TROTSKY
373
first explored the social physiognomy of bureaucratism, to his final
writings in 1940, in which he showed signs of uncertainty as to some
of his earlier sociological analyses of Stalinism. But especially in the
earlier critiques, Trotsky made the error of supposing that in al–
liance with the new conservative elements in the countryside (whose
interests he saw reflected in the "Right Communist" group led by
Bukharin) , the bureaucracy might constitute a nucleus for the
restoration of private capitalism. Actually, as it slowly gathered into
its hands control of the entire state, which meant control over the
socio-economic life of the nation, this new ruling stratum had every
interest in preventing a return to private capitalism, for it neither
owned nor could own property but instead controlled the state in
whose legal custody property resided. Private capitalism would have
meant the end of its power and privilege. It turned instead against
every real or potential source of opposition both within and outside
the party, destroying the bulk of the Bolshevik "Old Guard" in the
purges of the next decades, reducing the intellectuals to a traumatized
obedience, terrorizing the workers into passivity, and establishing it–
self as the sole center of power.
Until the late twenties, criticism of this bureaucratic trend
could still be voiced in Russia, though in the later years not with
impunity. Various opposition groups struggled to change the Bolshe–
vik course between 1920 and 1923, that is, before Trotsky became
the major critic of Stalinism and indeed, without his badly-needed
help. One respected Bolshevik oppositionist, G. Myasnikov, wrote:
"The Soviet power must maintain at its own expense a body of de–
tractors as did once the Roman Emperors." These words went un–
heeded, and their author suffered rebuke from the Central Com–
rruttee. The questions Trotsky would raise in his struggle against
Stalinism-questions concerning revolutionary strategy abroad, eco–
nomic development at home, democracy wi thin the ruling party–
were surely important; but now it seems clear that the main sig–
nificance of all the opposition groups, both Trotskyist and non–
Trotskyist, was as a series of ill-connected efforts to stop or slow
the trend toward totalitarianism.
For some years, roughly between 1923 and 1928, Trotsky was
both
political leader and intellectual guide of the left opposition
groups in Russia which attacked the growing despotism of the Stalin
