Leon Trotsky: An Interview by Social-Demokraten

November 23, 1932

[Writing of Leon Trotsky, Vol. 4, 1932, New York 1973, p. 315-317]

Trotsky: First and foremost, I want to express my thanks for the invitation and entry permit to Denmark. I recognize that the government, which in no way shares my viewpoint, has given me permission to give a purely historical and scientific lecture to a number of interested young people. I had already received a similar invitation prior to this from Norway, but I had to turn it down because of a fire in my house in Istanbul last year. The trip has been a great pleasure, especially for my wife, who for ten years was in charge of all the museums in Russia, and who was happy to be able to see the wonders of Italy in this field.

Rechendorff: How long has it been since you spoke in public?

T: I have not given a speech in Western Europe since 1914, in Austria. For four years I have been isolated not only from political life, but also from public life in general and from any real communication with broader circles. I have no auditorium where I can speak face to face with people. All I have is my literary activity.

R: Are you lonesome?

T: On the island where my house is located, I live alone with my wife and my six-year-old grandson — who, by the way, was to have come with us — and with a few good friends, some of whom come to visit from great distances. There are six hundred inhabitants on the island, but I have no contact with them. I go fishing, hunting, and boating — and, of course, I write.

R: Only about Russia?

T: I was more at the center of the Russian Revolution than any other living person and as a result I have certain qualifications for portraying it. I have just finished a three-volume history of the revolution — a work that has required three years of intense labor. I just finished thoroughly going over the material, which I plan to present to my audience in Copenhagen. And I am already enjoying the fact that I will be able once again to speak directly to an audience in a meeting, rather than to unknown readers. But I am going to talk only about the results of historical research; I am not going to talk politics.

R: Do you have any plans for the future?

T: Yes, I am preparing three books — one about the world economic and political situation and one about Lenin, a biography, which I have already written a little about in an English periodical.¹ But reports of my book on Lenin have leaked out In Spain, for instance, a book on Lenin has already come out with my name on the title page. A falsehood and a forgery from one end to the other. I didn't write a word of it.

R: What's behind this forgery, politics or the desire to make a dollar?

T: A combination of both, I think. The book will bring in money, and at the same time it will do damage to me. The book is political in character, and it is full of abominations. Among other things, it has me making extremely disparaging and contemptuous statements about Lenin, speaking about him in a way that was completely inconceivable for me. I am now trying through the Spanish courts to have justice done in this matter.

R: What do you plan to write about Lenin?

T: Besides writing his biography, in the second volume I want to do away with the false interpretations of his teachings and the incorrect conclusions that have been drawn from his ideas. And in the third volume, which will be theoretical and political, I will go into a polemic against what I call his epigones in Russia.

R: Was Lenin himself the Russian Revolution?

T: As a Marxist, I know that history is made according to the material conditions. But under certain circumstances, men can end up playing a decisive role Without a mechanic, the machine will not run, and without the spark plug's spark, the motor will not start — even if every other part is working fine. Lenin was the Russian Revolution’s spark.

R: Do you mean that without Lenin, there would have been no revolution?

T: All the necessary conditions for revolution were present in Russia in October 1917. But without him, I doubt that it would have occurred at that point. Or perhaps it would have lasted for three years; new factors would have come into play, and perhaps the opportunity would have been missed.

R: What was Lenin like?

T: A lovable and simple person. I can still remember him playing with my two sons in the corridors of the Kremlin, where we both had offices. He was like a child in the midst of all the seriousness. His character was such that he took a responsible approach to everything he did. He worked just as carefully on a speech to five workers in London as he did on a proposal to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets. And this almost omniscient man could all by himself make the world's most complicated questions simple and easy for the uninitiated to understand.

R: What did his death mean for the Soviet Union?

T: That Russia lost a man who could not be replaced.

R: And for you?

T: Aren't you trying to sneak in some politics here? You know I'm not going to say anything about politics.

R: Isn't everybody asking you about politics?

T. Yes, they are, but in order to avoid any misunderstanding, I never let a word about current politics cross my lips — let alone an interview. I am writing. I am enjoying the pleasure of relaxing after the exertions of the trip, and I intend to spend my time seeing Copenhagen and its surroundings, and renewing acquaintances I made during my stay here twenty-two years ago for the 1910 congress.