[lbo-talk] great moments in the history of liberalism

[wrobert at uci.edu]

I think I'll get around to responding to the Trotsky baiting.  I think
that it is both a mistake and extraordinary misreading of Trotsky's texts
to refer to them as 'self-serving' and 'simplistic'  (I'll let tendentious
go as that Trotsky probably wouldn't deny that his readings were
partisan.)  The Revolution Betrayed (not original title) in particular
offers a complex analysis of the ways that the USSR has transformed under
the regime of the time.  As for Stalin, yeah Trotsky clearly hated the
man, but people tend to develop these little biases when someone is
instrumental in killing many of your closest friends and family, but the
truth of the matter is that Trotsky tended to emphasize the power of the
bureaucracy as a whole rather than Stalin as an individual.  If anything,
there was a constant underestimation of Stalin's influence, rather than
the reverse.  The question of the party is also an interesting one.  There
is a radical shift in who was in the party as Stalin gained more
influence.  He was able to transform the Lenin levy in particular into a
gain in influence.  At the same time, even many of these folks were at
risk by 1937.  I still have a great deal of respect for the opposition,
and these comments are not particularly fair to it.

                            robert wood


> I think it is time to rid ourselves of Trotsky's
> self-serving, simplistic and tendentious
> interpretation of history. ;)
>
> Khrushchev's too. "I, Khrushchev, am good. Stalin was
> bad. It was all the fault of the Georgian guy. I never
> killed anybody."
>
> --- Shane Mage <shmage at pipeline.com> wrote:
>