Part of the reason that Trotsky did not praise Clara Zetkin is that she was (quietly) aligned with Bukharin and the right wing of the CPSU. After the defeat of the right wing, she kept whatever criticisms of Stalin she had secret. She did die in 1933, before the bloodthirst of Stalin reached the heights of the Moscow trials and mass murder of communists (and so many others).

But there is another question. The united front was, of course, an extremely important tactic to develop in resisting the rise of fascism. But, as Zetkin related in her 1923 report to the CI Executive Committee, fascism rose as a movement in reaction to the failure of the Communist Party to lead the working masses to power. This was true both in Italy and in Germany. To use the example of Russia, it was not enough to shatter Kornilov’s army. If the Bolsheviks had not successfully led an insurrection, such as the one in October, a new Kornilov would have appeared, and perhaps won.

Am I too sectarian in thinking Zetkin’s 1932 Reichstag speech presented well the first half of this approach — the united front, but did not present as well the second half — the path to workers’ and farmers’ power? Maybe, but maybe not.

I too tried without success to find a comment on Zetkin by Trotsky. The next step, I think, is to consider Trotsky’s attitude to the “Right Opposition” originally led in Russia by Bukharin with which Zetkin was loosely associated. There are several articles on Brandler in the Trotsky Writings series, which are easy to find on Google. Trotsky and Brandler had important areas of partial agreement, including on the relationship of united front policy to resistance to fascism. But Trotsky’s comments on Brandler do not suggest that this agreement was reflected in any practical collaboration on this issue in Germany.

I believe Zetkin should best be remembered when she was at the height of her powers and influence. Even revolutionaries get old, infirm, lose their fire. And unfortunately, sympathizers of Trotsky and other oppositionists were very slow to understand the Stalinist coup. Bunny rabbits frozen in the road. Not realizing the danger they were in they talked too much and did little. But talking imperiled those spoken to. Still, few by then retained the discipline of the underground. Zetkin fought as long and as well as she could. Too bad she didn’t take the train to Geneva. Released from bondage, she would have been an inspiration.

Well said, Robert. It’s interesting to compare Zetkin’s statements with those by Trotsky. Until 1933, Trotsky believed it possible to reverse the degeneration of the Soviet CP within existing structures. Only in Zetkin’s last year did Trotsky call for a political revolution. Until 1933, they both shared a belief in the regenerative powers of the Soviet system at that time that is denied by a large segment of Anglo-American Marxists today.

I think a case can be made that Zetkin never shared Trotsky’s conviction that the degeneration in the Soviet Union was systemic. (There’s an interesting essay on this by Marcel Bois, so far available in German only.)

When you say “she should have used her resources to get out,” we must take note of her extreme isolation. Even so, she did make the painful and dangerous trip to Germany and succeeded in speaking out, just before her death. Other than that, regarding Stalin and the Stalin cult, she said nothing in public. In my opinion, in a context of universal compulsory adulation, hers was an eloquent silence.

John

Zetkin did not meet this standard. She waffled. Given her age and vulnerability accomodation with the regime is be understandable. At least she resisted. Think of the nameless Trotsyists in distant camps.

There is one thing a disciplined comrade might do in such a cirumstance which is to SAY NOTHING. If you are obliged by the regime sign on to whatever do so.. But people will know. Assume you are infiltrated and monitored. Zetkin must have known this. Muddied the waters some.

She should have used her resources to get out. And then raised her voice. That would have been a good thing.