Christopher Hitchens - Christopher Hitchens is an author, journalist and literary critic. Now living in Washington, D.C., he has been a columnist at Vanity Fair, The Nation and Slate; additionally, he is an occasional contributor to many other publications.
Peter Robinson - Peter M. Robinson is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, where he writes about business and politics, edits Hoover's quarterly journal, the Hoover Digest, and hosts Hoover's television program, Uncommon Knowledge.
Robinson is also the author of three books: How Ronald Reagan Changed My Life; It's My Party: A Republican's Messy Love Affair with the GOP; and the best-selling business book Snapshots from Hell: The Making of an MBA.
Robert Service - Robert Service, a noted Russian historian and political commentator, is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a Fellow of St. Antony’s College, Oxford.
His research interests cover Russian history and politics in all its aspects from the late nineteenth century to the present day. Service has finished a biography of Leon Trotsky, drawing on the Hoover Archives, which will be published by Macmillan and Harvard University Press in October 2009.
He is the author of The Russian Revolution 1900–1927, 4th edition (London, 2009), Lenin: A Biography (London, 2000), “Architectural Problems of Reform in the Soviet Union: From Design to Collapse” in Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, vol. 2 (2001), Russia: Experiment with a People (London and Harvard, 2002), “Stalinism and the Soviet State Order,” in Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, vol. 1 (2003), A History of Modern Russia. From Tsarism to the Twenty-First Century, 3rd edition, expanded and updated (London and Cambridge, Mass., 2009), Stalin: A Biography (London and Cambridge, Mass., 2004), “Military Policy, International Relations and Soviet Security after October 1917,” in Russia: War, Peace and Diplomacy. Essays in Honour of John Erickson (London, 2004), “Soviet Political Leadership and 'Sovietological' Modelling,” in Leading Russia: Putin in Perspective: Essays in Honour of Archie Brown (Oxford , 2005), and Comrades: A World History of Communism (London and Cambridge, Mass., 2007).
Service holds an M.A. in modern languages from the University of Cambridge and an M.A and a Ph.D. in government from the University of Essex.
Leon Trotsky, one of the leading figures of the Russian October Revolution, remains a controversial figure. For many, Trotsky's assassination in Mexico marked a tragedy in Soviet history, cutting off the possibility of a humane version of communism taking hold in Russia, with Trotsky himself arguing that he would have held back the tides of arbitrary rule and terror. But is that so? In answering this question and others about Trotsky's ideas, political defeat, and exile, Hitchens and Service speak to the very nature of communist ideology.
I am very surprised to discover how Trotsky's ideas evolved and became contagious in the West. When I studied history back in post-soviet state there's was hardly any mentioning of Trotsky with the exception of him being a "traitor".
The second surprising note is Hitchens' admiration of Trotsky. Yes, he's "the man of both action and ideas", but so is Lenin. It appears to me from the conversation of Trotsky confronting Stalin is in greater degree a struggle for power rather than substantial difference in policies.
However, the point remains that Trotsky was morally (logically) superior to Stallin. The fact that both were men of ideas and action is acknowledged and they are operating on the unspoken assumption that Trotsky is a sort of poster-boy for socialism (at least compared to Stallin, and he was the only one who was close in fame who may have been compared to establish a thorough discourse about socialist ideology and politics.) This promps Hitchens' first response to the first question.
My only real question is this: Why does no one mention that even though Trotsky being the supreme leader of Russia may have increased the chances of a bloodbath in Germany, wouldn't said bloodbath have had huge odds of stopping the holocaust because it would certainly not have left Hitler in power? If so, wouldn't this mean that Trotsky certainly would have been the lesser of two evils? (not that there isn't already enough evidence for this.)
Absolutely. I was surprised too of Hitchens' admiration for Trotsky. I know, though, its pure Romanticism. The same reason why I admired Trotsky since college. For all hi intellect, Hitchens is mere mortal just like me!
I think that's the understanding -"lesser of the two evils"- that most Trotskyites have now - if we can put down our romanticised vision of the October revolution and the hope for Collective economy and a Just and Fair society - as against a Market Driven economy and Greed Driven society.