Domenico Losurdo's book "Stalin: History and Critique of a Black Legend" has been cited as a reference in this thread. However, I do not think Losurdo’s book is dependable. For one thing, his portrayal of Isaac Deutscher as considering "the Moscow Trials more or less reliable" (on the page that was reproduced above) is a gross distortion of Deutscher's views. Anyone who has read Deutscher's "Stalin" can see that the author argues the exact opposite.
A similar dishonesty is seen in Losurdo’s plucking from Deutscher an alleged “factual truth regarding the execution of Tukhachevsky." The trumped-up charges against Tukhachevsky had to do with his supposedly taking part in a plot with Trotsky along with the German Wehrmacht to overthrow the regime headed by Stalin. In actuality, Deutscher (in a note on p. 409 of the paperback edition) merely relates how in 1922, the Soviet Politburo — led by Lenin — authorized Tukhachevsky and Trotsky to negotiate with the Wehrmacht to station unemployed soldiers and technicians on Russian soil to help train the Red Army. In return, Germany was allowed to conduct "experiments" in Russia that the Versailles Treaty had prohibited them from carrying out in Germany. This exchange, Deutsher reports, continued until 1935, at which time both Stalin and Hitler were firmly in power. Deutscher says nothing about Tukhachevsky cooking up a plot with the Wehrmacht against Stalin. In regard to the 1934 assassination of Sergei Kirov by a young dissident Communist, Losurdo uses the event to note while Trotsky* might *not have been directly involved, “his reaction gives food for thought." Losurdo then points out (the horror!) that Trotsky expressed hatred for Kirov and neglected to wholeheartedly condemn the assassin. He goes on to state that Trotsky had written extensively over the years on the uses of terrorism and offers a few quotations on the subject, but adds that although Trotsky had expressed himself as being against individual terrorism, “this is a clarification that is not entirely convincing.” He quotes for good coin Ruth Fisher (the Austrian-German Communist who in the 1950s collaborated with HUAC and the McCarthyite anti-Communist inquisition) in saying that Trotsky saw himself as a "kind of Red Bonaparte,” who sought a coup d’etat against the Old Guard of the Bolshevik Party (an alleged plot that was said to have provoked Trotsky's expulsion from the USSR). He follows this with quotes from others who offer reports that the Trotskyist Left Opposition was at work sabotaging railways and power plants. Losurdo does not bother to gather factual information to corroborate such reports. In my opinion, though Losurdo’s book purports to give a realistic appraisal of Stalin, it is not worth very much as a factual source in gaining an accurate accounting of the views and actions of Stalin, Trotsky, or any other figures in the Soviet leadership, or in evaluating the Moscow Trials. The author employs a huge grab bag of quotations from various political personalities and commentators, some of which are interesting while others seem entirely far fetched. He then weaves these quotations into his narrative of plots and counterplots within the Communist spectrum, with little regard for their political context. His dishonest reference to Deutscher’s conclusions and his glib use of unreliable testimony, like that of Ruth Fisher, illustrate the poor scholarship of his book. On Thu, Dec 25, 2025 at 1:00 PM Marv Gandall via groups.io <marvgand2= [email protected]> wrote: > Michael P. refers us to the historians Deutscher, Daniels, and Losurdo, > each having suggested that the Moscow trials were primarily based on > objective threats to Stalin’s regime rather than, as is often claimed, his > supposed paranoid personality > > There is no question but that the regime faced serious organized > opposition across the political spectrum. At one end were the agents of the > old czarist order and imperialist powers who had bitterly opposed the > Bolshevik Revolution and wanted to restore capitalism in the USSR. At the > other end were the Old Bolsheviks who made no secret of wanting to remove > Stalin - by force, if necessary - but in the interests of the revolution > they had themselves organized and led. Their goal was a political rather > than a social revolution, a change of regime rather the destruction of > social and economic foundations of the new Soviet society. > > Stalin and his subordinates were therefore justified in fearing these > threats, particularly from the Old Bolsheviks. Both the Right and Left > Opposition had supporters within the party, the bureaucracy, and the > military, the latter including Marshal Tukhachevsky, who was among the > notables purged and executed as a “Trotskyist”. > > This is the context in which Deutscher, Daniels, and even Losurdo viewed > the Moscow Trials. But none AFAIK gave any credibility or provided any > evidence to support the official justification for them - that the > Opposition within the party was allied with the revanchist White > reactionaries and fascist powers outside of it. > > Above, I mocked the most ridiculous of the regime’s claims - that the > roots of the conspiracy were traceable to plotting by Bukharin and others > to assassinate Lenin in the midst of the civil war. Poor Lenin! Such a > hard-headed and brilliant political tactician and student of world affairs, > but such a poor judge of human character! Lenin the innocent who > surrounded himself with those most bent on destroying him - notably > Trotsky, the future leader of the Left Opposition, whom he entrusted with > command of the Red Army, and Bukharin, the future leader of the Right > Opposition whom Lenin called "a most valuable and major theorist > ...rightly considered the favorite of the whole Party”. In fact, as we > know, Lenin was an astute observer of the strengths and weaknesses of > Trotsky, Bukharin, Stalin and others within the Bolshevik leadership and, > together with his associates, would have quickly unmasked any mortal > enemies within it. > > The 1918 plot can’t be seen apart from the 1938 trials, as Vyshinsky > insisted under Stalin’s direction and doubtless with his approval. They > rise or fall together as part of the same narrative, and it is the > spectacular fabrication about Old Bolshevik traitors in Lenin's midst > planning to take his life which gives conspiracy theorists like Furr the > most difficulty. > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#39858): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/39858 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/116918463/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
