From the Trotsky archive at MIA. >...n the chapter "Down With Substitutionism" in Party II of the book, Trotsky writes >in what could be a description of Stalinism : In the internal politics of the Party these methods lead, as we shall see below, to the Party organisation ‘substituting&’ itself for the Party, the Central Committee substituting itself for the Party organisation, and finally the dictator substituting himself for the Central Committee. M.P.
Leon Trotsky Our Political Tasks First published: 1904 as Nashi Politicheskiya Zadachi Translated by: New Park Publications Transcribed by: Andy Lehrer in 1999 for the Trotsky Internet Archive On-Line Edition's Forward by the Transcriber Preface Part I: Introduction: The criteria of Party development and the methods of evaluating it. Part II: Tactical Tasks The content of our activity in the proletariat. Part III: Organisational Questions. Part IV: Jacobinism And Social Democracy On-Line Edition's Forward by the Transcriber Our Political Tasks is Trotsky’s response to the 1903 split in Russian Social Democracy and a spirited reply to Lenin’s What Is To Be Done? and One Step Forwards, Two Steps back. A passionate, insightful attack on Lenin’s theory of party organisation and an outline of Trotsky’s own views on party structure, this controversial work was later disowned by Trotsky after he joined the Bolsheviks. Though it is far from Trotsky’s best work on a literary level (the young Trotsky tends to be repetitive, excessively sarcastic, overly verbose and generally in need of a good editor), the work is, nevertheless, a remarkable insight into the young Trotsky’s thinking and a vibrant expression of his commitment to revolution. It is, at times, hauntingly prophetic in its predictions of where the Leninist conception of democratic centralism may lead. For example, in the chapter "Down With Substitutionism" in Party II of the book, Trotsky writes in what could be a description of Stalinism : In the internal politics of the Party these methods lead, as we shall see below, to the Party organisation ‘substituting&’ itself for the Party, the Central Committee substituting itself for the Party organisation, and finally the dictator substituting himself for the Central Committee It is very difficult to find an edition of this work in any language, as the book’s line on the party is not consistent with that of most Trotskyist organisations. Our Political Tasks fell into obscurity after the 1917 Revolution only to be used and misrepresented by Trotsky’s enemies during the leadership struggle, which followed Lenin’s death. The book (and, implicitly, the Marxist tradition of spirited debate and critical thought) was used to attack Trotsky for being insufficiently Leninist and to smear him with the accusation of Menshivism, (for an especially viscous example see Stalin’s1927 speech "The Trotskyist Opposition Then and Now"). In fact, Our Political Tasks outlines a political position which, while critical of Lenin’s, is also clearly revolutionary and distinct from what would become Menshevism. This version is based on the English language translation published by New Park Publications in the early 1970s. Spelling and typographical errors have been corrected (and hopefully not replaced with new spelling and typographical errors) and several of the translation’s more egregious grammatical errors have also been corrected. For another criticism of Lenin’s position on party organisation from a left wing perspective, see Rosa Luxemburg’s "Organisational Questions of the Russian Social Democracy" later republished as Leninism or Marxism? For Lenin’s views, see What Is To Be Done? and One Step Forward, Two Steps Back. For Trotsky’s later views on the 1903 split see chapter 12, "The Party Congress and the Split" in My Life. >--- Original Message --- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: 4/17/02 7:08:03 AM > > > >> BTW, in practice, most "democratic centralist" organizations end up >> not >> being democratic. >> The rank and file end up being manipulated by the central >> committee or its leader, i.e., end up being passive followers rather >> than >> active, democratic, participants. >> >> ^^^^^^^^ >> >> CB: Most ? Do you have stats on this ?This is a standard >> anti-democratic centralist claim and opinion. > >Standard because historically substantiated, Charles. > >Democratic centralism leads to bureaucratic centralism and, ultimately, >an apparat not unlike a ruling class, whose being (and material >interests) is unlike that of its 'constituency' and whose consciousness >comes to reflect this. It's a process of substitutionism. First, the >party stands for the class on the grounds that those not yet in the >party (the vast majority of the class) could not yet be expected to know >its own interests (just what you'd expect a middle class intellectual >minority to think, I suppose). Then, to disagree with the party (or, >rather, what current power relations within the formal party determine) >is to be a counter-revolutionary, an enemy of your class. So you're >removed. Top-down nonsense like this ain't Marxian revolution at all - >not in the medium term anyway. Read Marx on The Paris Commune, mate; >it's all about ever revocable delegates from, for, of and by the >people. Theory ain't nothin' without social practice (praxis), so the >revolutionary engine is the people, not a bunch of abstractly-theorising >elitists selflessly throwing pearls before swine. > >There's much spilled blood in the very guts of the notion, I reckon. > >Cheers, >Rob. > > > >
