Władysław Leopold Jaworski 

Trotsky’s Prophecies 

Trotsky sent two articles to Neue Freie Presse about the direction of the Soviet revolution. They are highly interesting and informative. They are worth reading and we should take advantage of the author’s experiences, as they are of a general significance.

It is almost commonly thought that the Russian peasant will put an end to the Soviet system. Trotsky dispels this illusion. The Russian peasant knows that the end of the Soviet rule would mean a return of large land ownership, and he shall defend himself from that to his dying breath. The Russian peasant therefore prefers to suffer all the difficulties resulting from the nationalization of industry, rather than return to the old land property relations.

Trotsky also refutes the view that the Soviet system can transform into a parliamentary democracy.

In his opinion, this is just an empty statement, because the Soviet system’s transformation would be not into a parliamentary democracy, but into capitalism. And if capitalism were restored in Russia, that would be the end of her independence. Capitalist Russia would become a colony of foreign powers.

This is why Trotsky believes that a possible fall of the USSR would give rise to Bonapartism, that is, a military dictatorship, which from its birth would harbor a germ of a new revolution.

All this, however, depends on the international relations, and Trotsky concludes his disquisition with a somewhat mysterious paragraph. According to him, the future development of the Soviet system, and consequently the fate of the opposition, shall depend not only on the internal Russian factors, but also and to a larger extent on the evolution of relations around the world. Trotsky asks: In which direction will the capitalist world evolve? How will the great powers that need to expand behave on the world market? What will the relations among the European states be like and — which is undoubtedly more important — what will be the relations between the United States and Europe, and particularly between the US and Great Britain? According to Trotsky, all of these questions are closely interconnected.

Is Trotsky a pessimist? It would seem so. He clearly states that he does not believe the Soviet system to be unshakable. He does take into consideration the possibility of a civil war, which would result in a military dictatorship. He sees the enormous increase in bureaucracy and the weakening of the connection between the masses and the ruling class. Are these passive positions in Trotsky’s balance balanced by the active positions of Bolshevism? Trotsky assumes that the active positions consist in Bolshevism being a guarantee against the restoration and against the loss of independence. Restoration would mean a return to the former relations in the countryside, while capitalism would make Russia a slave to foreign powers. But Trotsky must admit that these active items in his balance are of a negative nature. Therefore, recently his sole consolation has been that the counter-revolution, which would have to end in a military dictatorship, would lead to a new Bolshevik revolution.

As we can see, Trotsky predicts a constant series of upheavals. How can the international situation affect the Soviet system? Trotsky does not say, and his opinion would be particularly important here, since he seems to have stopped believing in the international revolution.

What does Trotsky look like in this self portrait of his? We know that he does not want parliamentary democracy, capitalism, or restoration and that he is opposed to military dictatorship. In the present system, he does not see sufficient forces or means to avert these dangers. He is terrified by the increase in the party bureaucracy, because in his opinion it is an embodiment of the desire of those who have “succeeded” to peacefully reap the benefits of their acquired positions. The above confessions of Trotsky suggest that if he has not come to doubt the success of the cause to which he devoted himself, then he is one of the most consistent dynamists. Peace is an unattainable ideal. War is the true essence of life. This is the disintegration which the culture based on historical materialism had to lead to.

This is the real Trotsky. His fate is a result of his own actions. His only hope is in the “great reserves and means of Bolshevism” and in a change of the international situation. But these “reserves” can turn precisely against Bolshevism, and the international situation will certainly not be beneficial to it.

During the interviews, Trotsky also characterizes the internal relations within the Bolshevik Party. I do not think that his position is clear in this regard. Rather, we are inclined to suppose that Trotsky was banished mainly for personal reasons. Stalin, in his pursuit of a dictatorship, wanted to remove his most dangerous opponent. As for Trotsky, even when we take everything into account, it remains unknown whether he was fighting against the dictatorship or against Stalin.

But let us now put all these considerations aside and try to get to the core of Trotsky’s beliefs. It seems to me that they can be summed up in two sentences: The future of Russia depends on the Russian army; and: The military dictatorship introduced by it would spark off a new revolution. These prophecies carry a lesson whose importance for every democratic system in the world must not be underestimated. If there is evil in democracy, can democracy be fixed, reformed, and, above all, based on different spiritual foundations? This is the problem in the era in which we live.

“Przepowiednie Trockiego,” Dziennik Poznański 100, 30 April 1929, p. 1.