Theory Of Permanent Revolution Research Articles

Leon Trotsky and the political conundrum of international relations

In this article we identify the ways in which Leon Trotsky’s ideas constitute a powerful resource to understand the contemporary crisis of international relations and its historical roots in the 20th century. Trotsky’s concept of uneven and combined development has already been highlighted as a signal contribution by an established scholarship in and around the discipline of International Relations. While this is a welcome development, we contend that it has come at a significant cost, detaching Trotsky’s theoretical insights from his revolutionary politics. We employ a different mode of engagement with Trotsky’s ideas, focusing on the theory of Permanent Revolution as an expression of an original analysis of the dialectic between the national and the international. Far from being a theoretically detachable and politically erroneous appendage to the more fundamental and applicable concept of uneven and combined development, we argue that Permanent Revolution constitutes its necessary culmination, as well as Trotsky’s most significant contribution to classical Marxism. We then elucidate how, writing in the first half of the 20th century and applying his theory of Permanent Revolution, Trotsky was able to diagnose certain essential lines of political development – the rise and ongoing breakdown of American hegemony, the political degeneration and collapse of the Soviet Union, and the emergence and failure of the postcolonial independent nation states – tracing the long and crisis-ridden trajectory of international relations from the second half of the 20th century down to today.

Lew Dawidowicz Trocki o wojnie polsko-bolszewickiej 1919–1920

<p>Tekst dotyczy rekonstrukcji poglądów Lwa Dawidowicza Trockiego na wojnę polsko-bolszewicką 1919–1920. Podkreśla się zaledwie incydentalny związek jego teorii rewolucji permanentnej z początkiem, przebiegiem i zakończeniem tej wojny. Wskazana jest elastyczność poglądów Trockiego wynikająca ze zmiennych losów konfliktu zbrojnego. Podkreślone są praktyczne osiągnięcia tego polityka w obszarze budowy Armii Czerwonej, a także jego umiejętność oddzielania celów politycznych od bezpośredniego dowodzenia wojskiem. Wskazuje się, że ta wojna zasadniczo nie leżała w interesie politycznym obu stron konfliktu i żadnej z nich nie przyniosła korzyści. Stąd pacyfistyczne skłonności Trockiego do jej zakończenia. Ze strony Polski nie była to wojna uzasadniona względami ideologicznymi czy narodowościowymi. Chodziło o realizację pewnej wizji granic państwa polskiego. Ze strony Rosji Czerwonej (wbrew pozorom) nie wynikała zaś z założenia koniecznego wniesienia rewolucji na jej bagnetach na teren Europy Zachodniej, lecz miała w znacznej mierze charakter defensywny.</p>

Trotsky's Understanding of "The United States of Europe"

트로츠키는 1차 세계대전을 비롯해 전간기 유럽의 국제정치적 위기 상황과 관련해 19세기 유럽 평화주의 진영에서 논의되었던 유럽합중국론에 관해 자신의 입장을 밝혔다. 물론 그가 짧은 몇 편의 글에서 유럽의 정치적 통합에 관해 하나의 이론 체계를 정립한 것은 아니었다. 게다가 그는 유럽 문제를 자신의 주요 이론인 영구혁명론의 관점에서 바라보았다는 점에서 유럽합중국은 그의 주된 관심사는 아니었던 것으로 보인다. 말하자면, 유럽합중국은 연속되는 혁명 과정에서 한시적으로 존재했다가 사라지는 단계로 사회주의 혁명으로 가는 도정에 있어 일종의 과도기 전략으로 의미가 있었다. 바꿔 말해, 트로츠키에게 유럽합중국은 평화주의 운동에서 생각했던 것처럼 유럽의 평화를 항구적으로 보장하기 위한 정치체제라기보다 유럽의 프롤레타리아 혁명 과정에서 지나가게 되는 특정한 단계로 인식되었다. 이 글에서는 이러한 가설에 기초해 트로츠키의 유럽합중국론을 논하고자 한다. 글의 전반부에서는 트로츠키의 핵심 이론인 영구혁명론을 개괄할 것이다. 영구혁명론을 먼저 살펴보아야 하는 이유는 그가 국내외 정치 문제를 논할 때는 항상 이 이론에서 출발하기 때문이며, 유럽합중국 역시 국제정치적 이슈로서 영구혁명론과 분리해서 이해할 수 없기 때문이다. 이어서 글의 후반부에서는 유럽합중국에 관한 그의 글과 언급을 중심으로 그가 이를 어떻게 이해했는지를 살펴볼 것이다. 아울러 필자의 견해를 덧붙여 이를 평가해보고자 한다.Trotsky pointed out his position on the United States of Europe, which was discussed in the 19th century European pacifist camp in relation to the international political crisis in Europe during and after the World War I. In a few short articles he did not establish a theoretical framework for European political integration. Moreover, the United States of Europe seemed not to be his main concern, because he viewed the European conflicts and problems from the standpoint of his theory of permanent revolution. In other words, the United States of Europe was meaningful as a kind of transitional strategy in the struggle for the socialist revolution. It should exist for a limited period of time in the course of successive revolutions. For Trotsky, the United States of Europe was perceived as a specific stage that would pass through the process of proletarian revolution in Europe, rather than as a political system for the permanent guarantee of European peace, as was thought in the pacifist movement. Based on these hypotheses, I will discuss Trotsky s theory of European unity in this article. The first half of the article will outline Trotsky s core theory of permanent revolution. The reason why we should first look at the theory of permanent revolution is that he always starts from this theory when he discusses domestic and foreign political issues. The United States of Europe is also an international political issue and can not be understood separately from the permanent revolutionary theory. In the second half of the article, I will look at how he understood the United States of Europe in his writings and commentary on it. I would like to add my opinion and evaluate it.

Behind every Caesar a new one? Reflections on revolution and counter-revolution in Egypt in response to Gramsci on Tahrir

SUMMARYFocusing on the political ramifications of the concepts and historical analysis deployed in Gramsci on Tahrir (De Smet 2016), Anne Alexander and Sameh Naguib challenge Brecht De Smet’s reading of the development of capitalism and the 2011 revolution in Egypt through the lens of Caesarism, offering an alternative perspective on how the theory of permanent revolution can be applied in the Egyptian case as a tool for understanding why a revolution erupted in 2011 and why it took the course it did.

The Theory of Permanent Revolution and the 1905 Russian Revolution: The Early Discussions

이 글은 1905년과 1917년 러시아 혁명을 이해하는 데 필수적인 트로츠키의 연속 혁명론이 1905년 혁명 전후 어떻게 성장하고 발전했는지 다룬다. 연속혁명은 마르크스와 엥겔스가 처음 사용했는데, 1905년 혁명 이전에 복원되었다. 당대의 사회민주주의자들은 이 용어를 러시아 사회의 변화와 투쟁, 그리고 1905년 혁명에 적용하면서 사용했다. 이 글은 먼저 트로츠키 본인의 저작인 1906년 『평가와 전망』 초판과 그 이전 글을 통해 연속혁명에 대한 그의 내적 발전을 검토한다. 또 마르크스와 엥겔스가 사용한 연속혁명의 의미를 점검하고 메링, 카우츠키, 랴자노프, 파르부스, 룩셈부르크가 변화한 상황 속에서 어떻게 이를 사용했는지 살펴본다. 아울러 연속혁명에 대해 러시아 사회민주주의 지도자 플레하노프와 레닌이 어떻게 반응했는지 점검한다. 끝으로 연속혁명에 대해 논한 이들의 공통점과 차이점을 밝히고 트로츠키 연속혁명의 일관성과 철저함을 보인다. 결국 이 글은 연속혁명 이론의 발전 속에서 1905년 러시아 혁명의 경험이 중요한 역할을 했다는 점, 트로츠키만이 분명하게 연속혁명이라는 용어 안에 사회주의로의 이행을 포함시켰다는 점, 연속혁명을 논한 다른 이들이 비록 혁명의 부르주아적 한계를 최종적으로 넘어서지 못했을지라도 그 가능성을 고려했다는 점을 밝힌다.

The elusive ‘International’

This contribution to the forum on Alex Anievas’ Capital, the State and War takes issue with its reliance on a ‘lite’ version of Trotsky’s concept of uneven and combined development (UCD) cut out of the theory of permanent revolution. It argues that if Trotsky’s theory would have been taken seriously, a quite different reading of the world wars comes into view, in which ‘permanent counterrevolution’ as the overriding dynamic suggests an understanding of war as a link in that process. Permanent war as under the current War on Terror would fit into this. In Anievas’ version of UCD, the notion on the other hand functions in a quasi-Weberian actor theory of ‘the international’, which, like ‘the market’ in neoclassical economics, is assumed to be an ultimately unfathomable, regulatory instance. UCD then would serve as a reminder that there is social substance to ‘the international’—without specifying what that substance is. As a result, the entire procedure works to block the ability to really open up the inner workings of the global political economy as a process of class formation and struggle mediated by foreign and international relations.

'The American Worker' and the Theory of Permanent Revolution: Karl Kautsky on Werner Sombart's Why Is There No Socialism in the United States?

'The American Worker' and the Theory of Permanent Revolution: Karl Kautsky on Werner Sombart's Why Is There No Socialism in the United States?

A Preface to the Study of Modern Jewish Political Thought

U niversalism or particularism? That was the issue debated around 1890 within a student circle in Berlin. One speaker was A. L. Helphand, a revolutionary better known later by his pen name, Parvus. In ensuing years this curious figure helped to shape Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution; he was expelled from German Social Democracy for corruption, and, after he became the kaiser's agent, he helped to arrange Lenin's passage to the Finland Station.

Marxism and Revolution: Karl Kautsky and the Russian Marxists, 1900-1924

This book offers a new interpretation of the origins of Russian Marxism, placing it firmly within the folds of the western European socialist movement. Moira Donald argues that the chief theoretician of German Marxism, Karl Kautsky, was a primary influence on Lenin and the Russian Social Democratic Party, and that only the revolution of 1917 severed the Bolsheviks from mainstream orthodox Marxism. Donald contends that Lenin's thought was neither original nor especially significant in the development of Marxism, but that his ability lay in adapting his ideas to fit his revolutionary strategy. She places Lenin's writings in their historical context, showing that they were written as individual pieces, each with a specific aim and often directed within the Party. Lenin was a tactician rather than a thinker, says Donald, and even those areas of his thought that seem most original - the party, the role of the intelligentsia, and imperialism - reveal his significant debt to Kautsky. According to Donald, Lenin was not the only Russian Marxist to borrow ideas from Kautsky: Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution, which was to prove crucial when it was taken up by the Bolsheviks in 1917, was also influenced by Kautsky's thought. Kautsky's relationship with the Russian Social Democratic Party has been widely underestimated because of the later split between them. Using a wide range of published and unpublished sources, Donald reveals how important Kautsky's role was in formulating the ideology of the Bolsheviks - the only effective revolutionary party in the socialist movement. Moira Donald was lecturer in history in the Department of History and Archaeology at Exeter University.

The Politics of Combined and Uneven Development: The Theory of Permanent Revolution

The Politics of Combined and Uneven Development: The Theory of Permanent Revolution

II Imperialism and Dependency

The on-going discussion over the nature of Latin American relationship to imperial ism finds expression in this section in a number of critical essays. David Romagnolo ana lyzes the theory of Permanent Revolution and argues that it has negative implications if employed as a strategy for Latin American revolution. Romagnolo is a graduate student in history at the University of California, Irvine. John Myer assesses the Cardoso variant of dependency theory, arguing that it is not based upon the Marxist class struggle and leads to political inaction. Myer is a graduate student in history at the University of Cali fornia, Irvine. Kyle Steenland, who teaches American Studies at the State University of New York at Buffalo, while disagreeing with Gunder Frank that Chilean agriculture had been capitalist since the conquest, argues that capitalism has characterized the mode of production in Chilean agriculture since 1930. Finally Josd Ocampo responds to the criti cisms of his article (co-authored with Raúl Ferndndez) which appeared in the Spring 1974 issue of Latin American Perspectives. Ocampo is a political scientist at the Universidad Distrital, Bogotá, Columbia.