WHO KILLED LEON TROTSKY?

2013 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 109
Author(s):  
Rubén Gallo
Keyword(s):  
2001 ◽  
Vol 60 ◽  
pp. 232-233
Author(s):  
Gerd Callesen

This bibliography is quite an impressive effort. It is extensive, thorough, structurally sound, and contains excellent indexes. In short, it is a truly useful tool for anyone who, for scholarly or political reasons, takes an interest in Trotsky and Trotskyism. Of course, the definition of Trotskyism is somewhat blurred; too many people have used the concept subjectively, either with positive or negative connotations, for it to signify anything unambiguous. The Lubitzes have done their utmost to remedy this state of affairs by disregarding sectarian restraints and by choosing a broad approach to the subject; they have even gone to the extreme of including some anti-Trotskyist effusions of no real scholarly or current political value.


1985 ◽  
Vol 102 ◽  
pp. 253-276
Author(s):  
Peter Kuhfus

After the 1927/28 upheaval in the communist movement, a complex relationship evolved between Chen Duxiu (1879–1942) and Leon Trotsky (1879–1940). To date little has been written about this relationship in the west. The relationship between Chen and Trotsky, however, deserves treatment in its own right for various reasons. First, an elucidation of the contacts between them should close a significant gap in the respective biographies of the two Opposition leaders. The intention is not only to define Trotsky's role as seen from Chen's perspective, but also to emphasize the Far Eastern component hitherto underestimated in biographies of Trotsky. Secondly, the reconstruction of the relationship between Chen and Trotsky constitutes an important, correcting supplement to our knowledge of the developments ( = Wirkungsgeschichte) of “Trotskyism” in China, as it has been described as a concrete phenomenon as well as an ideological-political undercurrent. Thirdly, a study of the relationship between Chen and Trotsky should provide a better understanding of relations between the Communists of China and of the Soviet Union.


2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Alves Fogal

A revolução russa de 1917 tem sua relevância marcada objetivamente no plano histórico, principalmente por ter fortalecido o marxismo no Ocidente e oferecido uma perspectiva importante para se compreender e confrontar os rumos do capitalismo. Entretanto, fala-se pouco sobre sua importância para o campo das artes e da estética, algo que muitas das vezes é relegado ao segundo plano. O intuito desse estudo é demonstrar, a partir das reflexões de Leon Trotsky na obra Literatura e Revolução, como ele foi capaz de desenvolver uma linha de interpretação contundente sobre movimentos intelectuais importantes como o futurismo e o formalismo, dois marcos para a arte moderna no ocidente. 


2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcel van der Linden

AbstractThis paper presents a critical reconstruction of the main Marxist debates about the idea of 'leaps forward' in historical development. There have been two important approaches: the so-called 'law of uneven and combined development', as developed by Leon Trotsky, George Novack and Ernest Mandel, and Jan Romein's 'handicap of a head start'. Although Romein's approach is Stalinist in origin, elements of it are compatible with Trotsky's interpretation. But, even an expanded version of the 'law' of uneven and combined development lacks predictive value, although one can say with certainty in hindsight whether a combined development has taken place. It is argued that the 'law' is, in fact, an underspecified social mechanism and that its explanatory power can be increased by identifying a number of recurrent patterns.


Leon Trotsky ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. 3-24
Author(s):  
Kunal Chattopadhyay ◽  
Paul Le Blanc
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document