The Daily Worker Newspaper, October 1, 1927, Page 5

THe New MacaZIne SATURDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1927. Section of The DAILY WORKER : This Magazine Section Appears Every Saturday in The DAILY WORKER SO ALEX BITTELMAN, Editor The Soviet Union and The United States Trotsky in Error in Interview With American Delegation Below we publish the report of the conversation between Leon Trotsky and the American Labor Delegation, which returned to the United States early this week. The conversation took place in Moscow, on Aug- ust 19th, Following comrade Trotsky’s re- plies to the questions put to him by the spokesman for the American delegation, we are publishing editorial comment by “Prayda” of August 24th, which exposes the deviations that developed in some of Trotsky's answers, By LEON TROTSKY F the questionnaire, which you have just handed to me, I see that there are a number of points which touch upon the internal life of our Party; and in particular, upon our differences of opinion. Tt is a custom among us Bolshevists to express our minds on these questions within our Party. I would request you not to assume from my words that I am prepared to express myself freely to foreign guests upon any question which may interest them; I should prefer first of all to put before people who are not members of our Party the thoughts and considerations which might prevail upon them to enter our Party, and then to take stock of inter- nal differences of opinion. I shall revert to this question in conjunction with the danger of war. I will begin with the seventh question. It runs: “Can it be said that the country of the Soviets represents a democracy, or must it be said that the dictatorship of a class or a por- tion of this class—the Communist Party—rules here?” Whether or not one calls Soviet Russia the land of democracy depends upon the significance one at- taches to the conception of democracy. I can quite understand that from the standpoint of existing American democracy our Soviet Union can be denied the right to call itself a democracy. But I reserve the right to deny from our standpoint that the United States constitutes a democracy. I might place alongside Question 7 a Question 7-a: “Can it be said that the United States constitutes a democracy or is a country which is administered by the dictator- ship of big banks, trusts, etc.?” To this question I should like to propose the following answer: In the United States there rules under the cloak of the outward forms of a political democracy the dictatorship of the most highly concentrated capi- tal. Where a privileged minority rules the ex- ploited majority, the minority is concerned to cloak and disguise its rulership with various mystifica- tions of religion, of hereditary monarchy or of political democracy. The Soviet system is*the dic- tatorship of the working class, which is not at all concerned toe deceive the others concerning the char- acter of its dictatorship, and, in consequence, it does not make use of camouflage. A further and equally profound difference be- tween the dictatorship of the working class, which is led by its vanguard, ie., the Party, and the dictatorship of feudal lords or of capitalists is that the feudal lords and capitalists try to maintain their dictatorship forever, while the Communist Party regards the dictatorship of the proletariat as transitory, as a regime of the transition period. The object of revolutionary dictatorship is the crea- tion of an order of society which will no longer need any state force at all, because it will be based upon the solidarity of the producers freed from exploita- tion and from class barriers of every kind. Now for the eighth question: : “How is it that in the Soviet Union there is not freedom of the Press and of speech for all, including the opponents of the Soviet re- gime?” In order to answer thig question one must here, too, be clear as to what is to be understood by freedom of speech and the right to hold meetings. Everybody has the right to fly, but if one has not an aeroplane one will hardly succeed in making use of this right. In any democratic country the workers have a right to their own press, they have the right to hold meetings and so forth. But the press needs vrintine-works and paper: for meetings, rooms are Pravda, Official Organ of Communist Party of the Soviet Union Exposes the Mistakes of Leon Trotsky JOSEPH STALIN. Secretary of the Communist Party of. the Soviet Union. But the printing-works and necessary and leisure. buildings do not belong to the workers but to the bourgeoisie. The journalists come from the bour- geois class or, in case they rise from the working class, are re-educated in the sense of bourgeois interests. In America freedom of the press for the worker amounts to the right to buy for two cents a@ newspaper produced by bourgeois journalists in the interests of capitalists. In present-day America there is no other freedom of the press. Such free- dom does not exist in our country. We have taken away from the bourgeoisie the printing-works, sup- plies of paper and the paper factories. We have placed these material instruments of “freedom of speech” in the service of workers’ and peoples’ education. We have, therefore, made tremendous advance from the regime of bourgeois democracy, which gives people the right to fly but deprives them of aeroplanes. You ask: Can it not happen under the Soviet regime that the people become dissatisfied and then have no channels through which to express their - dissatisfaction? Naturally, the possibility of dissatisfaction or the existence of dissatisfaction cannot be denied. As long as there is misery and privation, as long as class differences exist—these still prevail in our country—dissatisfaction is inevitable. This dis- satisfaction is a force which urges us forward. Can it find expression among us? We assert that, in spite of all the shortcomings of the Soviet system, this system, as it is, affords the working masses through the medium of our Party, incomparably more complete and immediate possibilities for the expression of feelings and interests than the ut- terly artificial and deceitful system of bourgeois democracy. In this connection we have a very rec- ent example, which must give food for thought to all Democrats, not the professionals, but to Demo- crats from conviction. H Austria, as is well known, represents demo- eracy, and, moreover, is a democracy constructed quite recently in accordance with the best interna- tional traditions and with the immediate participa- tion of American observers and instructors. And what is the result? A short while ago the Austrian workers, in spite of “freedom” of the press, the right to hold meetings, could find no other means of expression than an insurreetion in Vienna. You must*admit that our workers do not resort to such methods of expressing their opinions. The reason for this ig that the State system of the Soviets, in contrast to bourgeois democracy, affords the worx- ers immeasurably greater possibility of exercising direct influence in State and public affairs. The tenth question: “Can. it be said that the foreign policy of the Soviet Union is directed towrrds the East and not towards the West?” I do not believe that the general direction of our foreign policy can be formulated in this man- ner. There are periods during which our attention and our endeavors are claimed to 4 greater extent by the East than by the West, but the reverse. is also the case at times. We must defend our west- ern and eastern frontiers. During the occupation of the Ruhr and during the general strike in Eng- land we were more interested in. the West. The events of the Chinese revolution attracted the great- er part of our attention towards the East. In gen- eral, the fate of our country is intimately connected with the movement of the working class throughout the world and with the movement of the oppressed peoples in the colonies and protectorates, i. e., with revolution both in the West and in the East, “What prevents the Government of the United States from recognizing the Soviet Union and what can be done to remove ob- struction to such recognition?” I should prefer to hear from our honored guests the answer to this question. (Laughter.) In my opinion the chief obstacle is the contrast between our social systems. The United States is the most complete and strongest expression of the capitalist system, while we are the first attempt, so far mis, to construct a socialistic System; we are so to speak, a rough working model. Those who con- trol the course of the United States do not look kindly upon the coming successors of the capitalist regime. It will be. difficult to remove the chief obstruction, because ne country has any intention of changing its regime voluntarily. But, in spite ef this, much can be done towards improving mu- tual relations. First of all, it should be reported in America that we are not quite so bad as we are there thought to be—that would mean some slight progress. It must also be stated clearly that, though we oppose the principle of private property, we take existing circumstances into account, and when we contract with capitalists, we fulfill our obliga- tions scrupulously. Why do people accuse us of carrying on illicit propaganda? Because capitalist governments can- not tolerate the existence of a government which gives expression to non-capitalistic ideas. Our pres- ‘ent conversation might serve as an example. We are at present in a government office. A sheet containing about twenty questions has been handed to me, and practically every one of these auestions might be represented by a person of ill will as an attempt to overthrow the Soviet system. But it will-not occur to anv of our newspapers to accuse our worthy guests of carrying on illicit propaganda, Now just imagine a delegation from the Soviet Union putting in a State department in Washing- ton twenty similar questions to an official of the United States, thereby giving utterance to “doubt concerning the pillars cf American public and Stat¢ administration. You will readily see that such a thing would be impossible. Please do not regard my words as conveying any reproach concerning the questions which you have put to me. They are by no means intended to do so. On the contrary, I am grateful that the questions have been asked frankly and directly, It is possible for this reason to answer them wit! equal frankness. I only wished to indicate that, such questions were put by us, they would inevitably be regarded by a capitalist State as an attempt at_illicit ‘propaganda.” The twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth ques- tions relate to the investment of foreign capital i this country. You have already received explicit information in: writing on this point. We will, therefore. confine ourselves to consideration of the respective principles, So far, foreign concessions, including those granted to America, have played but an insignifix cant role in our economic life. There are several (Continued on page 4) i