Was Trotsky a Good Guy?

Nick Gillespie | August 11, 2009

National Review's Uncommon Knowledge interview program Uncommon Knowledge, hosted by Peter Robinson, is one of the best video shows on the interwebs. The format is great, the guests well-informed, the conversation civil but intensely engaged.

Check out this episode, which features Christopher Hitchens and Robert Service discussing the legacy of Leon Trotsky.

Reason on Trotsky, not a good guy, btw.

Comments

Barry Loberfeld|8.11.09 @ 8:52AM|#

FROM HERE:

Heilbroner is hardly alone in recognizing Marxism's need to eliminate the "central economic freedom of bourgeois society" -- and its demanumitting nature. That Marxism resubjects men to a "slave state" was noted by Arnold Ruge -- in 1844, with that conclusion becoming more inescapable each year. As Richard Pipes observes:

The concept of compulsory labor was embedded in Marxism. Article 8 of the Communist Manifesto of 1848 called for the "equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture." Obviously, in a regimented economy, without a free commodity market, it made no sense to maintain a free market in labor services.

And the Bolshevik theoretician most influenced by Marx in these matters agreed:

In the era of serfdom it was not so that gendarmes stood over every serf. There were certain economic forms to which the peasant had grown accustomed, which, at the time, he regarded as just.... It is said that compulsory labor is unproductive. This means that the whole socialist economy is doomed to be scrapped, because there is no other way of attaining socialism except through the command allocation of the entire labor force by the economic center.... Forced serf labor did not emerge because of the ill will of the feudal class: it was a progressive phenomenon.

With expositors like Trotsky, socialism doesn't need critics like Hayek. Indeed, it is almost impossible for any honest thinker not to see that Marx was leading mankind on a road back to serfdom, e.g., the classic The Liberal Tradition in America's Louis Hartz, who recognized that of course socialism wasn't the innovation of a proletariat existentially compelled by an almost animistic "mode of production":

Actually socialism is largely an ideological phenomenon, arising out of the principles of [aristocracy] and the revolutionary liberal revolt against them which the old European order inspired. It is not accidental that America which has uniquely lacked a feudal tradition has uniquely lacked also a socialist tradition. The hidden origin of socialist thought everywhere in the West is to be found in the feudal ethos. The ancien régime inspires Rousseau; both inspire Marx.

It was therefore "no accident" that Marxist neo-feudalist theory translated into Communist neo-feudalist practice.

Solanum|8.11.09 @ 9:12AM|#

Bad guy or not, he got to bang Salma Hayek.

|8.11.09 @ 9:20AM|#

I'd take an axe for a night with Salma.

Cabeza de Vaca|8.11.09 @ 9:25AM|#

"The only good thing that Stalin did/was put an icepick in Trotsky's head."

Found this quote in the Reason archives. Not sure who wrote it, but well done.

!</ </a>|8.11.09 @ 9:49AM|#

I never did quite get the ifferent stripes of Communists all using 'Trotskyite' as a slam against others Socialists that don't agree with them.

Any Commie lurkers out there who can enlighten me/us?

Spoonman|8.11.09 @ 9:57AM|#

My girlfriend declares me a "communist" when I'm wearing a button-down or collared shirt when I'm not seeing not-us people, which has earned the (highly preferred) undershirts the designation "trotskyite shirts".

|8.11.09 @ 10:06AM|#

Spoonman,

Just tell her that excessive public hair on women is the ugliest form of collectivism.

Spoonman|8.11.09 @ 10:11AM|#

SugarFree, I'm a fan of her not liking me wearing clothes.

|8.11.09 @ 10:14AM|#

Ah, then you are right to not want to generate any perverse incentives.

Warty|8.11.09 @ 10:22AM|#

But does she have a unibrow, Spoonman?

John|8.11.09 @ 10:22AM|#

I've never understood the strange sympathy that conservatives sometimes feel for Trotsky. He was Stalin lite, and that's not saying much in his favor.

Mad Max|8.11.09 @ 10:29AM|#

John,

Have the liberal hatemongers gotten to you, too? Don't you realize that the affinity the neocons have for Trotsky is simply a myth?

The fact that a program by *National Review,* hosted by someone from the Hoover Institution, features an openly atheist ex-Trotskyite who still hasn't gotten over his love affair with Leon, proves nothing.

!</ </a>|8.11.09 @ 10:36AM|#

I've never understood the strange sympathy that conservatives sometimes feel for Trotsky and FDR. He was They were Stalin lite, and that's not saying much in his their favor.

I agree stronger with this version.

|8.11.09 @ 10:58AM|#

If Trotsky got to Stalin with an ice pick first, we'd live in a world where there would be discussions of whether Stalin was the good one.

NeonCat|8.11.09 @ 11:05AM|#

It was an ice AXE, not an ice pick - the kind used for mountain climbing.

Even communists understand the benefits of leverage.

No More Heros Anymore|8.11.09 @ 11:24AM|#

What ever happened to Leon Trotsky?
He got an ice pick
That made his ears burn

Abdul|8.11.09 @ 11:24AM|#

Trotsky has met my definition of a good Communist ever since the ice axe incident.

Franklin Harris|8.11.09 @ 11:27AM|#

If Trotsky got to Stalin with an ice pick first, we'd live in a world where there would be discussions of whether Stalin was the good one.

This.

|8.11.09 @ 12:07PM|#

I'm currently reading "The Russian Revolution" by Richard Pipes.

Editorial in Izvestiia upon the organization of a Red army:
"through war lies also the road to socialism"

the book also mentions that Tristky did not want WW1 to end as it was helping him consolidate power. This also coincides with the fact that Trotsky wass friends with some wall street elite in NYC who also were in favor of extended warfare. The same guys who are today's neocons.

|8.11.09 @ 12:22PM|#

I meant to say the russian civil war ...not WW1

"Trotsky spent the rest of the Civil War transforming the Red Army from a ragtag network of small and fiercely independent detachments into a large and disciplined military machine, through forced conscription, party controlled blocking squads, compulsory obedience and officers chosen by the leadership instead of the rank and file. He defended these positions throughout his life."


this seems to be neo-con jackoff material.

|8.11.09 @ 12:25PM|#

"The only good thing that Stalin did/was put an icepick in Trotsky's head."

Doesn't he also deserve a little credit for beating Hitler?

|8.11.09 @ 12:26PM|#

I've never understood the strange sympathy that conservatives sometimes feel for Trotsky.

Please don't confuse neoconservatives with conservatives.

|8.11.09 @ 12:37PM|#

Just tell her that excessive public hair on women is the ugliest form of collectivism.

That particular instance of RC'z Law has a strangely Muslim tone to it, SugarFree. Is there something your subconscious wants to share?

This also coincides with the fact that Trotsky wass friends with some wall street elite in NYC who also were in favor of extended warfare. The same guys who are today's neocons.

I doubt any 1918-era Wall Street elites are even alive today.

|8.11.09 @ 12:39PM|#

R C Dean,

I've had problems with that since I was a kid and had a anatomy picture book. The genital area was blank and just said "Pubic area." I always read it as "public." And people wonder why I'm so screwed up...

alan|8.11.09 @ 12:43PM|#

Mad Max | August 11, 2009, 10:29am | #
John,

Have the liberal hatemongers gotten to you, too? Don't you realize that the affinity the neocons have for Trotsky is simply a myth?

The fact that a program by *National Review,* hosted by someone from the Hoover Institution, features an openly atheist ex-Trotskyite who still hasn't gotten over his love affair with Leon, proves nothing.

Max, you really don't know what you are talking about here. Even in the late 80's the Marxist ideology within Neoconservative thinking was a given even to Neo-Cons who spoke of it quite openly. I recall reading the Social Democrat Sidney Hook in both Commentary and the National Review at the time, and he was a huge influence on the cultural thinking of Neo-Cons.

It was not a controversial matter to note this at the time. The backtracking by today's celebs in the NeoCon orbit is of recent vintage.

Here is a tiny list. You may complain that many were 'former' Marxist, but none of them ever embraced any thing remotely close to American libertarianism, and at best, like Irving Kristol, only respected the free markets to the extent of its efficiencies but was otherwise hostile to them.

It is not like Hitchens is the only one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Schwartz_%28journalist%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanan_Makiya

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Hook

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Shachtman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeane_Kirkpatrick

And my personal favorite,

James Burnham, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Burnham

for whom I actually have a great deal of admiration. His Managerial Revolution is still great stuff to read, not to mention his classic of the Cold War, The Suicide of the West. His thinking, while very patriotic American was still Marxian even when he switched sides after a falling out with Trotsky.

For those Neo-Cons who tend to scoff at conspiracy theories, I throw their own Burnham's Web of Subversion right back at them which his detailed account of a Stalinist conspiracy with its web cloaking all of Washington.

When you consider Burnham an actor in the political field in his own right, it is interesting to see which side gets played upon, and who does the playing.

|8.11.09 @ 1:16PM|#

National Review's Uncommon Knowledge interview program Uncommon Knowledge, hosted by Peter Robinson, is one of the best video shows on the interwebs. The format is great, the guests well-informed, the conversation civil but intensely engaged.

Right. Peter Robinson will not shut up, and of course everyone on the right has a hard on for Christopher Hitchens so he's given far too much time to give his politics-as-personal take on Trotsky. Ugh.

|8.11.09 @ 3:32PM|#

I link to a search??

jesus that is lazy...by the way nothing in that search actaully shows why Trotsky is a bad guy.

|8.11.09 @ 3:39PM|#

I never did quite get the ifferent stripes of Communists all using 'Trotskyite' as a slam against others Socialists that don't agree with them.

I think Trotsky never got around to actaully being leader of a commi state so he gets a pass for all the butchery Stalin gets pinned with.

Pretty much its a "Oh i am not a bad commi i am a good Trotsky Commi"

Mad Max|8.11.09 @ 10:25PM|#

alan,

Do I need to insert sarcasm tags? The Wikipedia article on sarcasm says that some people use this mark to indicate sarcasm: ؟

So let's try it:

؟ Have the liberal hatemongers gotten to you, too? Don't you realize that the affinity the neocons have for Trotsky is simply a myth? ؟

؟ The fact that a program by *National Review,* hosted by someone from the Hoover Institution, features an openly atheist ex-Trotskyite who still hasn't gotten over his love affair with Leon, proves nothing. ؟

Or try it this way:



Have the liberal hatemongers gotten to you, too? Don't you realize that the affinity the neocons have for Trotsky is simply a myth?

The fact that a program by *National Review,* hosted by someone from the Hoover Institution, features an openly atheist ex-Trotskyite who still hasn't gotten over his love affair with Leon, proves nothing.

[

Mad Max|8.11.09 @ 10:26PM|#

Whoa, let's try that last one again:



Have the liberal hatemongers gotten to you, too? Don't you realize that the affinity the neocons have for Trotsky is simply a myth?

The fact that a program by *National Review,* hosted by someone from the Hoover Institution, features an openly atheist ex-Trotskyite who still hasn't gotten over his love affair with Leon, proves nothing.

Mad Max|8.11.09 @ 10:28PM|#

It's like magic! The computer rendered my sarcasm tags invisible!

alan|8.12.09 @ 12:33AM|#

Mad Max,

well played, sir, well played. My apologies, and I'm a bit late with that because I'm enjoying what people are discussing on another thread with a little bowl of popcorn in my hands.

My internet kung-fu may need shaping up, if I didn't recognize sarcasm right off, esp. with that line about Hitchens. I must have been a sleep at the wheel not to realize what you would think of that bloated jerk.

|8.12.09 @ 10:23AM|#

There's a related post over at The Volokh Conspiracy:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_09-2009_08_15.shtml#1250038247