Nikolay Bukharin: a Retrospective Look at the Internal Party Discussions (on the Example of “How Not to Write the History of October”)

In our previous article, we analyzed an excerpt from N. I. Bukharin’s work “How Not to Write the History of the October Revolution”, which was written in 1924 in a heated debate with L. D. Trotsky and the Left Opposition. The excerpt provided a historical overview of the activities of the Central Committee of the Party, its Moscow and Petrograd committees, and Trotsky’s accusations of the party leadership’s retreat from the revolutionary movement and its separation from the revolutionary-minded masses. However, Bukharin’s positions as a prominent party ideologue in his polemics with Trotsky also provide insights into other parts of his work. In these sections, he examines the history of the party before 1917 and in the early 1920s, highlighting the intense and pivotal discussions surrounding Trotsky’s activities. This article examines Bukharin’s perception of the party’s activities as a group of Leninist associates, on the one hand, and Trotsky, on the other, during these historical periods, as a reflection of his positions in his polemics with Trotsky in 1923—1924.There are numerous works on the intra-party discussions of the 1920s, the positions and activities of Trotsky and Bukharin in the revolutionary movement, including those by prominent representatives of Russian and foreign historiography. However, there is still no consensus on the reasons for the sharp ideological confrontation between the two major representatives of Bolshevism in the 1920s, Trotsky and Bukharin, who both paid great attention to the destructive phenomena in party and state building, as well as the economic policies of the post-revolutionary period, and the serious challenges faced by the young Soviet state. This work by Bukharin helps to understand Bukharin’s position in this ideological struggle and complements his other works, which were created during a heated debate with the leftists on party building and economic policy.