Anti-Stalinist left

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series on
Libertarian socialism
Anarchist flag.svg
hide
Political concepts
Economics
People
Philosophies and tendencies
Significant events
Related topics
  • BlackFlagSymbol.svg Anarchism portal
  • Red flag II.svg Socialism portal
  • A coloured voting box.svg Politics portal
  • v
  • t

The anti-Stalinist left is an umbrella term for various kinds of left-wing political movements that opposed Joseph Stalin, Stalinism and the actual system of governance Stalin implemented as leader of the Soviet Union between 1927–1953. This term also refers to the high ranking political figures and governmental programs that opposed Joseph Stalin and his form of communism, like Leon Trotsky and other left wing traditional Marxists.

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 regimes that took inspiration from Stalinism such as the regimes of Kim Il-sung, Enver Hoxha and others, including in the former Eastern Bloc.[1][2][3] Some of the notable movements with the anti-Stalinist left have been Trotskyism, anarchism and libertarian socialism, left communism and libertarian Marxism, the Right Opposition within the Communist movement, and democratic socialism and social democracy.

These left-wing political movements can be characterized[citation needed] by different eras of critiques of Stalin and Bolshevism. These eras of critiques include the Revolutionary era, the Bolshevik era, the Popular Front era, the Post World War II era, the New Party era, and finally, the Post-Stalin era.

Revolutionary era critiques (pre-1924)[]

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.[4] However, as more politically repressive methods were used, the Bolsheviks steadily lost support from many anarchists and revolutionaries.[4] 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.[4][5]

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."[6] Primarily, Luxemburg's critiques were based on the manner in which the Bolsheviks suppressed anarchist movements.[7] In one of her essays published titled, "The Nationalities Question in the Russian Revolution", she explains:[6]

"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.[8] According to Trotsky, Stalin was "often lying about her and vilifying her" in the eyes of the public.[8]

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.[4] 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-Stalinst 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 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.[9][10][11][12]

Another key anti-Stalinst, Louis Fischer, later coined the term "Kronstadt moment" for this.[10]

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.[4] In her essay titled "There Is No Communism in Russia", Goldman details how Stalin "abused the power of his position" and formed a dictatorship.[4] In this text she states:[4]

"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 not the least sign in Soviet Russia even of authoritarian, State Communism."[4] Emma Goldman remained critical of Stalin and the Bolshevik's style of governance up until her death in 1940.[13]

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.[13]

Bolshevik era critiques of Stalin (1924–1930)[]

Trotsky (Middle-Left) and Stalin (Front Right) pictured at the funeral of Felix Dzerzhinsky in 1926.
Main articles: Old Bolsheviks, Left Opposition, Right Opposition, and Third Period

Leon Trotsky was one of the main critics of Stalin during the years after Lenin's death. When the Bolshevik party took power in 1917, Leon Trotsky was closely associated with Lenin and those in the Bolshevik movement. Once Vladimir Lenin passed away in 1924, the relation between Trotsky and prominent Bolsheviks like Joseph Stalin soured quickly because of fundamental disagreements on policy. Unlike anarchists and left communists, Trotskyists also claim to be Leninists.

At first, Stalin allied with the right wing of the Bolshevik movement, including Nikolai Bukharin to combat Trotsky and his supporters on the left. Stalin and his "centre" faction were allied with Bukharin and the Right Opposition from late 1924, with Bukharin elaborating Stalin's theory of Socialism in One Country. Together, they expelled Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev and the United Opposition from the Communist Party in December 1927.

However, once Trotsky was out of the way and the Left Opposition had been outlawed, Stalin soon became alarmed at the danger posed to the Soviet state by the rising power of the capitalistic Kulaks and NEPmen, who had become emboldened by the Left Opposition's illegalization. Sensing this danger, Stalin then turned on his Right Opposition allies. Bukharin and the Right Opposition were, in their turn, sidelined and removed from important positions within the Communist Party and the Soviet government from 1928-1930, with Stalin ditching the NEP and beginning the first Five-year plan. The Comintern entered its "Third Period", in which it took up ultra-left positions, such as denouncing social democratic and democratic socialist rivals as "social fascist".

One of the last attempts of the Rightists to resist Stalin was the Ryutin Affair in 1932, where a manifesto against the soviet policy of collectivization and Stalin was circulated. It openly called for "The Liquidation of the dictatorship of Stalin and his clique".[14] Later, some rightists joined a secret bloc with Leon Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev in order to oppose Stalin. Historian Pierre Broué stated that it dissolved in early 1933.[15]

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

Aside from forming different organizations, the disagreements between Trotsky and Stalin can be categorized into two main issues[citation needed]: the pace of industrialization and revolutionary tactics. One of the key policy differences could be traced to the pace of industrialization. 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.[16] Trotsky believed an accelerated global surge to be the answer to institute communism globally.[16] 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.[16]

Another disagreement between Stalin and Trotsky lies in their methods of revolution. Along with super-industrialization, Trotsky disagreed with Stalin's thesis of Socialism in One Country.[16] Trotsky was against this because he believed that the institution of revolution in one state or country would not be as effective as a global revolution.[17] He also criticized how the Socialism in One Country thesis went against broke the internationalist traditions of Marxism.[18] Trotskyists believed that a permanent global revolution was the most effective method to ensure the system of communism was enacted worldwide.[17]

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.[17][18]

Popular Front era critiques (1930–1939)[]

Main articles: Great Purge 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.

In the 1930s, the critics of Stalin inside and outside the Soviet Union were under heavy attack by the party. The Great Purge occurred from 1936-1938 as a result of growing internal tensions between the critics of Stalin but eventually turned into an all-out cleansing of "anti-Soviet elements".[19] A majority of those targeted were peasants and minorities, but common targets in this movement were political opponents and anarchists.[18] Anarchists and political opponents in this period were immensely critical of the implications of drastic repressive political techniques that Stalin used.[18] Once a critic knowingly spoke out against the Soviet government, they were to be executed or sent to Gulag prison camps extrajudicially.[19] It is estimated that during the Great Purge casualties ranged from 600,000 to over 1 million people.[19]

The various oppositional groups loosely aligned with Bukharin within the Comintern were forced to form their own organisations when they were, in their turn, purged from the national sections of the Comintern. On the right, in Europe, the most important and substantial of these new organisations was the Communist Party Opposition (KPO) in Germany, led by Heinrich Brandler. In the United States, Jay Lovestone, Bertram Wolfe and their supporters founded the Communist Party (Opposition) and published the newspaper Workers Age. In Canada, the Marxian Educational League was formed as part of Lovestone's CP(O), and it became affiliated with the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation. However, by the end of 1939, both the Toronto and Montreal groups of this organization had ceased to function. In a few places, Communist groups affiliated with the ICO achieved more success than the Comintern-affiliated organizations. For example, in Sweden, the Socialist Party of Karl Kilbom, affiliated with the ICO, received 5.7% of the vote in the 1932 elections to the Riksdag, outpolling the Comintern section which received 3.9%.

On the left, the dissidents formed the International Left Opposition in 1930. It was meant to be an opposition group within the Comintern, but members of the Comintern were immediately expelled as soon as they joined (or were suspected of joining) the ILO. The ILO therefore concluded that opposing Stalinism from within the communist organizations controlled by Stalin's supporters had become impossible, so new organizations had to be formed. In 1933, the ILO was renamed the International Communist League (ICL), which formed the basis of the Fourth International, founded in Paris in 1938.[20]

In Spain, the ICO-affiliated Bloque Obrero y Campesino (BOC), led by Joaquin Maurin, was for a time larger and more important than the official Spanish Communist Party. Later, the BOC merged with Andrés Nin's Izquierda Comunista in 1935 to form the Workers' Party of Marxist Unification (POUM) which was to be a major party backing the Second Spanish Republic in the Spanish Civil War. Maurin became general secretary of the POUM but was arrested early in the Civil War. As a result, Nin, a former Trotskyist, became the POUM's new leader.

Concurrently, fascism was rising across Europe. The Communist 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 can 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.[21][22] 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.

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"

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.[23]

Mid-century critiques (1939–1953)[]

See also: Titoism

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.[24] In the eyes of many, "Yugoslavia followed perfectly down the path of Soviet Marxism".[24] At the start, Tito was even considered "Stalin's most faithful pupil".[25] However, as the Yugoslavian Communist Party grew in size and power, it became a secondary communist powerhouse in Europe.[24] This eventually caused Tito to try to operate independently, which created tensions with Stalin and the Soviet Union.[24] In 1948, the two leaders split apart because of Yugoslavian independent foreign policy and ideological differences.[24][25]

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

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.[24] The result was the Yugoslav system of socialist workers' self-management.[24] This led to the philosophy of organizing of every production-related activity in society into "self-managed units".[24] This came to be known as Titoism. Tito was critical of Stalin because he believed Stalin became "un-Marxian".[24] In the pamphlet titled "On New Roads to Socialism" one of Tito's high ranking Aides states:[24]

"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.[25]

Other foreign leftist critics also came about during this time in Europe and America. Some of these critics include George Orwell, H. N. Brailsford,[26] Fenner Brockway,[27][28] the Young People's Socialist League, and later Michael Harrington,[29] and the Independent Labour Party in Britain. There were also several anti-Stalinist socialists in France, including writers such as Simone Weil[30] and Albert Camus[31] 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."[32][33] 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.

New Party Era critiques (1953–1991)[]

Main articles: Nikita Khrushchev and Triumvirate

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.[34] 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:[34]

"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.[34] 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.[34]

Khrushchev delivers a secret speech during the 20th party congress in 1956.

During this Cold War era, the American non-communist left (NCL) grew, covertly funded by the United States Department of State and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to counter the appeal of Soviet communism.[4] The NCL was critical of the continuation of Stalinist Communism because of its ability to easily connect to new audiences and the many "risks behind the ideology" like famine and repression.[4] Members of the NCL were often former communists that became fervent opponents toward the communist movement.[4] This strategy directly 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.[35]

Post-Stalin critiques (1991–present)[]

After the fall of Gorbachev and the Soviet Union in 1991, the anti-Stalinist movement grew rapidly. These movements were generally small but were significant in their importance.

In the early 1990s, many new anti-Stalinist left movements emerged in the former Soviet bloc as a result of failed elections and Boris Yeltsin’s Palace Coup. When this seizure of power occurred, more than thirty electoral blocs set out to contest the election.[36] Some of these anti-Stalinist groups included, the Party of Russian Unity & Accord, Russia’s Choice, Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, the Civic Union for Stability, Justice & Progress, Constructive Ecological Movement, Russian Democratic Reform Movement, Dignity and Mercy, Women of Russia, and the Democratic Party of Russia.[36] Even though these movements were not successful in contesting the election, they displayed how there was still a strong support of anti-Stalinism after the collapse of the Soviet Union. These movements were all critical of Stalinist policy and some even called it an "unmitigated disaster for socialists" [37] Since the establishment of these groups, there has been a decrease in the prevalence of communist groups in Russia.[37]

Notable figures[]

  • George Orwell[58]
  • IF Stone

See also[]

  • Anti-Leninism
  • De-Stalinization
  • Eurocommunism
  • Harvill Secker
  • Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee
  • Left-wing uprisings against the Bolsheviks
  • Libertarian socialism
  • New Left
  • Red fascism

References[]

  1. ^ Dennis H Wrong The American Left and Cuba Commentary FEB. 1, 1962
  2. ^ Julius Jacobson Reflections on Fascism and Communism. Socialist Perspectives, Edited by Phyllis Jacobson and Julius Jacobson, 1983.
  3. ^ Samuel Farber, Cuba since the Revolution of 1959: A Critical Assessment, Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2011
  4. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k Goldman, Emma (1935). "There Is No Communism in Russia". The Anarchist Library. Retrieved 13 March 2021.
  5. ^ Schurer, H. “Some Reflections on Rosa Luxemburg and the Bolshevik Revolution.” The Slavonic and East European Review, vol. 40, no. 95, 1962, pp. 356–372. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4205366.
  6. ^ Jump up to: a b "The Nationalities Question in the Russian Revolution (Rosa Luxemburg, 1918)". Libcom.org. 11 July 2006. Retrieved 2 April 2021
  7. ^ Weitz, E. (1994). "Rosa Luxemburg Belongs to Us!" German Communism and the Luxemburg Legacy. Central European History, 27(1), 27-64. Retrieved April 18, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4546390
  8. ^ Jump up to: a b Trotsky, Leon (June 1932). "Hands Off Rosa Luxemburg!". International Marxist Tendency.
  9. ^ Bell, Daniel. "Arguing the World -- The New York Intellectuals". PBS. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  10. ^ Jump up to: a b "The Hitchens out-takes". Prospect Magazine. 24 May 2008. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  11. ^ "Critical Crossings". UC Press E-Books Collection, 1982-2004. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  12. ^ "Remembering Daniel Bell". Dissent Magazine. 27 September 2012. Retrieved 23 April 2021.
  13. ^ Jump up to: a b Goldman, Emma (1988). Living my life. Pluto Press. OCLC 166081114.
  14. ^ 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.
  15. ^ "Pierre Broué: The "Bloc" of the Oppositions against Stalin (January 1980)". www.marxists.org. Retrieved 7 August 2020.
  16. ^ Jump up to: a b c d "L.D. Trotsky: The New Course in the Economy of the Soviet Union (March 1930)". www.marxists.org. Retrieved 19 April 2021.
  17. ^ Jump up to: a b c Martin Oppenheimer The “Russian Question” and the U.S. Left, Digger Journal, 2014
  18. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Harap, Louis (1989). The Rise and Decline of the Anti-Stalinist Left from the 1930s to the 1980s. Guilford Publication.
  19. ^ Jump up to: 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.
  20. ^ "Class Nature of Eastern Europe" Resolution Adopted by the Third Congress of the Fourth International—Paris, April 1951
  21. ^ Beevor, Antony (2006). The battle for Spain: the Spanish Civil War 1936-1939. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 978-0-297-84832-5. OCLC 64312268.
  22. ^ 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.
  23. ^ Potthoff, Heinrich; Faulenbach, Bernd (1998). Sozialdemokraten und Kommunisten nach Nationalsozialismus und Krieg: zur historischen Einordnung der Zwangsvereinigung. Klartext. p. 27.
  24. ^ Jump up to: 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.
  25. ^ Jump up to: a b c Mehta, Coleman (2011). "The CIA Confronts the Tito-Stalin Split, 1948–1951". Journal of Cold War Studies. 13 (1): 101–145. ISSN 1520-3972.
  26. ^ F. M. Leventhal, The Last Dissenter: H.N. Brailsford and His World, Oxford University Press, 1985, ISBN 0-19-820055-2 (pp. 248–49).
  27. ^ "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)
  28. ^ 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).
  29. ^ 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
  30. ^ "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)
  31. ^ "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)
  32. ^ Maurice Isserman Steady Work: Sixty Years of Dissent: A history of Dissent magazine, Dissent, January 23, 2014
  33. ^ Wilford, Hugh (2003). "Playing the CIA's Tune? The New Leader and the Cultural Cold War". Diplomatic History. Oxford University Press (OUP). 27 (1): 15–34. doi:10.1111/1467-7709.00337. ISSN 0145-2096.
  34. ^ Jump up to: 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
  35. ^ Saunders, Frances Stonor (2013). The cultural cold war : the CIA and the world of arts and letters. New York. ISBN 1-59558-914-7. OCLC 826444682.
  36. ^ Jump up to: a b Andy Blunden 1993 The Class Struggle in Russia: III: The Left in Russia Stalinism: It's [sic] Origin and Future.
  37. ^ Jump up to: a b Hillel H. Ticktin End of Stalinism, Beginning of Marxism May–June 1992, Against the Current 38
  38. ^ Seymour Martin Lipset Neoconservatism: Myth and Reality John F. Kennedy-Institut tür Nordamerikastudien, der Freien Universität Berlin, p.8 "The anti-Stalinist left intellectuals on the whole continued to identify themselves as socialists or liberals during the post-war period. The cold war of the late forties and early fifties was led in the free world by liberals and leftists, e.g., Harry Truman, Clement Attlee, Ernie Bevan, Kurt Schumacher, Guy Mollet, and Haakon Lie."
  39. ^ 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. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  40. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Birchall, Ian H. (2004). Sartre Against Stalinism. Berghahn Books. pp. 5–8. ISBN 978-1-78238-973-6. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  41. ^ 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.
  42. ^ Wilford, Hugh (2003). "Playing the CIA's Tune? The New Leader and the Cultural Cold War". Diplomatic History. Oxford University Press (OUP). 27 (1): 15–34. doi:10.1111/1467-7709.00337. ISSN 0145-2096.
  43. ^ Jump up to: 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. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  44. ^ Wasserstein, Bernard (2007). Barbarism and civilization: a history of Europe in our time. Oxford University Press. pp. 509. ISBN 978-0-19-873074-3.
  45. ^ Jump up to: 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
  46. ^ Birchall, Ian H. (2004). Sartre Against Stalinism. Berghahn Books. p. 17. ISBN 978-1-78238-973-6. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  47. ^ Milani, Tommaso (15 June 2020). Hendrik de Man and Social Democracy. Springer Nature. p. 109. ISBN 978-3-030-42534-0. Retrieved 22 June 2020.
  48. ^ Jump up to: a b Birchall, Ian H. (2004). Sartre Against Stalinism. Berghahn Books. p. 15. ISBN 978-1-78238-973-6. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  49. ^ Christopher Phelps On Socialism and Sex: An Introduction New Politics Summer 2008 Vol:XII-1 Whole #: 45
  50. ^ 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. Retrieved 12 June 2020.
  51. ^ 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. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  52. ^ 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. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
  53. ^ Chapman, Rosemary (1992). Henry Poulaille and Proletarian Literature 1920-1939. Rodopi. p. 83. ISBN 978-90-5183-324-9. Retrieved 22 June 2020.
  54. ^ Berry, David (2002). A History of the French Anarchist Movement, 1917-1945. Greenwood Press. p. 168. ISBN 978-0-313-32026-2.
  55. ^ Fulton, Ann (1999). Apostles of Sartre: Existentialism in America, 1945-1963. Northwestern University Press. p. 9. ISBN 978-0-8101-1290-2. Retrieved 22 June 2020.
  56. ^ Susan Weissman Victor Serge: `dishonest authoritarian', `anti-worker anarchist' or revolutionary Bolshevik?, Against the Current, issue 136, September–October 2008
  57. ^ "Introduction". The Third Way: Marxist-Leninist Theory & Modern Industrial Society. www.marxists.org. 1972.
  58. ^ Menand, Louis. "Honest, Decent, Wrong". The New Yorker. Retrieved 7 December 2020.

Further reading[]

  • Ian Birchall Sartre Against Stalinism. Berghahn Books. (See review here.)
  • Julius Jacobson The Russian Question And American Socialism,New Politics, vol. 6, no. 3 (new series), whole no. 23, Summer 1997
  • Alan Johnson The Cultural Cold War: Faust Not the Pied Piper, New Politics, vol. 8, no. 3 (new series), whole no. 31, Summer 2001
  • David Renton, Dissident Marxism 2004 Zed Books ISBN 1-84277-293-7
  • Boris Souvarine, Stalin, 1935
  • Frances Stonor Saunders, Who Paid the Piper?: CIA and the Cultural Cold War, 1999, Granta, ISBN 1-86207-029-6 (USA: The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, 2000, The New Press, ISBN 1-56584-596-X).
  • Alan Wald The New York Intellectuals, The Rise and Decline of the Anti-Stalinist Left From the 1930s to the 1980s. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987. 440 pp (See review by Paul LeBlanc here)

External links[]

Retrieved from ""