Introduction. The article analyzes the problem of substantiating morality in revolutionary activity using the example of L. D. Trotsky’s articles. The relevance of the article is connected with its consideration of ethical ideas, which are largely common to Marxist and generally left-radical philosophy. In addition, the works of L. D. Trotsky that we are considering, for political reasons, entered into free scientific circulation relatively recently, and to date have not received a sufficient amount of versatile academic commentary, primarily philosophical. The purpose of the study is to analyze the position of L. D. Trotsky regarding the use of violence as a means of achieving political goals, to identify the main arguments and principles underlying his approach to this problem, and also to assess its influence on political thought and practice. As a result of the analysis, the authors strive to provide readers with a deeper understanding of the problematic ethical aspects of using violence in politics through the prism of the ideas and views of Leo Trotsky. Methods. The authors use historical and hermeneutic methods. The first allows us to explore the context of the time in which the ethical views of L. D. Trotsky developed, and the second allows us to identify in his texts the basic principles and ideas characteristic of revolutionary radicalism. In addition, general scientific methods were used: analysis, synthesis, comparison and generalization, which made it possible to organize the material, identify patterns and draw conclusions based on a comparison of the ethical views of L. D. Trotsky with various ethical systems, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses in these views. Scientific novelty of the research. The authors focus on the problematic substantiation of morality in the articles of L. D. Trotsky, primarily such as “Terrorism and Communism” (1920) and “Their Morality and Ours” (1938, written in exile). At the same time, Western research on this topic is analyzed, as well as the controversy that unfolded between Trotsky and Bertrand Russell. It is noted that based on the statements of F.M. Dostoevsky that building a just society is impossible with the help of immoral means, since the goal can be transformed depending on the methods of achieving it. The problematic nature of the concept of conscience and possible options for its inadequate interpretation are revealed: (1) when it replaces the moral and metaphysical ideal (I. Kant, L. Tolstoy), or (2) it is completely declared a “chimera”, identified with selfish aspirations, the need to capture and retain power, hiding behind some ideals. It is indicated that the second position is characteristic of L. Trotsky, who tried to “morally” justify total revolutionary violence. Results. The authors come to the conclusion that Trotsky’s position is essentially an extremely utilitarian and revolutionary version of Machiavellianism, when, for the sake of an allegedly good goal, it becomes possible to carry out mass repressions, to sacrifice not only people, but also entire nations. It turned out that sworn political opponents, Stalin and Trotsky, assessed the role of violence in politics in a similar way. At the same time, the launched flywheel of violence cannot be stopped so easily; it destroyed Trotsky himself. Nevertheless, the fact that Trotsky addressed this item speaks to the importance of resolving the moral problems associated with revolutionary practice.
Read full abstract