ARNE

SwABECK

Visiting Trotsky at Prinkipo *

My assignment in Europe was to visit Trotsky after attending an

international conference of Trotskyist organizations in Paris in early
February 1933. The conference, called on short notice , was intended
to strengthen the International Secretariat of the movement. This
task proved to be difficult. Members of the Paris group lacked
experience in the building of a political organization, and were
unable to elevate fundamental interests of the movement above
personal and group rivalries. Steps were taken, of course , to establish
the Secretariat by regularly elected personnel. Nonetheless, all the
groups tended to look to Trotsky, then at his home on the Turkish
island of Prinkipo. Although he scrupulously observed the practice of
channeling all questions of an organizational or internal character
through the International Secretariat, Trotsky remained the actual
source of theoretical and political guidance. As long as that was
the case, the Secretariat was a secondary international center.
En route to Turkey, I stopped off in Berlin, where Hitler had just
come to power. I thus became an eye-witness to one of history's
terrible tragedies. Row s of trucks rolled through the streets, loaded
with storm troopers shouting "Heil Hitler." At other times, a
'" Th is account was excerpted from the author's memoirs, From Debs to
Mao: My Sixty Years of Social Struggle, to be published by Charles H. Kerr
Publishing Co., Chicago. By permi ssion of the author and publisher. The
author wishes to thank Professor Constance Ashton Myers for selecting and
helping edit this excerpt.
SruoIES IN C OMPARATIVE CoM MUNIS M

VOL.

X, Nos. 1 & 2,

SPRING/SuMMER

1977, 152-159

VISITING TROTSKY AT PRINKIPO

153

flourish of drums in a military band would announce the arrival of

marching storm troopers. Either way, the objective was the same:
a savage and relentless method of terrorizing the people.
I had been assigned by the international conference to report
and discuss its deliberations with the Berlin group, which had gone
underground. At the same time Trotsky's son, Lyova, then still
located in Berlin, had made arrangements for me to take a radio
along personally to Prinkipo and thus avoid the exorbitant Turkish
import duty. Though radio technology was still in the earphone stage
of development, this radio had a primitive loudspeaker-a large
contraption which would have to be shipped in the baggage car.
With regret I had to admit failure of that part of my mission. The
radio never got to Prinkipo. It ended up in the hands of the Turkish
custom officials.
Traveling to Prinkipo, I had to make the long and wearying
trainride from Berlin through Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and the
Balkan states to Constantinople. This included stops at every border,
where custom and " security" officials conducted examinations.
At the borders of Turkey an army intelligence officer questioned
me closely: What was my purpose in coming to Turkey? Did I
have a special mission, or a job? What were my connections in
the United States? Suddenly I remembered that Kemal Pasha, the
Turkish president, had once expressed gratitude for support from the
Soviet government, headed by Lenin and Trotsky, when he was hard
pressed in his reform movement to modernize Turkey. I told the
officer directly: "I am going to visit Trotsky." The reply came
without hesitation: "You may proceed on your journey, I have no
further questions."
Arrival in Prinkipo
At Prinkipo I met Trotsky in fact for the second time. The first
time had been in Moscow in 1922. From the platform of the Fourth
Congress of the Communist International, Trotsky had then
announced, amidst the tumultuous acclaim of the delegates, the final
crushing of the counterrevolutionary armies. We had then looked on
Trotsky as the founder of the Red Army and the organizer of
victory. On the platform he had stood out as a commanding personality, a great revolutionary leader. At Prinkipo he was an exile.
stripped of all official authority; but he remained a commanding
personality and a great and inspiring revolutionary leader. We should
remember that my meetings with Trotsky occurred under two dif-

154

STUDIES IN COMPARATIVE COMMUNISM

ferent historical circumstances. In the first, Trotsky stood shoulder

to shoulder with Lenin in their united defense of the young Soviet
republic. In the second, he was an exile of the usurper.
Arriving at Trotsky's home at Prinkipo, I felt the contrast between
the hostile world that I had left and the warm friendship among
comrades. I met Trotsky's wife Natalia for the first time, and
Trotsky's three young secretaries, Pierre Frank, Jean van Heijenoort,
and Otto Schussler. Later came Rudolf Klement. All were eager
to hear about Germany.
At about this time, Lyova, the elder of Natalia and Leon Trotsky's
sons, had to leave fascist Germany in haste and steal across the
French border, headed for Paris. No one knew the fate, or even the
whereabouts, of the younger son in the Soviet Union . Trotsky's two
daughters by his first marriage had been separated both from their
husbands, who in Stalin's purges were condemned to concentration
camps, and from their children. The youngest daughter died of
consumption contracted in a life of poverty. The elder daughter was
driven to suicide. Though these blows struck the household shortly
before my arrival, Natalia bore up well. Trotsky dug more tenaciously
into his work, convinced that there was no one except him to carr y
out the mission of restoring Marxist-Leninist theory and practice
to the proletarian movement, and to arm a new generation with
revolutionary methods.

Discussions with Trotsky

In Trotsky, as in Marx, the man of ideas was indissolubly bound
up with the man of action. Trotsky was always engaged in correspondence, chiefly with political supporters in various countries, but
also in reply to inquiries about ideology and policy. He gave the same
scrupulous attention to his letters as he did to his major theoretical
works. Trotsky did not write with facility. His major works were the
result of painstaking efforts for precise expression, and when finished
bore testimony to his power of thought, his energy, and his
self-discipline.
Thoroughness and exactitude permeated his activity, even including
his physical exercise. Fishing trips in the Sea of Marmara became
the usual type of exercise. And whenever or whatever the trip,
all of us young disciples went along, always mindful of our duty as
bodyguards and always armed. Each fishing trip became something
of an adventure. The kind of expedition, the kind of fishing gear,
depending on the specific area in the sea and on weather conditions,

VISITING TROTSKY AT PRINKIPO

155

was decided in advance through consultation with Kharalambos, the

Greek fisherman who always went along. He knew the meaning
of wind and weather and temperature, and he knew the Sea of
Marmara.
Sometimes the trip turned into an elaborate expedition, what with
the heavy boat, stones, and dragnets. At other times we would set
a long line, one end fastened ashore, the other end held by a float.
At certain intervals along the line, we attached baited drop lines.
The next day we gathered in the fish. If the expedition called for
angling, Trotsky heaved the baited hook line and sinker up and
down with broadly measured strokes. That provided excellent exercise, and apparently the poor fish snapped the more eagerly for the
bait. 1
In our discussions on major subjects Trotsky took the lead.
Generally these discussions were conducted in German; but Trotsky
often switched to French when he wanted to make sure that the
essence was throughly understood by the French comrades present.
I noticed his ability to change from one language to another without
mixing up words-a feat that I always had found difficult.
American Imperialism
Our first extensive discussion in Prinkipo centered on American
imperialism, about which we had drafted a thesis for our third
national conference. Trotsky thought its basic content excellent,
but lacking in exactness. He reasoned from his law of the uneven
development of capitalism, a basic tenet of his ideology. This unevenness during earlier periods of its evolution offered advantages to
the United States; but by the 1930s it had become unfavorable.
What exactly was this law? It suggested that not all countries
simultaneously pass through the same development, but that they
evolve differently and at varying tempos, owing to differences in
objective conditions and historical connections. It resembles the
concept of "combined development." The contrast between
advanced and backward countries becomes the most elementary
1. I must digress briefly because of an interesting piece of information
Trotsky gave me early in my visit which illuminated a little known aspect of
his military career. Shortly before Hitler came to power an emissary of the
German Army General Staff approached Trotsky seeking exclusive German
rights to translate and publish his works on military questions. Several volumes
had been published in the Soviet Union in 1925 and Trotsky had simply
answered that these rights were in the hands of the Soviet government.

156

STUDIES IN COMPARATIVE COMMUNISM

expression of the law. However, evolution has shown that backward

countries supplement their backwardness with the latest advances.
From this emerges the combined development which Trotsky
described as an example for Russia in his History of the Russian
Revolution.
In America one sees another kind of combined development: an
advanced industrial structure together with a backward political and
ideological development for all classes. The internal colonization
of immigrant workers and black slaves was responsible for the retarded consciousness of the workers. The law of uneven development leads to the law of combined development.
Must America pass through an epoch of social reforms? The
answer depends in part upon the Communist Party. Once more
the law of uneven and combined development comes into play. The
fact that the proletariat in Russia had not yet gone through the
democratic school that could lead to its victory has been advanced
in opposition to the permanent revolution and the proletarian
seizure of power. But (Trotsky argued) the Russian proletariat passed
through the democratic period in the course of eight months-from
February to October 1917. In England it took centuries and in
America it seems to be lasting quite long. The unevenness expresses
itself also in the fact that different stages are not jumped over but
may pass rapidly-as, for example, the democratic stage in Russia.
Since the American proletariat as a class has not fought for social
legislation, one must assume that the democratic phase of the struggle
will take a longer time. One cannot predict whether the new workingclass stage will begin next year, in five years or after ten years. One
can, however, say with certainty that at the moment when the American proletariat constitutes itself as an independent political party,
even if at first under a democratic reformist banner, it will pass
rapidly through this stage.

Negro Self-Determination
In our discussion on the Negro question-" Negro" was still the
common term-I reported that American Trotskyists had not yet
attempted to formulate a program. We disagreed, however, with the
Communist Party slogan of .. self-determination for the Negroes."
The Party attached to it a demand for an autonomous Negro republic
in the southern black belt. We did not contest the right of the Negroes
to self-determination, but rather the correctness of the slogan as
a means to win the Negro masses. We did not view Negroes in the

VISITING TROTSKY AT PRINKIPO

157

United States as a separate nationality having their own language

and their own cultural traditions. On the contrary, we viewed them
as an integral part of American social, economic, and political life.
In the South they subsisted under Jim Crow conditions, and in both
North and South they drew lower wages than did white workers;
their working conditions were generally much worse, as they were
allotted the most menial work. Victims of discrimination everywhere,
they were even barred from trade union membership. It was therefore our opinion that the position and interests of American Negroes,
as a racial minority, were subordinated to the class relations of the
United States and were dependent upon them. Consequently, we
felt that our central slogan should be: "Social, economic, and
political equality for the Negroes," and such additional slogans as
might flow therefrom.
Trotsky said he did not find our point of view fully convincing.
Here I summarize only the main reasons approximately as given by
him. Were the Negroes a race and not a nation? Nations grow out
of racial material under definite conditions. We did not obligate
the Negroes to become a nation; that was a question of their consciousness: what they desired and worked toward. We said: If that
is what the Negroes want, then we must fight against imperialism
to the last drop of our blood and help them gain the right to separate
a piece of land for themselves wherever and however they please.
When Negro workers unite with their own petty bourgeois, Trotsky
continued, that is because they are not sufficiently developed to defend their elementary rights. The Negro petty bourgeoisie will
take up the demand for "social, economic, and political equality"
and for "self-determination," but will prove absolutely incapable
in this struggle. The Negro proletariat will march over this petty
bourgeoisie in the direction of the proletarian revolution. That will
be for them the most important road. Trotsky said that he could
therefore see no reason why we should not advance the demand for
" self-determination."
We can assume, he continued, that because of the unexampled
American economic advance the awakening of the American working class from its political and theoretical backwardness will proceed
rapidly. The old ideological covering will burst, all questions will
emerge at once, and since the country is so economically mature
the adaptation of the political and theoretical to the economic level
will be quickly achieved. Possibly, the Negroes will then become
the most advanced section. We have already a similar example in

158

STUDIES IN COMPARATIVE COMMUNISM

Russia. The Russians were the European Negroes . Possibly, American

Negroes will proceed through self-determination to the proletarian
dictatorship in a couple of gigantic strides, ahead of the great majority
of white workers. They will then function as the vanguard. They
will in any case fight better than the white workers . That, however,
can happen only provided the Communist Party carries on an uncompromising struggle, not against Negro nationalism, but against the
colossal prejudices of white workers.
Trotsky added that he had never studied this quest ion; his remarks
proceeded from general considerations. He found the arguments of
the American comrades insufficient and not without a certain American chauvinism, which he regarded as dangerous. In view of the
importance of the Negro question to the American revolutionary
movement, he urged that we give it serious attention. Unfortunately,
this we failed to carry out. Although I admired Trotsky's presentation, I could not agree with his view of self-determination for
American Negroes.
While I was at Prinkipo, Trotsky showed great concern over the
internal difficulties in our American organization. He often inquired
into the views held by lim Cannon and myself, and about the atti tudes, views, and positions of Max Shachtman and Martin Abern.
He indicated that he was disturbed about Abern's tendency to needlessly sharpen internal disputes and exaggerate organizational
questions. While he held both sides to be guilty of certain impatient
organizational maneuvers, Trotsky left no doubt that, in his opinion,
a solution to the American Trotskyists' internal struggle could be
found only through entry into mass work and drawing to the League 2
fresh proletarian elements. That became part of our next major
discussion.

A New Party and New International

This discussion centered around what was to become a reversal
of orientation of the Left Opposition. Trotsky proposed a halt to the
attempt to reform the Communist parties, and the formation instead
of new revolutionary parties and a new International.
Trotsky presented this proposal as his conclusion from the fact
of Hitler's rise to power. He expressed his conviction " that in Germany the proletariat will rise again-Stalinism never . . . . An
2. For further details about the Communist League of America, the
Trotskyist organization from November 1928 to December 1934, see the Myers
article above.

VISITING TROTSKY AT PRINKIPO

159

organization which has not been awakened by the thunderbolt of

fascism is dead and cannot be revived." Not only had the German
Communist Party failed in its historic mission, but the Executive
Committee of the Communist International, at its first session after
this defeat. declared: "The policy followed by the German Communist Party up to and at the time of Hitler's coup d'etat was fully
correct." The affiliated parties accepted this declaration from Moscow
and thereby became equally responsible for the mistaken policy pursued in Germany. Thus, we had no choice but to give up reform and
proceed to build new revolutionary parties and a new International.
"The most dangerous thing in politics," said Trotsky. "is to
become a prisoner of your own formula, which was appropriate
yesterday, but is deprived of any content today." The truth of this
statement found confirmation in this instance, but not only in this instance. Even the best formulas have a limited validity, and can apply
only to specific historical conjunctures.
Although we were aware of our numerically small organizations
and lack of mass contact. we knew there could be no logical objection
to Trotsky's proposal. As he put it: The Communist International
and its affiliated parties had experienced their" fourth of August"a collapse as ignominious as that which the Second International
suffered at the outbreak of World War I. I had witnessed the collapse of the German party. Hence, in my mind, there could be no
doubt that we could achieve a rebirth of Marxism only in complete
independence and beyond the confines of orthodox Communist
parties. But for that an unstained banner was needed. The Left Opposition, Trotsky concluded, would have to unfurl the unstained banner
through the formation of new Marxist-Leninist parties and a new
International.
As I got ready to leave Prinkipo after a two-month visit and
return to my duties in the United States, I knew that I had enjoyed
the benefit of a great experience. I had observed at first hand how
Trotsky applied the Marxist method of social analysis to complex
contemporary phenomena. I had learned valuable lessons from a great
revolutionary. I knew that Trotsky had appreciated the visit from
a young disciple. That he regarded our encounter as a solemn agreement to keep the revolutionary banner aloft was demonstrated by
his warm comradely embrace at the point of my departure from
Prinkipo.

MURAL BY DIEGO RIVERA PAINTED AT THE COMMUNI ST LEAGUE OF AMERICA HEADQUARTER S IN NEW YORK

Upper row (right to left): Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Engel s, Licbknccht, Lu xemburg. Low er row: James Ca nnon, Ch ristian Rakovsky,
Max Shachtman, Arne Swabeck , children of prominent American Trotskyists.