Wikipedia

Anti-Stalinist left

(Redirected from Anti-Stalinist Left)

The anti-Stalinist left is a term that refers to various kinds of Marxist political movements that oppose Joseph Stalin, Stalinism, Neo-Stalinism and the system of governance that Stalin implemented as leader of the Soviet Union between 1924 and 1953. This term also refers to the high ranking political figures and governmental programs that opposed Joseph Stalin and his form of communism, such as Leon Trotsky and other traditional Marxists within the Left Opposition. In Western historiography, Stalin is considered one of the worst and most notorious figures in modern history.[1][2][3][4]

In recent years, it may also refer to left and centre-left wing opposition to dictatorships, cults of personality, totalitarianism and police states, all being features commonly attributed to Marxist-Leninist regimes that took inspiration from Stalinism such as the regimes of Kim Il Sung, Enver Hoxha and others, including in the former Eastern Bloc.[5][6][7] Some of the notable movements with the anti-Stalinist left have been Trotskyism and Titoism, anarchism and libertarian socialism, left communism and libertarian Marxism, the Right Opposition within the Communist movement, and democratic socialism and social democracy.

Revolutionary era critiques (pre-1924)

edit
Main articles: Left-wing uprisings against the Bolsheviks, Kronstadt rebellion, Left communism, and libertarian Marxism

A large majority of the political left was initially enthusiastic about the Bolshevik Revolution in the revolutionary era. In the beginning, the Bolsheviks and their policies received much support because the movement was originally painted by Lenin and other leaders in a libertarian light.[8] However, as more politically repressive methods were used, the Bolsheviks steadily lost support from many anarchists and revolutionaries.[8] Prominent anarchist communists and libertarian Marxists such as Sylvia Pankhurst, Rosa Luxemburg, and later, Emma Goldman were among the first left-wing critics of Bolshevism.[8][9]

Rosa Luxemburg was heavily critical of the methods that Bolsheviks used to seize power in the October Revolution claiming that it was "not a movement of the people but of the bourgeoisie."[10] Primarily, Luxemburg's critiques were based on the manner in which the Bolsheviks suppressed anarchist movements.[11] In one of her essays published titled, "The Nationalities Question in the Russian Revolution", she explains:[10]

"To be sure, in all these cases, it was really not the "people" who engaged in these reactionary policies, but only the bourgeois and petit bourgeois classes, who – in sharpest opposition to their own proletarian masses – perverted the "national right of self-determination" into an instrument of their counter-revolutionary class policies."

 
Rosa Luxemburg's political legacy was criticized by Stalin after he rose to power.

Because of her early criticisms toward the Bolsheviks, her legacy was vilified by Stalin once he rose to power.[12] According to Trotsky, Stalin was "often lying about her and vilifying her" in the eyes of the public.[12]

The relations between the anarchists and the Bolsheviks worsened in Soviet Russia due to the suppression of movements like the Kronstadt rebellion and the Makhnovist movement.[8] The Kronstadt rebellion (March 1921) was a key moment during which many libertarian and democratic leftists broke with the Bolsheviks, laying the foundations for the anti-Stalinist left. The American anti-Stalinist socialist Daniel Bell later said:

Every radical generation, it is said, has its Kronstadt. For some it was the Moscow Trials, for others the Nazi-Soviet Pact, for still others Hungary (The Raik Trial or 1956), Czechoslovakia (the defenestration of Masaryk in 1948 or the Prague Spring of 1968), the Gulag, Cambodia, Poland (and there will be more to come). My Kronstadt was Kronstadt.[13][14][15][16]

Another key anti-Stalinist, Louis Fischer, later coined the term "Kronstadt moment" for this.[14]

Like Rosa Luxemburg, Emma Goldman was primarily critical of Lenin's style of leadership, but her focus eventually transferred over to Stalin and his policies as he rose to power.[8] In her essay titled "There Is No Communism in Russia", Goldman details how Stalin "abused the power of his position" and formed a dictatorship.[8] In this text she states:[8]

"In other words, by the Central Committee and Politbureau of the Party, both of them controlled absolutely by one man, Stalin. To call such a dictatorship, this personal autocracy more powerful and absolute than any Czar's, by the name of Communism seems to me the acme of imbecility."

Emma Goldman asserted that there was "not the least sign in Soviet Russia even of authoritarian, State Communism."[8] Emma Goldman remained critical of Stalin and the Bolshevik's style of governance up until her death in 1940.[17]

Overall, the left communists and anarchists were critical of the statist, repressive, and totalitarian nature of Marxism–Leninism which eventually carried over to Stalinism and Stalin's policy in general.[17] Conversely, Trotsky argued that he and Lenin had intended to lift the ban on the opposition parties such as the Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries as soon as the economic and social conditions of Soviet Russia had improved.[18]

According to historian Marcel Liebman, Lenin's wartime measures such as banning opposition parties was prompted by the fact that several political parties either took up arms against the new Soviet government, or participated in sabotage, collaboration with the deposed Tsarists, or made assassination attempts against Lenin and other Bolshevik leaders. In one incident in Baku, the British military, once invited in, proceeded to execute members of the Bolshevik Party who had peacefully stood down from the Soviet when they failed to win the elections. [19]

Bolshevik era critiques of Stalin (1924–1930)

edit
 
Bolshevik revolutionary Leon Trotsky was exiled by Stalin in February 1929.[20] Trotsky would become the most vocal and prominent critic of Stalinism in the early 20th century.
Main articles: Old Bolsheviks, Left Opposition, United Opposition (Soviet Union), Right Opposition, and Third Period

One of the last attempts of the Right Opposition to resist Stalin was the Ryutin affair in 1932, where a manifesto against the policy of collectivization was circulated; it openly called for "The Liquidation of the dictatorship of Stalin and his clique".[21] Later, some rightists joined a secret bloc with Leon Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev to oppose Stalin. Historian Pierre Broué stated that it dissolved in early 1933.[22]

 
A young Nikolai Bukharin, whose ideas formed the ideological framework of the Right Opposition

Leon Trotsky and Stalin disagreed on issues of industrialization and revolutionary tactics.[23] Trotsky believed that there was a need for super-industrialization while Stalin believed in a rapid surge and collectivization, as written in his 5-year plan.[23] Trotsky believed an accelerated global surge to be the answer to institute communism globally.[23] Trotsky was critical of Stalin's methods because he believed that the slower pace of collectivization and industrialization to be ineffective in the long run.[23] According to historian Sheila Fitzpatrick, the scholarly consensus is that Stalin appropriated the position of the Left Opposition on such matters as industrialisation and collectivisation.[24] Trotsky also disagreed with Stalin's thesis of Socialism in One Country,[23] believing that the institution of revolution in one state or country would not be as effective as a global revolution.[25] He also criticized how the Socialism in One Country thesis broke with the internationalist traditions of Marxism.[26] Trotskyists believed that a permanent global revolution was the most effective method to ensure the system of communism was enacted worldwide.[25] According to his biographer, Isaac Deutscher, Trotsky explicitly supported proletarian internationalism but was opposed to achieving this via military conquest as seen with his documented opposition to the war with Poland in 1920, proposed armistice with the Entente and temperance with staging anti-British revolts in the Middle East.[27]

He is an unprincipled intriguer, who subordinates everything to the preservation of his own power. He changes his theory according to whom he needs to get rid of.

Bukharin on Stalin's theoretical position, 1928.[28]

Overall, Trotsky and his followers were very critical of the lack of internal debate and discussion among Stalinist organizations along with their politically repressive methods.[25][26] In 1936, Trotsky called for the restoration of the right of criticism in areas such as economic matters, the revitalization of the trade unions and the free elections of the Soviet parties.[29] Trotsky also opposed the policy of forced collectivisation under Stalin and favoured a voluntary, gradual approach towards agricultural production[30][31] with greater tolerance for the rights of Soviet Ukrainians.[32][33]

edit
Main articles: Great Purge, Moscow Trials, Dewey Commission, Fourth International, Spanish Revolution of 1936, and Spanish Civil War
 
A Diego Rivera mural (Man, Controller of the Universe) depicts Trotsky with Marx and Engels as a true champion of the workers' struggle.
 
A widely publicized election poster of the Social Democratic Party of Germany from 1932, with the Three Arrows symbol representing resistance against reactionary conservatism, Nazism and Stalinism, alongside the slogan "Against Papen, Hitler, Thälmann"

"With all the greater frankness can I state how, in my view, the Soviet government should act in case of a fascist upheaval in Germany. In their place, I would, at the very moment of receiving telegraphic news of this event, sign a mobilisation order calling up several age groups. In the face of a mortal enemy, when the logic of the situation points to inevitable war, it would be irresponsible and unpardonable to give that enemy time to establish himself, to consolidate his positions, to conclude alliances… and to work out the plan to attack.."

Trotsky describing the military measures he would have taken in place of Stalin to negate the rise of Hitler in 1932.[34]

From the 1930s and beyond, Leon Trotsky and his American supporter James P. Cannon described the Soviet Union as a "degenerated workers' state", the revolutionary gains of which should be defended against imperialist aggression despite the emergence of a gangster-like ruling stratum, the party bureaucracy. While defending the Russian Revolution from outside aggression, Trotsky, Cannon and their followers at the same time urged an anti-bureaucratic political revolution against Stalinism to be conducted by the Soviet working class themselves.

In 1932 International Revolutionary Marxist Centre was founded as an international association of left-wing parties which rejected both more moderate mainstream social democracy and the Stalinist Third International.

During the 1930s, critics of Stalin, both inside and outside the Soviet Union, were under heavy attack by the party. The Great Purge occurred from 1936 to 1938 as a result of growing internal tensions between the critics of Stalin but eventually turned into an all-out cleansing of "anti-Soviet elements".[35] A majority of those targeted were peasants and minorities, but anarchists and democratic socialist opponents were also targeted for their criticisms of the severely repressive political techniques that Stalin used.[26] Many were executed or sent to Gulag prison camps extrajudicially.[35] It is estimated that during the Great Purge, casualties ranged from 600,000 to over 1 million people.[35]

Concurrently, fascism was rising across Europe. The Soviet leadership turned to popular front policy during the 1930s, in which Communists worked with liberal and even conservative allies to defend against a presumed Fascist assault. One of the more notable conflicts could be seen in the Spanish Civil War. While the whole left fought alongside the Republican faction, within it there were sharp conflicts between the Communists, on the one hand, and anarchists, Trotskyists and the POUM on the other.[36][37] Support for the latter became a key issue for the anti-Stalinist left internationally, as exemplified by the ILP Contingent in the International Brigades, George Orwell's book Homage to Catalonia, the periodical Spain and the World, and various pamphlets by Emma Goldman, Rudolf Rocker and others.[38][39][40]

In other countries too, non-Communist left parties competed with Stalinism as the same time as they fought the right. The Three Arrows symbol was adopted by the German Social Democrats to signify this multi-pronged conflict.[41]

Mid-century critiques (1939–1953)

edit
See also: Titoism

Dissidents in the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party, witnessing the collaboration of Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler in the invasion and the partition of Poland and the Soviet invasion of the Baltic states, argued that the Soviet Union had actually emerged as a new social formation, which was neither capitalist nor socialist. Adherents of that view, espoused most explicitly by Max Shachtman and closely following the writings of James Burnham and Bruno Rizzi, argued that the Soviet bureaucratic collectivist regime had in fact entered one of two great imperialist "camps" aiming to wage war to divide the world. The first of the imperialist camps, which Stalin and the Soviet Union were said to have joined as a directly participating ally, was headed by Nazi Germany and included most notably Fascist Italy. In that original analysis, the "second imperialist camp" was headed by England and France, actively supported by the United States.[42]

Shachtman and his cothinkers argued for the establishment of a broad "third camp" to unite the workers and colonial peoples of the world in revolutionary struggle against the imperialism of the German-Soviet-Italian and the Anglo-American-French blocs. Shachtman concluded that the Soviet policy was one of imperialism and that the best result for the international working class would be the defeat of the Soviet Union in the course of its military incursions. Conversely, Trotsky argued that a defeat for the Soviet Union would strengthen capitalism and reduce the possibilities for political revolution.[43]

 
Tito was a heavy critic of Stalin after their split in 1948.

Josip Broz Tito became one of the most prominent leftist critics of Stalin after World War II. The Communist Party of Yugoslavia and the policies that were established was originally closely modeled on that of the Soviet Union.[44] In the eyes of many, "Yugoslavia followed perfectly down the path of Soviet Marxism".[44] At the start, Tito was even considered "Stalin's most faithful pupil".[45] However, as the Yugoslavian Communist Party grew in size and power, it became a secondary communist powerhouse in Europe.[44] This eventually caused Tito to try to operate independently, which created tensions with Stalin and the Soviet Union.[44] In 1948, the two leaders split apart because of Yugoslavian independent foreign policy and ideological differences.[44][45]

Tito and his followers began a political effort to develop a new brand of socialism that would be both Marxist–Leninist in nature yet anti-Stalinist in practice.[44] The result was the Yugoslav system of socialist workers' self-management.[44] This led to the philosophy of organizing of every production-related activity in society into "self-managed units".[44] This came to be known as Titoism. Tito was critical of Stalin because he believed Stalin became "un-Marxian".[44] In the pamphlet titled "On New Roads to Socialism" one of Tito's high ranking aides states:[44]

"The indictment is long indeed: unequal relations with and exploitation of the other socialist countries, un-Marxian treatment of the role of the leader, inequality in pay greater than in bourgeois democracies, ideological promotion of Great Russian nationalism and subordination of other peoples, a policy of division of spheres of influence with the capitalist world, monopolization of the interpretation of Marxism, the abandonment of all democratic forms..."

Tito disagreed on the primary characteristics that defined Stalin's policy and style of leadership. Tito wanted to form his own version of "pure" socialism without many of the "un-Marxian" traits of Stalinism.[45] Tito has also accused Stalinist USSR's hegemonic practices in Eastern Europe and economic exploitation of the Soviet satellite states as imperialist.[46]

Other foreign leftist critics also came about during this time in Europe and America. Some of these critics include George Orwell, H. N. Brailsford,[47] Fenner Brockway,[48][49] the Young People's Socialist League, and later Michael Harrington,[50] and the Independent Labour Party in Britain. There were also several anti-Stalinist socialists in France, including writers such as Simone Weil[51] and Albert Camus[52] as well as the group around Marceau Pivert.

In America, the New York Intellectuals around the journals New Leader, Partisan Review, and Dissent were among other critics. In general, these figures criticized Soviet Communism as a form of "totalitarianism which in some ways mirrored fascism."[53][54] A key text for this movement was The God That Failed, edited by British socialist Richard Crossman in 1949, featuring contributions by Louis Fischer, André Gide, Arthur Koestler, Ignazio Silone, Stephen Spender and Richard Wright, about their journeys to anti-Stalinism.

Post-Stalinist critiques (1953–1959)

edit
Main articles: De-Stalinization and Predictions of the collapse of the Soviet Union

Following the death of Joseph Stalin, many prominent leaders of Stalin's cabinet sought to seize power. As a result, a Soviet triumvirate was formed between Lavrenty Beria, Georgy Malenkov, and Nikita Khrushchev. The primary goal of the new leadership was to ensure stability in the country while leadership positions within the government were sorted out. Some of the new policy implemented that was antithetical of Stalinism included policy that was free from terror, that decentralized power, and collectivized leadership. After this long power struggle within the Soviet government, Nikita Khrushchev came into power. Once in power, Khrushchev was quick to denounce Stalin and his methods of governance.[55] In a secret speech delivered to the 20th party congress in 1956, Khrushchev was critical of the "cult of personality of Stalin" and his selfishness as a leader:[55]

"Comrades, the cult of the individual acquired such monstrous size chiefly because Stalin himself, using all conceivable methods, supported the glorification of his own person. This is supported by numerous facts."

Khrushchev also revealed to the congress the truth behind Stalin's methods of repression. In addition, he explained that Stalin had rounded up "thousands of people and sent them into a huge system of political work camps" called gulags.[55] The truths revealed in this speech came to the surprise of many, but this fell into the plan of Khrushchev. This speech tainted Stalin's name which resulted in a significant loss of faith in his policy from government officials and citizens.[55]

During this Cold War era, the American non-communist left (NCL) grew.[56] The NCL was critical of the continuation of Stalinist Communism because of aspects such as famine and repression,[8] and as later discovered, the covert intervention of Soviet state interests in the Communist Party USA (CPUSA).[57]: 31  Members of the NCL were often ex-communists, such as the historian Theodore Draper whose views shifted from socialism to liberalism, and socialists who became disillusioned with the communist movement. Anti-Stalinist Trotskyists also wrote about their experiences during this time, such as Irving Howe and Lewis Coser.[57]: 29–30  These perspectives inspired the creation of the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), as well as international journals like Der Monat and Encounter; it also influenced existing publications such as the Partisan Review.[58] According to John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, the CCF was covertly funded by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to support intellectuals with pro-democratic and anti-communist stances.[57]: 66–69  The Communist Party USA lost much of its influence in the first years of the Cold War due to the revelation of Stalinist crimes by Khrushchev.[59] Although the Soviet Communist Party was no longer officially Stalinist, the Communist Party USA received a substantial subsidy from the USSR from 1959 until 1989, and consistently supported official Soviet policies such as intervention in Hungary and Czechoslovakia. The Soviet funding ended in 1989 when Gus Hall condemned the market initiatives of Mikhail Gorbachev.[60]

From the late 1950s, several European socialist and communist parties, such as in Denmark and Sweden, shifted away from orthodox communism which they connected to Stalinism that was in recent history.[61]: 240  The emergence of the New Left was influenced to some degree by the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956 and increasing amount of information available about Stalinist terror.[61]: 285  Albert Camus criticized Soviet communism, while many leftists saw the Soviet Union as emblematic of "state capitalism".[62] After Stalin's death and the Khrushchev Thaw, study and opposition to Stalinism became a part of historiography. The historian Moshe Lewin cautioned not to categorize the entire history of the Soviet Union as Stalinist, but also emphasized that Stalin's bureaucracy had permanently established "bureaucratic absolutism", resembling old monarchy, in the Soviet Union.[63]

Castrism critiques (1959-1968)

edit
Main article: Betrayal thesis

After Fidel Castro's visit to the United States in 1959, various American academics began publishing essays and books on the character of the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro. Some arguing that Castro was veering away from the goals of the Cuban Revolution, and towards Stalinism. Others argued that the criticisms of Castro were unwarranted.[64] Throughout 1960, many articles were published in the socialist Monthly Review journal, arguing against any rumored "betrayal" of the Cuban Revolution. These articles were influenced by the writings of socialists Paul Sweezy and Leo Huberman, who visited Cuba in 1959.[65]

In 1961, the historian Theodore Draper famously published in the anti-Stalinist Encounter magazine, that Castro had betrayed the Cuban Revolution, and that Castro could bring international war. The article was passed to John F. Kennedy, who considered it before approving the Bay of Pigs Invasion.[66] According to Draper, the Cuban Revolution was a middle class movement for democracy. Fidel Castro, after coming to power, began pursuing a wave of land reforms in 1960 and 1961. During this time, Castro drifted away from his original democratic goals. Eventually, Castro heavily integrated Communist officials into his provisional government, and by Draper's conception, Castro had abandoned the democratic goals of the Cuban Revolution, and his own land reform plans of 1960–1961.[67]

Draper considered his betrayal thesis to be a criticism of the accounts of socialists like Paul Sweezy and Leo Huberman who were sympathetic to Castro. Draper attempted to present a Marxist interpretation of Castroism, that made analogies to Trotskyist conceptions of Stalinism as a betrayer of the Russian Revolution.[68]

Draper's work as a historian of the Cuban Revolution brought him to the attention of the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace, an anti-communist think tank located at Stanford University.[69] Draper accepted a Hoover Institution fellowship and remained there until 1968, at which time he departed, ill at ease with the growing conservatism of the institution.[69] Draper moved across country to accept a similar post at the Institute for Advanced Study located at Princeton University, where he focused his scholarship on the question of race relations.[69]

Notable figures

edit

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^ Dunn, Dennis J. (1 January 1998). Caught Between Roosevelt & Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow. University Press of Kentucky. pp. 6, 271. ISBN 978-0-8131-7074-9.
  2. ^ Creveld, Martin van (26 August 1999). The Rise and Decline of the State. Cambridge University Press. p. 402. ISBN 978-0-521-65629-0.
  3. ^ Taylor, Jeremy E. (28 January 2021). Visual Histories of Occupation: A Transcultural Dialogue. Bloomsbury Academic. p. 239. ISBN 978-1-350-14220-6.
  4. ^ Service, Robert (2005). Stalin: A Biography. Harvard University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-674-01697-2.
  5. ^ Dennis H Wrong The American Left and Cuba Archived 23 May 2018 at the Wayback Machine Commentary FEB. 1, 1962
  6. ^ Julius Jacobson Reflections on Fascism and Communism. Socialist Perspectives, Edited by Phyllis Jacobson and Julius Jacobson, 1983.
  7. ^ Samuel Farber, Cuba since the Revolution of 1959: A Critical Assessment Archived 23 May 2018 at the Wayback Machine, Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2011
  8. ^ a b c d e f g h i Goldman, Emma (1935). "There Is No Communism in Russia". The Anarchist Library. Archived from the original on 3 October 2012. Retrieved 13 March 2021.
  9. ^ Schurer, H. (1962). "Some Reflections on Rosa Luxemburg and the Bolshevik Revolution". The Slavonic and East European Review. 40 (95): 356–372. JSTOR 4205366.
  10. ^ a b "The Nationalities Question in the Russian Revolution (Rosa Luxemburg, 1918)". Libcom.org. 11 July 2006. Retrieved 2 April 2021
  11. ^ Weitz, Eric D. (1994). ""Rosa Luxemburg Belongs to Us!" German Communism and the Luxemburg Legacy". Central European History. 27 (1): 27–64. doi:10.1017/S0008938900009675. JSTOR 4546390. S2CID 144709093.
  12. ^ a b Trotsky, Leon (June 1932). "Hands Off Rosa Luxemburg!". International Marxist Tendency.
  13. ^ Bell, Daniel. "Arguing the World – The New York Intellectuals". PBS. Archived from the original on 16 April 2021. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  14. ^ a b "The Hitchens out-takes". Prospect Magazine. 24 May 2008. Archived from the original on 23 April 2021. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  15. ^ "Critical Crossings". UC Press E-Books Collection, 1982–2004. Archived from the original on 23 April 2021. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  16. ^ "Remembering Daniel Bell". Dissent Magazine. 27 September 2012. Archived from the original on 23 April 2021. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  17. ^ a b Goldman, Emma (1988). Living my life. Pluto Press. OCLC 166081114.
  18. ^ Deutscher, Isaac (5 January 2015). The Prophet: The Life of Leon Trotsky. Verso Books. p. 528. ISBN 978-1-78168-721-5.
  19. ^ Liebman, Marcel (1985). Leninism Under Lenin. Merlin Press. pp. 1–348. ISBN 978-0-85036-261-9.
  20. ^ "Stalin banishes Trotsky".
  21. ^ Ryutin, Martemyan N. (2010). The Ryutin Platform: Stalin and the Crisis of Proletarian Dictatorship : Platform of the "Union of Marxists-Leninists". Seribaan. ISBN 978-81-87492-28-3. Archived from the original on 23 April 2021. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  22. ^ "Pierre Broué: The "Bloc" of the Oppositions against Stalin (January 1980)". www.marxists.org. Archived from the original on 12 August 2021. Retrieved 7 August 2020.
  23. ^ a b c d e "L.D. Trotsky: The New Course in the Economy of the Soviet Union (March 1930)". www.marxists.org. Archived from the original on 19 April 2021. Retrieved 19 April 2021.
  24. ^ Fitzpatrick, Sheila (22 April 2010). "The Old Man". London Review of Books. 32 (8). ISSN 0260-9592.
  25. ^ a b c Martin Oppenheimer The "Russian Question" and the U.S. Left, Digger Journal, 2014
  26. ^ a b c Harap, Louis (1989). The Rise and Decline of the Anti-Stalinist Left from the 1930s to the 1980s. Guilford Publication.
  27. ^ Deutscher, Isaac (5 January 2015). The Prophet: The Life of Leon Trotsky. Verso Books. pp. 472–473. ISBN 978-1-78168-721-5.
  28. ^ Sakwa, Richard (17 August 2005). The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Union. Routledge. p. 165. ISBN 978-1-134-80602-7.
  29. ^ Trotsky, Leon (1991). The Revolution Betrayed: What is the Soviet Union and where is it Going?. Mehring Books. p. 218. ISBN 978-0-929087-48-1.
  30. ^ Beilharz, Peter (19 November 2019). Trotsky, Trotskyism and the Transition to Socialism. Routledge. pp. 1–206. ISBN 978-1-000-70651-2.
  31. ^ Rubenstein, Joshua (2011). Leon Trotsky : a revolutionary's life. New Haven : Yale University Press. p. 161. ISBN 978-0-300-13724-8.
  32. ^ Deutscher, Isaac (5 January 2015). The Prophet: The Life of Leon Trotsky. Verso Books. p. 637. ISBN 978-1-78168-721-5.
  33. ^ "Leon Trotsky: Problem of the Ukraine (1939)". www.marxists.org.
  34. ^ Deutscher, Isaac (2015). The Prophet: The Life of Leon Trotsky. Verso Books. pp. 1192–1193. ISBN 978-1-78168-560-0.
  35. ^ a b c Ellman, Michael (November 2002). "Soviet Repression Statistics: Some Comments". Europe-Asia Studies. 54 (7): 1151–1172. doi:10.1080/0966813022000017177. ISSN 0966-8136. S2CID 43510161.
  36. ^ Beevor, Antony (2006). The battle for Spain: the Spanish Civil War 1936–1939. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 978-0-297-84832-5. OCLC 64312268.
  37. ^ Howson, Gerald (1999). Arms for Spain: the untold story of the Spanish Civil War (1st ed.). New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 0-312-24177-1. OCLC 42706615.
  38. ^ Vérité, La (21 October 1936). "Spanish Revolution". English Language Paper of the POUM. Retrieved 19 June 2022.
  39. ^ Merilyn Moos, Anti-Nazi Exiles German Socialists in Britain and their Shifting Alliances 1933–1945 (London: Community Languages, 2021)
  40. ^ a b Høgsbjerg, Christian (2013). "'A Kind of Bible of Trotskyism': Reflections on C.L.R. James's World Revolution". The CLR James Journal. 19 (1/2). Philosophy Documentation Center: 243–275. doi:10.5840/clrjames2013191/214. ISSN 2167-4256. JSTOR 26752040. OCLC 8289946512. Retrieved 19 June 2022.
  41. ^ Potthoff, Heinrich; Faulenbach, Bernd (1998). Sozialdemokraten und Kommunisten nach Nationalsozialismus und Krieg: zur historischen Einordnung der Zwangsvereinigung. Klartext. p. 27.
  42. ^ See for example "Against Both War Camps — For the Camp of World Labor!" and the May Day 1940 manifesto of the Workers Party, the political offshoot of the SWP established by Burnham, Shachtman and Martin Abern in April 1940 (Labor Action, "Special May Day Preview Number", May 1, 1940, p. 1).
  43. ^ A series of sharply critical articles and letters from Trotsky's debates with Shachtman was published posthumously under the title In Defense of Marxism. Cannon's polemics against Burnham and Shachtman are contained in the book The Struggle for a Proletarian Party.
  44. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Macridis, Roy (1952). "Stalinism and the Meaning of Titoism". World Politics. 4 (2): 219–238. doi:10.2307/2009046. ISSN 0043-8871. JSTOR 2009046. S2CID 154384077. Archived from the original on 19 April 2021. Retrieved 19 April 2021.
  45. ^ a b c Mehta, Coleman (2011). "The CIA Confronts the Tito–Stalin Split, 1948–1951". Journal of Cold War Studies. 13 (1): 101–145. doi:10.1162/JCWS_a_00070. ISSN 1520-3972. JSTOR 26923606. S2CID 57560689. Archived from the original on 19 April 2021. Retrieved 19 April 2021.
  46. ^ Perović, Jeronim (2007). "The Tito–Stalin split: a reassessment in light of new evidence" (PDF). Journal of Cold War Studies. 9 (2). MIT Press: 32–63. doi:10.1162/jcws.2007.9.2.32. S2CID 57567168.
  47. ^ F. M. Leventhal, The Last Dissenter: H.N. Brailsford and His World, Oxford University Press, 1985, ISBN 0-19-820055-2 (pp. 248–49).
  48. ^ "Brockway ... sought to articulate a socialism distinct from the pragmatism of Labour and the Stalinism of the "Communist Party".David Howell, "Brockway, (Archibald) Fenner, Baron Brockway" in H.C.G. Matthew and Brian Harrison (eds.) Oxford Dictionary of National Biography: From the Earliest Times to the Year 2000. ISBN 0-19-861411-X (Volume Seven, pp. 765–66)
  49. ^ Paul Corthorn, In the shadow of the dictators: the British Left in the 1930s. Tauris Academic Studies, 2006, ISBN 1-85043-843-9, (p. 125).
  50. ^ Isserman, M. (1996), MICHAEL HARRINGTON AND THE VIETNAM WAR: THE FAILURE OF ANTI-STALINISM IN THE 1960S. Peace & Change, 21: 383–408. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0130.1996.tb00279.x
  51. ^ "In August 1933 Weil carried these reflections further in a widely read article in the avant-garde, anti-Stalinist Communist review Revolution proletarienne... John Hellman, Simone Weil:An Introduction to her thought. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1982 ISBN 0-88920-121-8 (p.21)
  52. ^ "From well before the Algerian war the Communists in particular held against Camus not so much his anti-Stalinism as his growing refusal to share political "positions" or get into public arguments..." Quoted in Tony Judt,The Burden of Responsibility: Blum, Camus, Aron, and the French Twentieth Century. University of Chicago Press, 2007 ISBN 0-226-41419-1 (p. 92)
  53. ^ Maurice Isserman Steady Work: Sixty Years of Dissent: A history of Dissent magazine Archived 24 September 2018 at the Wayback Machine, Dissent, January 23, 2014
  54. ^ Wilford, Hugh (2003). "Playing the CIA's Tune? The New Leader and the Cultural Cold War". Diplomatic History. 27 (1). Oxford University Press (OUP): 15–34. doi:10.1111/1467-7709.00337. ISSN 0145-2096.
  55. ^ a b c d "Khrushchev's Secret Speech, 'On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences,' Delivered at the Twentieth Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union," February 25, 1956, History and Public Policy Program Digital Archive, From the Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 84th Congress, 2nd Session (May 22, 1956 – June 11, 1956), C11, Part 7 (June 4, 1956), pp. 9389–9403. http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/115995
  56. ^ "Non-Communist Left Materials". Socialist Pamphlets – UT Libraries Exhibits. 17 August 2020. Archived from the original on 17 December 2021. Retrieved 17 December 2021.
  57. ^ a b c Haynes, John Earl; Klehr, Harvey (2005). In Denial: Historians, Communism & Espionage (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Encounter Books. pp. 29–31, 63, 66–69. ISBN 1-59403-088-X. OCLC 62271849.
  58. ^ Saunders, Frances Stonor (2013). The cultural cold war : the CIA and the world of arts and letters. New York: New Press. ISBN 978-1-59558-914-9. OCLC 826444682.
  59. ^ Cohen, Patricia (20 March 2007). "Communist Party USA Gives Its History to N.Y.U." The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 17 December 2021. Retrieved 17 December 2021.
  60. ^ "The curious survival of the US Communist Party". BBC News. 30 April 2014. Archived from the original on 17 December 2021. Retrieved 17 December 2021.
  61. ^ a b Klimke, Martin; Scharloth, Joachim (2008). 1968 in Europe : a history of protest and activism, 1956–1977 (1st ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 240, 285. ISBN 978-0-230-61190-0. OCLC 314773526.
  62. ^ Sherman, David (2009). Camus. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. p. 4. ISBN 978-1-4443-0328-5. OCLC 476247587. Archived from the original on 17 December 2021. Retrieved 17 December 2021.
  63. ^ "Moshe Lewin – What should be known about USSR?". pages.uoregon.edu. Archived from the original on 17 December 2021. Retrieved 17 December 2021.
  64. ^ Lambe, Jennifer (2024). The Subject of Revolution Between Political and Popular Culture in Cuba. University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 9781469681160.
  65. ^ Rojas, Rafael (2015). Fighting Over Fidel The New York Intellectuals and the Cuban Revolution. Princeton University Press. pp. 97–100. ISBN 9781400880027.
  66. ^ Iber, Patrick (2015). Neither Peace Nor Freedom The Cultural Cold War in Latin America. Harvard University Press. p. 141. ISBN 9780674915145.
  67. ^ Bjarkman, Peter (2018). Fidel Castro and Baseball The Untold Story. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. pp. 19–23. ISBN 9781538110317.
  68. ^ Goose, Van (1993). Where the Boys Are Cuba, Cold War and the Making of a New Left. Verso Books. p. 214. ISBN 9780860916901.
  69. ^ a b c Christopher Lehmann-Haupt, "Theodore Draper, Freelance Historian, Is Dead at 93", The New York Times, February 22, 2006.
  70. ^ "There Is No Communism in Russia". The Anarchist Library. Retrieved 12 August 2023.
  71. ^ Brottman, Mikita (2014). The Great Grisby: Two Thousand Years of Literary, Royal, Philosophical, and Artistic Dog Lovers and Their Exceptional Animals. Harper Collins. p. 18. ISBN 978-0-06-230463-6. Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  72. ^ a b c d e f Birchall, Ian H. (2004). Sartre Against Stalinism. Berghahn Books. pp. 5–8. ISBN 978-1-78238-973-6. Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  73. ^ Brick, Howard (1986). Daniel Bell and the decline of intellectual radicalism : social theory and political reconciliation in the 1940s. Madison, Wis: University of Wisconsin Press. pp. 60–61, 90, 148. ISBN 978-0-299-10550-1. OCLC 12804502.
  74. ^ Wilford, Hugh (2003). "Playing the CIA's Tune? The New Leader and the Cultural Cold War". Diplomatic History. 27 (1). Oxford University Press (OUP): 15–34. doi:10.1111/1467-7709.00337. ISSN 0145-2096.
  75. ^ a b c d Collins, Cath (2010). Post-Transitional Justice: Human Rights Trials in Chile and El Salvador. Penn State Press. p. 206. ISBN 978-0-271-03688-5. Archived from the original on 13 July 2020. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  76. ^ Jean-Paul Sartre; Albert Camus (2004). David Sprintzen; Adrian Van den Hoven (eds.). Sartre and Camus : a historic confrontation. Amherst, N.Y.: Humanity Books. p. 59. ISBN 1-59102-157-X. OCLC 53096794.
  77. ^ Wasserstein, Bernard (2007). Barbarism and civilization: a history of Europe in our time. Oxford University Press. pp. 509. ISBN 978-0-19-873074-3.
  78. ^ a b Michael HOCHGESCHWENDER "The cultural front of the Cold War: the Congress for cultural freedom as an experiment in transnational warfare" Ricerche di storia politica, issue 1/2003, pp. 35–60
  79. ^ a b c Pernicone, Nunzio (2005). "Taking on the Stalinists". Carlo Tresca. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US. pp. 227–236. doi:10.1057/9781403981097_21. ISBN 978-1-349-52834-9.
  80. ^ Birchall, Ian H. (2004). Sartre Against Stalinism. Berghahn Books. p. 17. ISBN 978-1-78238-973-6. Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  81. ^ Milani, Tommaso (15 June 2020). Hendrik de Man and Social Democracy. Springer Nature. p. 109. ISBN 978-3-030-42534-0. Archived from the original on 9 July 2020. Retrieved 22 June 2020.
  82. ^ a b Birchall, Ian H. (2004). Sartre Against Stalinism. Berghahn Books. p. 15. ISBN 978-1-78238-973-6. Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  83. ^ Christopher Phelps On Socialism and Sex: An Introduction Archived 23 May 2018 at the Wayback Machine New Politics Summer 2008 Vol:XII-1 Whole #: 45
  84. ^ Wald, Alan M. (1987). The New York Intellectuals: The Rise and Decline of the Anti-Stalinist Left from the 1930s to the 1980s. UNC Press Books. ISBN 978-0-8078-4169-3. Archived from the original on 13 March 2017. Retrieved 12 June 2020.
  85. ^ Dulles, John W. F. (2011). Brazilian Communism, 1935–1945: Repression During World Upheaval. University of Texas Press. p. 135. ISBN 978-0-292-72951-3. Archived from the original on 11 July 2020. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  86. ^ Collins, Cath (2010). Post-Transitional Justice: Human Rights Trials in Chile and El Salvador. Penn State Press. p. 205. ISBN 978-0-271-03688-5. Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  87. ^ Chapman, Rosemary (1992). Henry Poulaille and Proletarian Literature 1920–1939. Rodopi. p. 83. ISBN 978-90-5183-324-9. Archived from the original on 9 July 2020. Retrieved 22 June 2020.
  88. ^ Berry, David (2002). A History of the French Anarchist Movement, 1917–1945. Greenwood Press. p. 168. ISBN 978-0-313-32026-2.
  89. ^ Fulton, Ann (1999). Apostles of Sartre: Existentialism in America, 1945-1963. Northwestern University Press. p. 9. ISBN 978-0-8101-1290-2. Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 22 June 2020.
  90. ^ Susan Weissman Victor Serge: `dishonest authoritarian', `anti-worker anarchist' or revolutionary Bolshevik? Archived 13 May 2018 at the Wayback Machine, Against the Current, issue 136, September–October 2008
  91. ^ 'Svoboda': The Press in Czechoslovakia 1968. International Press Institute. 1969. p. 36. propagated the anti-Stalin ideas of other personalities, such as those of Professor Ota Sik
  92. ^ Menand, Louis (20 January 2003). "Honest, Decent, Wrong". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on 20 December 2020. Retrieved 7 December 2020.

Further reading

edit
edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anti-Stalinist_left&oldid=1258498368"