Biography Service

Katerina St. The audience listened carefully for more than an hour, after which he was asked a number of questions. Some listeners were students of the service or knew that he occupies leading positions in the teaching staff of Oxford. One of the asked questions expressed surprise that the service was not present at the lecture in order to act with the protection of their work. In English, the text of the speech of D.

North was published on May 6, this is my third lecture on this book. A legal question arises, what can be added to what I already wrote and said? This thought was spinning in my head when I began preparations for today's assembly. Will I have to repeat what I already said, although before the new audience? This, at least, in general, will not happen. Some repetitions are inevitable, but there is a lot of what else should be said.

Two things became clear for me when, after several months, I again turned to the biography of Mr. Service. Firstly, this book is even worse than before I had previously. Secondly, I did not immediately recognize all the actual mistakes, half-truths, distortions, falsification and frank slander, which should be found in a biography written by the Mr. Service. In fact, work on finding all errors in his book is presented by a lesson that would require several months of labor of more than one graduate of the historical faculty of Oxford.

What I wrote in my first review was not an exaggeration: a refutation of each statement, which is virtually wrong, is devoid of the necessary evidence and which violates the adopted research norms would require a volume of almost the same size as the service book itself. Each of its chapter contains statements and judgments that are completely incompatible from a purely professional point of view.

Earlier, I paid attention to some of the most evil passages in the biography written by the service, namely, to his insulting image of the personality and personal life of Trotsky. As the service recognized in his introduction, he intended to debunk the heroic image of Trotsky, which arose on the pages of the outstanding biographical trilogy of Isaac Doycher [Armed Prophet, disarmed by the Prophet, Prophet in exile] and which had a significant impact on the whole generation of radicalized youth in the years.

The intention of the service was not only to discredit Trotsky as a political figure, but also as a person: to present him with an ungrateful son, husband - a traitor and a red tape, a cold and inattentive father, a rude, squabble and unreliable comrade and, finally, a massacre, a man who “enjoyed the terror” Trotsky, p. In short, Trotsky was portrayed by one of the monsters of the political history of the twentieth century.

I also pointed to the obsessive concentration of Mr. Service in relation to Jewish origin of Trotsky, which the service considered in a style that can please anti-Semites. The detailed exposure of how the service tried to denigrate the identity of Trotsky would not leave time to criticize the interpretation of the policy of politics and the ideas of Trotsky. However, it should be noted that, according to the service of the service, he was not particularly interested in exploring what Trotsky was said, written or even, by and large, was done.

The service wrote that he intended to "excavate the buried life" p. The service said that he was interested in "which Trotsky was silent about what he had or wrote about." According to the service, “unspoken basic representations [Unutered Basic Assumptions]“ Trotsky ”were an integral part of the Amalgam of his life” p. This approach, corresponding to the goals of Mr.

Service, has both a commercial and political in nature. First of all, he eliminates him from the need for real familiarization with the main works of Trotsky, and even more so from the systematic study of his huge heritage of published and unrelated works. In any case, the service could not conduct a serious research, even if he was inclined to undertake it.

His biography of Trotsky was fabricated in accordance with the commercial formula that he developed with his publishers of MacMillan in Britain, Harvard University Press in the United States. Trotsky’s biography was the third big book of the service, which was thrown by the author to the market for only five years. The first book, the biography of Stalin, was published in the year.

It contained pages of text, skillfully divided into five parts. Each part contained 11 chapters with the volume of pages. The second book of the service, comrades of Comrades, was published two years later, in the year. This volume, declared as an authoritative history of world communism, contained pages of a text divided into six parts. Each part included six chapters. Each chapter consisted of pages.

Comrades are a caricature of political and intellectual history.The introduction written by the service for this and reminiscent of a frantic jump according to the sources of Marxism is read as a draft script for the parody show of Monty Python. The service informs its readers, among other things, that "Marx announced that Hegel should turn up up the ends," and that he never "indulged in the protection of private entrepreneurship by Ricardo." Having dealt so briskly with philosophy and political economy, the service proclaimed: "The decisive for Marxism was the dream that paradise would follow the apocalypse.

This method of thinking existed in Judaism, Christianity and Islam "p. This volume sparkles with many such a strikingly deep observation. After this publication, the service got involved in a new risky enterprise. In Trotsky, published in the year, the service and its publishers reached the perfect balance and the process of creating the text. Trotsky contains the page of the text into four parts, divided into four parts, divided into four parts.

13 chapters in all of the chapter, in each way, it can be reasonable that they expected to produce one chapter in a week and the completion of work in just one year. Thinking the material. However, even if Mr. Service agreed on a more free schedule, the result would still be the same. The service intended to attack Trotsky and do antitrotskyist work, which, in its very nature, excluded the fundamental and thoughtful study of the works and ideas of Trotsky.

Ignoring Trotsky's works contributed to the distortion of his ideas. For the service, the truth or untreatment of any separate statement or how much this or another judgment was based on the deserved confidence of evidence, there was no what to worry about. In the work of Trotsky, no absurdity was too grotesque. The fact that Trotsky was one of the great revolutionary thinkers of the twentieth century is not a statement that serious historians - including those who do not feel sympathy for his politics - would be disputed.

Undoubtedly, he was a writer who had an exclusive effect. He was a rare political figure who was able to take possession of the attention of the world through the power of his work. Deprived of all traditional attributes of power, living an exile in isolation - on the island of Rado with Istanbul in Turkey, then in the provincial villages of France and Norway and, finally, in the suburbs of Mexico City - Trotsky influenced world public opinion with his word.

His enemies continued to be afraid of him. The mention of his name could bring Hitler as a rage. Even the powerful Stalin, who had settled in the Kremlin and disposed of a huge apparatus of terror, was afraid of Trotsky. The Soviet historian, the late General Dmitry Volkogonov wrote: “He [Stalin] was translated in one copy almost everything that came out of Trotsky’s pen ... in a special cabinet in Stalin’s office ...

There were almost all Trotsky’s books, with numerous bookmarks, emphasizing. Interviews, Trotsky’s statements were immediately translated and reported to Stalin” [1]. In the remarkable passage of the Volkogonov, who had access to Stalin’s personal papers, he wrote: “The ghost of Trotsky often visited Stalin ... Stalin hated him more than when he was nearby ... When Stalin listened to Molotov, Kaganovich, Khrushchev, Zhdanov, he often came to him, how smarter, Trotsky was above these functionaries!

He mentally crossed his other associates and in his comrades -in -arms and I was convinced of confusion - neither in terms of thinking, nor in organizational grip, nor in oratory, nor in the skill of a publicist they could not compare with TPOTSKY. But he was smarter and more talented than him, Stalin ... Reading Trotsky’s translated books “Stalin's School of Falsification”, “An open letter to members of the Bolshevik party”, “Stalinsky Termidor”, “The Leader” almost lost his temper ”[2].

And after seventy years after the death of Trotsky, they continue to print in many languages ​​throughout the world. All the main representatives of classical Marxism - perhaps, with the exception of Marx and Engels - Trotsky remains the most readable author.Until the Russian revolution remains the subject of interest, polemic and inspiration - that is, for future generations, the monumental history of the Russian revolution Trotsky will retain its influence on the minds, imagination and feelings of readers.

Trotsky was undoubtedly the most important political thinker. As the famous modern historian Baruh-Patz Baruch Knei-Paz, who is not Trotskyist, was successfully expressed in the study of Trotsky’s ideas in the year: “A lot was written about the life and revolutionary activity of Trotsky-when he was in power and without power-but relatively little about his social and political ideas.

Perhaps this is quite natural, and his life is filled with many sensational events, and and Even today, and perhaps it is not unfairly considered as the most outstanding revolutionary in an era, which was not a shortage of revolutionary figures. And the political thinker in him was no less significant part of his personality than a more well -known person of action ”[3]. Now we listen to the service: "He [Trotsky] always wrote what was currently at his head" p.

Trotsky "did not claim intellectual originality: he would have been ridiculed if he tried to do it." His articles were filled with schematic projects, a shaky argument and poorly justified slogans "p.

When you read such passages, you are simply amazed at their absolute stupidity and rudeness. Does their author expect that such nonsense will be taken seriously? Really, he himself believes in this? The service does not give examples of" confusing the interference of the Trotsky. It is not trying to analyze or at least give a brief presentation of Trotsky’s work, similar to the above, even the most significant concepts and ideas related to Trotsky-such as the theory of permanent revolution and its analysis of the socio-economic foundations of the Soviet Union as a reborn working state-are not explained in which brief references are not explained in which brief references are not explained in which brief references are not explained in which brief references are not explained in which brief references are not explained in which brief references are not explained in Separate works by Trotsky are still brought, this is done in such a way as to expose their author and his ideas in a ridiculous form.

The service is not the first to use such equipment against Trotsky. In fact, his method is strikingly similar to the techniques used in the International Antitrotskyist Campaign, deployed by the Soviet bureaucracy and close to it by the Stalinist parties, such as the Communist Party of the UK CPC, in the end of the 10th - early 10ths. Being at that time a young graduate student studying Soviet history, Mr.

Service could be well aware of this campaign. In those years, Soviet bureaucracy became more and more concerned about the spread of Trotskyist influence among radicalized youth. But since Stalin’s crimes were already publicized by the disclosures of Khrushchev, it was no longer possible to simply blame Trotsky as a “fascist geek” for the ideological agents of the Kremlin, as was done in the years.

Other forms of disguised falsifications should be developed. A rough distortion of Trotsky’s works - especially their image absurd or as a delicious lunatic - played a major role in the renewed attack on Trotskyism. Of course, an attempt to discredit Trotsky’s ideas demanded that quotes from his work be minimized.