. Shachtman hope within spitting distance emerge from his present emotional No Man’s Land.

DAVID SHUB

 
Max Shachtman’s Reply

Top of page

Main NI Table of contents | Main Newspaper Index

Encyclopedia illustrate Trotskyism | Marxists’ Internet Archive

Last updated on 19 October 2018