My Life: An Attempt at an Autobiography (Dover Value Editions) Paperback – June 5, 2007

Trotsky wrote this autobiography in 1929 at age 48 and the English translation was published by Charles Scribner & Sons in 1930. I could not discover the translator. I read the Kindle edition, and accessed the 1935 Norwegian Preface from the Marxist Internet Archive. Obviously, the decade of his literary work, later exiles, and assassination in Mexico City after the start of the Second World War are not covered in this book.It is an appealing work, a thoughtful exploration of historical events and the Author's own part in them. Born into an ambitious Jewish family determined to take advantage of whatever class mobility was offered by late 19th Century Russia, young Lev Bronstein was not caught up in this but observed how it affected others, and this detached habit of mind developed and is exhibited throughout the autobiography. He is a careful student, a loner, and develops excellent communication skills. He attended middle school in Odessa, a resort with international clientele, and after a well-meant action intended to help a fellow student treated unjustly by school fellows, Bronstein found himself the object of slander and went from head of the class to expelled. He stated that the characters he met- virtuous peers who tried to do the right thing, scurrilous peers who contrived to attack others out of envy or malice, and the majority of vacillating peers who sided at first with one and then the other- he encountered the rest of his life.He came of age and embraced Marxism, taking the name "Trotsky" after one of the guards in his first imprisonment. These were days when Russia was under the influence of Pobedonostzev, the lay government official in charge of the Holy Synod, the committee of bishops that administered the Russian Orthodox (state) Church. Czar Peter the Great had replaced the Patriarchate of Moscow with a consistory, in frank imitation of the German Protestant model of church governance, so as to keep any one individual from attaining too much power/prestige vis-a-vis the Czar. Trotsky credited Pobedonostzev, who was popularly regarded as an out-of-touch bureaucrat, with being much more aware of the political/cultural forces at work in Russia which would have overthrown the regime much earlier if a permissive policy had been adopted by the government. However, Trotsky asserts, the conservatives could not know that social revolution was inevitable.This latter conviction, that History will work itself out, and that our own destiny is unknowable and, in the end insignificant, is Trotsky's faith. This conviction gives meaning and direction to his life and sustains him through challenges, reverses, power and exile. It gives the man humility, the ability to tell his own story without making his personal ups and downs the measure of its value. He allows the narration of facts speak for themselves, and his appreciation of others, recognition of their virtue, goodness, and integrity, is manifest on almost every page.Whether a calculated portrait or not, Trotsky emerges as a romantic hero. Much as the hero of romance does not look for trouble, but rather becomes involved when justice requires it, so Trotsky's life unfolds as a writer and organizer who is committed to international class revolution. His treatment by various governments, notably the English, is detailed, revealing the contrast between principle and practice. As an uncomplaining object of injustice from class enemies and presumably friends, he gains our sympathy. He takes great pains to express his admiration for Lenin as the true genius of the (October) Revolution, and Trotsky's own subordinate, yet vital and remarkable partnership is rescuing the Revolution from both Central Powers and White Russians. The fact that he is outmaneuvered by Stalin and his self-interested cronies makes him a tragic hero, one who keeps faith, even in exile and seeming failure.This also explains the need of Stalin to eliminate and vilify the old Bolshevik. Just as the story of the Byzantine (and many other empires) is marked by the need, not just to replace but to destroy the previous claimant or his heirs, so in the age of Ideology, the need remains to change the story by attacking the person and reputation of the protagonist.I say that Trotsky's faith is misplaced, obviously because I have another faith. Now "faith" has two aspects, two meanings. One is the believing faith, the subjective faith, the experience which sustains the individual through conflict, gives direction amid confusion, consoles when disappointed, enables integrity when outside forces work to change the individual's values, because this subjective faith recognizes something outside the believer which is more important than the believer's self. Trotsky was a man of this kind of faith and he inspires us with admiration of his person, even as Socrates inspired those he left behind.But the other meaning of faith is objective faith, the thing(s) believed. I believe I have money in the bank (to use a bourgeoisie illustration) and so I write a check and drive off with a new car. But my faith is mistaken, the check bounces, and I am followed by repossessors. And what is the substance of Trotsky's faith? The dialectical materialism of Marx, which is expected to lead to a more just society through equitable distribution of wealth. It is a salvation of humanity as a whole, the only hope available for the individual. The vanity of this expectation is illustrated in Trotsky's own experience of envy, veniality, and selfish pursuit of power among the revolutionaries who slandered and exiled him. Trotsky himself had to deal with the many critics who observed that the October Revolution which arose out of the desire to end the sacrifices of war ended up prolonging armed conflict in Russia years after the conflicts ended in the rest of Europe. The fact that Russians were economically worse off under Communism in the 15 years after the revolution is dismissed by him as a premature reading of history, the fulfillment of which he expects in the long run.As faith is "confidence in things not yet seen" as Hebrews puts it, Trotsky had a point, and many Trotskyites today continue that faith. But the decades since have shown the failure of the Soviet system, and intellectuals in the last half century have modified Marxist thinking from economic class conflict into race and gender conflict, tending toward either classic anarchist thinking, or the kind of totalitarian ideological regimes illustrated by Maoism. Such dysfunctional extremes are the fruit of mistaking class envy for justice.The Christian faith in contrast with Trotsky's faith transcends history and points to a reality beyond the temporal world. It frankly recognizes the hopelessness of human nature (without Divine intervention) and the provisional aspect of all governance and institution, but holds out the hope of individual salvation, begun in the temporal sphere but manifest primarily in an afterlife. While Trotsky expected humanity to evolve into a more perfect state with no guarantees for the individual, the Christian faith holds that human nature is only perfected outside the temporal world, and that a compassionate Creator entered His creation to invite us to set our hopes on what He has promised. Trotsky, man of faith that he was, found this unbelievable.

This is the only autobiography by any of the early foundational Communist leaders, and Trotsky (his assumed name, taken from one of his jailers) comes across as an extremely bright thinker, perhaps of the troika--Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin--the most original thinker, yet one who tried to stay true to the revolutionary aspects of Communist thought. It is easy to see how he came into conflict with Lenin and especially Stalin, who had him murdered, for the other two were willing to make any kind of change they deemed necessary to put and keep the Bolshevik party in power, and to make sure that history conformed to their approach (and in the process kept them in absolute control.) One cannot really understand the Russian Revolution and the state power that emerged without considering Trotsky's role. And, his writing style is engaging.

Trotsky is a great historical account of the Russian revolution and the intrigue post revolution between fellow revolutionaries. He was a passionate Marxist and very bright. His stubborn theory of permanent revolution most likely prevented him from making real change. In the end , a common political thug in Stalin achieved the notoriety and power.

If you're into Trotsky and Left Opposition politics as it were, this was a great read. Almost as good as Deutschet's 3 volume biography. Whatever criticism people have of Trotsky and/or Deutscher, these were volcanic times and both are by and large principled people. These books are reports from the front line on the first proletarian revolution. La Luta Continua. The Struggle Continues.

Great read. Trotsky counters many modern-day beliefs about the lack of productivity of communism and its short-comings with respect to capitalism. Very enriching even (or perhaps particularly) today, after a widespread (mis)understanding of communism has established itself in the western world.

We bought this when my daughter was directing "You Can't Take it With You" during the summer. She got 15 actors plus crew to essentially give up their summer to put on this play. One of her goals was authenticity of props, so this fit the bill. It was a great show.

Really detailed and interesting.

Mr Trotsky presents himself as sadly naive and self-absorbed, to such a degree that he lacked a native empathy for even the people who he was most indebted to. This was rather unexpected.