What do you think?
Rate this book
Trotsky #2
The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky, 1921-1929
Few political figures of the twentieth century have aroused as much controversy as the Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky. Trotsky’s extraordinary life and extensive writings have left an indelible mark on revolutionary conscience, yet there was a danger that his name would disappear from history. Originally published in 1954, Deutscher’s magisterial three-volume biography was the first major publication to counter the powerful Stalinist propaganda machine. In this definitive biography Trotsky emerges in his real stature, as the most heroic, and ultimately tragic, character of the Russian Revolution.
This second volume of the trilogy, first published in 1959, is a self-contained account of the great struggle between Stalin and Trotsky that followed the end of the civil war in Russia in 1921 and the death of Lenin. From the narrative of Trostsky’s uncompromising opposition to Stalin’s policies emerge character studies of the important Soviet leaders; a brilliant portrait of Trotsky the man of ideas, the Marxist philosopher and literary critic; and a new assessment of the causes of defeat which led to his expulsion from the party, his exile, and his banishment from Russia.
This second volume of the trilogy, first published in 1959, is a self-contained account of the great struggle between Stalin and Trotsky that followed the end of the civil war in Russia in 1921 and the death of Lenin. From the narrative of Trostsky’s uncompromising opposition to Stalin’s policies emerge character studies of the important Soviet leaders; a brilliant portrait of Trotsky the man of ideas, the Marxist philosopher and literary critic; and a new assessment of the causes of defeat which led to his expulsion from the party, his exile, and his banishment from Russia.
464 pages, Paperback
First published December 31, 1959
21 people are currently reading
1649 people want to read
About the author
Isaac Deutscher
54 books149 followersIsaac Deutscher was a Polish-born Jewish Marxist writer, journalist and political activist who moved to the United Kingdom at the outbreak of World War II. He is best known as a biographer of Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin and as a commentator on Soviet affairs. His three-volume biography of Trotsky, in particular, was highly influential among the British New Left.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 39 reviews
April 10, 2012
I came away with five things from the second volume of Isaac Deutscher’s incomparable Trotsky biography -- The Prophet Unarmed. Some of these thoughts are new to me, some of them are solidifications of ideas or opinions I already had, but they are what I leave this book with and, I think, worth sharing.
5. Stalin destroyed the promise of Engels, Marx and Lenin. He stained communism. And he provided capitalism with the ugliness it needed to vilify communism in the minds of their own, potentially dangerous, proletarian ranks. His need for power, the way he achieved it, his authoritarianism -- none of these things a feature of genuine communism -- all came to represent communism in the minds of the capitalist west. Stalin’s very existence was capitalism’s best propaganda tool against communism. And this man who was neither a Bolshevik nor a true Communist remains the best tool to this day (with neo-Stalinists Mao and Pol Pot a close second and third).
4. The U.S., England and their European lackeys should be ashamed of themselves -- as usual -- because it would have been vastly more difficult (if not impossible) for Stalin to have achieved power if it weren’t for their meddling in the earliest days of the Soviet Union. Arms and advisors sent to the White Guard during the Civil War, isolationist policies, boycotts, etc., etc., worsened already terrible conditions in post-Tsarist Russia, forcing the early Bolsheviks into compromising their principles to ensure survival, and once those principles were compromised the situation became easier and easier for Stalin to manipulate. While the west’s support of the counter-revolution failed in the short term, it certainly succeeded in condemning the Soviet Union to totalitarianism in the long term.
3. The methods, tactics and controls of Stalinism are not all that different from contemporary North America. Our right wing engages in fear mongering, disinformation, media manipulation, vilification of dissenters, purges, and claims to moral superiority and historical loyalty; they’re tactics are so commonplace as to be almost unnoticeable to everyday citizens. Worse still, our left is as apathetic and conciliatory as most of the Left Opposition that Trotsky tried in vain to rally in his day. Our liberals clamour on about how “nice and polite and correct” they are, about how “stupid and racist and misogynistic” the right is, but they’ve not learned the lesson that their “enlightenment” is a minority “enlightenment” that can only be turned into a majority “enlightenment” through hard work and a conscious effort to negate their tendency to condescension. History repeating itself. Again.
2. Trotsky was a great man. Some can be great revolutionaries. Some can be great thinkers. Some can be great leaders. Some can be great diplomats. Some can be great warriors. Some can be great writers. Some can be great winners. Some can be great losers. Some can live great lives. Some can die great deaths. But very few can be and do all of them in their lifetime. Trotsky was great at every single one. In the annals of socialism only Marx and Lenin can match him (although Engels and Che surely deserve honourable mentions). The hatchet to the brain was a great loss to us all.
1. Communism can’t succeed. Not because of any bullshit about the superiority of capitalism. Not because communism is “inherently evil” as ultra-capitalists would have us believe. Not even because it is “unworkable.” Communism can’t succeed because it hard fucking work. To be a communist, to create a communist society, everyone must be dedicated to selflessness, to hard work, to action, to trust, to reason, to each other. But most humans are too selfish, too apathetic, too untrusting, too unreasonable, too lazy to achieve the requirements of communism, and so communism must fail.
But I’ve a crappy lance, a skinny horse, and a world full of windmills, so I’ll keep fighting.
5. Stalin destroyed the promise of Engels, Marx and Lenin. He stained communism. And he provided capitalism with the ugliness it needed to vilify communism in the minds of their own, potentially dangerous, proletarian ranks. His need for power, the way he achieved it, his authoritarianism -- none of these things a feature of genuine communism -- all came to represent communism in the minds of the capitalist west. Stalin’s very existence was capitalism’s best propaganda tool against communism. And this man who was neither a Bolshevik nor a true Communist remains the best tool to this day (with neo-Stalinists Mao and Pol Pot a close second and third).
4. The U.S., England and their European lackeys should be ashamed of themselves -- as usual -- because it would have been vastly more difficult (if not impossible) for Stalin to have achieved power if it weren’t for their meddling in the earliest days of the Soviet Union. Arms and advisors sent to the White Guard during the Civil War, isolationist policies, boycotts, etc., etc., worsened already terrible conditions in post-Tsarist Russia, forcing the early Bolsheviks into compromising their principles to ensure survival, and once those principles were compromised the situation became easier and easier for Stalin to manipulate. While the west’s support of the counter-revolution failed in the short term, it certainly succeeded in condemning the Soviet Union to totalitarianism in the long term.
3. The methods, tactics and controls of Stalinism are not all that different from contemporary North America. Our right wing engages in fear mongering, disinformation, media manipulation, vilification of dissenters, purges, and claims to moral superiority and historical loyalty; they’re tactics are so commonplace as to be almost unnoticeable to everyday citizens. Worse still, our left is as apathetic and conciliatory as most of the Left Opposition that Trotsky tried in vain to rally in his day. Our liberals clamour on about how “nice and polite and correct” they are, about how “stupid and racist and misogynistic” the right is, but they’ve not learned the lesson that their “enlightenment” is a minority “enlightenment” that can only be turned into a majority “enlightenment” through hard work and a conscious effort to negate their tendency to condescension. History repeating itself. Again.
2. Trotsky was a great man. Some can be great revolutionaries. Some can be great thinkers. Some can be great leaders. Some can be great diplomats. Some can be great warriors. Some can be great writers. Some can be great winners. Some can be great losers. Some can live great lives. Some can die great deaths. But very few can be and do all of them in their lifetime. Trotsky was great at every single one. In the annals of socialism only Marx and Lenin can match him (although Engels and Che surely deserve honourable mentions). The hatchet to the brain was a great loss to us all.
1. Communism can’t succeed. Not because of any bullshit about the superiority of capitalism. Not because communism is “inherently evil” as ultra-capitalists would have us believe. Not even because it is “unworkable.” Communism can’t succeed because it hard fucking work. To be a communist, to create a communist society, everyone must be dedicated to selflessness, to hard work, to action, to trust, to reason, to each other. But most humans are too selfish, too apathetic, too untrusting, too unreasonable, too lazy to achieve the requirements of communism, and so communism must fail.
But I’ve a crappy lance, a skinny horse, and a world full of windmills, so I’ll keep fighting.
April 28, 2018
الجزء الثاني من حياة تروتسكي من بعد وفاة لينين إلى ما قبل النفي، في جزء منه كانت مناقشات اقتصادية طويلة مملة لكن كما الجزء الأول أسلوبا الكاتب والمترجم رائعان.
April 22, 2025
A far cry from the highs of the first entry in this trilogy- where Trotsky's youth, élan, and revolutionary zeal find their match in the maelstroms of 1905 and 1917- The Prophet Unarmed is both falling action and climax.
The simultaneously heroic and tragic travails of the first part of Trotsky and the Russian Revolution's lives give way to crisis-management, political intrigue, and factional strife. In the hands of a lesser author, and perhaps with a figure less titanic than Trotsky, this would make for a sad sequel. But, for me, Deutscher captures the epic nature of the struggles- mostly waged over the heads of the masses, true- taking place in all of their complexity, drama, and importance.
An incredible read, which I would wholeheartedly recommend to any Marxist, historian, or student of revolution.
The simultaneously heroic and tragic travails of the first part of Trotsky and the Russian Revolution's lives give way to crisis-management, political intrigue, and factional strife. In the hands of a lesser author, and perhaps with a figure less titanic than Trotsky, this would make for a sad sequel. But, for me, Deutscher captures the epic nature of the struggles- mostly waged over the heads of the masses, true- taking place in all of their complexity, drama, and importance.
An incredible read, which I would wholeheartedly recommend to any Marxist, historian, or student of revolution.
March 10, 2016
This was as great as expected, recommended from a generation of writers and thinkers who cut their teeth on this one. It is not really a biography but historical drama, with politics as its focus, and Trotsky the main star. It would be a mistake to avoid this, feeling that you need to have a position on communism. It is not necessary; at every step of the way Deutscher pitches his story at the level of monumental stakes where millions of lives are concerned, and how one brilliant man came to terms trying to define those stakes, to lead his people a certain way. It is the thinking man who is the "prophet", not the one who may or may have not got things right about the 20th century.
Hitchens had a good line about why Trotsky survives as a figurehead, whereas others were "localized before they were defeated." He credits Deutscher as a Talmudic scholar and a Marxist polymath. On both, Deutscher pauses halfway in to address Trotsky's Jewishness:
"As a rule the progressive or revolutionary Jew, brought up on the border lines of various religions and national cultures, whether Spinoza or Marx, Heine or Freud, Rosa Luxemburg or Trotsky was particularly apt to transcend in his mind religious and national limitations and to identify himself with a universal view of mankind. He was therefore also peculiarly vulnerable whenever either religious fanaticisms or nationalist emotions ran high. Spinoza and Marx, Heine and Freud, Rosa Luxemburg and Trotsky, all suffered excommunication, exile, and moral or physical assassination; and the writings of all were burned at the stake."
Excellent quote but you would think the revolutionary Jew from Nazareth should at least get a nod?
There is way too much to even begin to summarize, whether coming to terms with an absurdity like "inner-party democracy" or in trying to imagine who you would favor, the working class or the wealthy peasantry. The bourgeoisie actually have their uses, which was one of the pleasant surprises of this book. What explains Trotsky's failure to seize power after Lenin died? The plot is exceptionally thick, and what you won't get is Hamlet-like explanations for why not. By contrast, I dipped into the Robert Service biography and in five minutes of browsing was told outright that Trotsky is a murderer and that one time in the early 1920s he looked the other way from his wife. If you need to feel superior than your subject, then Deutscher's is not the one for you. But if you're into a person whose cultural and educational philosophy is against "half-knowledge and semi-competence" (p. 141-2) and who, surprisingly, didn't favor abusive language, please, give this one a go.
Hitchens had a good line about why Trotsky survives as a figurehead, whereas others were "localized before they were defeated." He credits Deutscher as a Talmudic scholar and a Marxist polymath. On both, Deutscher pauses halfway in to address Trotsky's Jewishness:
"As a rule the progressive or revolutionary Jew, brought up on the border lines of various religions and national cultures, whether Spinoza or Marx, Heine or Freud, Rosa Luxemburg or Trotsky was particularly apt to transcend in his mind religious and national limitations and to identify himself with a universal view of mankind. He was therefore also peculiarly vulnerable whenever either religious fanaticisms or nationalist emotions ran high. Spinoza and Marx, Heine and Freud, Rosa Luxemburg and Trotsky, all suffered excommunication, exile, and moral or physical assassination; and the writings of all were burned at the stake."
Excellent quote but you would think the revolutionary Jew from Nazareth should at least get a nod?
There is way too much to even begin to summarize, whether coming to terms with an absurdity like "inner-party democracy" or in trying to imagine who you would favor, the working class or the wealthy peasantry. The bourgeoisie actually have their uses, which was one of the pleasant surprises of this book. What explains Trotsky's failure to seize power after Lenin died? The plot is exceptionally thick, and what you won't get is Hamlet-like explanations for why not. By contrast, I dipped into the Robert Service biography and in five minutes of browsing was told outright that Trotsky is a murderer and that one time in the early 1920s he looked the other way from his wife. If you need to feel superior than your subject, then Deutscher's is not the one for you. But if you're into a person whose cultural and educational philosophy is against "half-knowledge and semi-competence" (p. 141-2) and who, surprisingly, didn't favor abusive language, please, give this one a go.
February 4, 2016
تاريخ دهه اول بعد از انقلاب اكتبر، نبردهاى داخلى حزب بلشويك و نحوه به قدرت رسيدن نهايى استالين. زبان كتاب فوق العاده بود و نويسنده خيلى خوب تونسته همه اجبارها و تناقض هايى كه پيامدهايى انچنان بزرگ داشت رو وصف كنه و شرح بده
March 6, 2023
I loved all three parts of this wonderful biography of one of the modern world’s most fascinating men. I looked for his island home-in-exile while I was in Turkey but, sadly, am not really sure I found it.
July 12, 2022
good shit!
July 18, 2022
Sveučilišna naklada Liber
Zagreb, 1976.
Prevela Nada Šoljan
Jezično Isaac Deutscher tka jedan zanimljiv tekst. tekstil njegova tkanja je kvalitetan, dakako ne u književnoumjetničkom vidu, već u žurnalističkom vidu.
Ne bih ovaj tekst karakterizirao kao znanstveni ili čak popularno-znanstveni, ne radi se o biografiji, radi se o hagiografiji.
Zanimljivo je kako Deutscher sam iznosi, ili navodi Trockijeve citate, kako je Trocki zapravo bio po mnogo čemu veći staljinist od samog Staljina.
Trocki je još u dvadesetima zagovarao brzu i radikalnu industrijalizaciju i stvaranje seljačih zadruga.
Jedna pseudoreligija kao što je takozvani "znanstveni socijalizam" je od svog začetka obnovila jedan izrazito drevan vid upravljanja društvom.
Sovjetski Savez je bio oživjela okamina, probuđeni trilobit, u sociološkom smislu nanovo oživljeni dinosaur.
Nema ničega novog u ideji komunizma, Sovjetski Savez je oživio zastarjeli sustav znan kao teokratski socijalizam.
Isto kao što u bespućima povijesti nailazimo na pseudoreligije Sumera i drevnog Egipta koje su se klanjale demonima i koje su održavale državnu birokraciju vojskom robova, Sovjetski Savez je bio odraz nečega već viđenog tisućama godinama prije Krista.
Komunizam je poput svakog izroda Francuske revolucije regresivan.
Čitajući ovu hagiografiju stekoh dojam da je jedini iole normalan u sovjetskoj administraciji bio Buharin koji je želio nastaviti s NEP-om i koji je branio privatno vlasništvo na selu.
Već više od trideset godina ne postoji Savez Sovjetskih Socijalističkih Republika, u narednih trideset godina rastakanje onoga što je ostalo od Sovjetskog Saveza će doživjeti jednu novu razinu, svi oni koji su živjeli u tom razdoblju će umrijeti, još više spomenika će se uništiti.
Metapolitički i geopolitički će biti izuzetno zanimljivo što će se događati s Ruskom Federacijom kroz ovo desetljeće, tridesete i četrdesete.
Spengler je davno ubrao da Rusija nikada neće postati zasebna civilizacija, vječno će biti raskoljena između faustovske i, zaboravio sam kako je Spengler prozvao azijatsku civilizaciju. Oprostite.
Na nespenglerijanski i naivni način nadam se ipak pobjedi faustovske civilizacije u Rusiji, uspostavi istinske parlamentarne demokracije.
Zanimljivo je kako su sibirska prostranstva progutala tako mnogo buntovnika, od Trockoga do Jurja Križanića.
Dakako, ti butnovnici su bili izrazito heterogeni; od ubojica poput psa Trockoga do umnih silnika poput Jurja Križanića.
Hasta luego mis murcielagos!
Zagreb, 1976.
Prevela Nada Šoljan
Jezično Isaac Deutscher tka jedan zanimljiv tekst. tekstil njegova tkanja je kvalitetan, dakako ne u književnoumjetničkom vidu, već u žurnalističkom vidu.
Ne bih ovaj tekst karakterizirao kao znanstveni ili čak popularno-znanstveni, ne radi se o biografiji, radi se o hagiografiji.
Zanimljivo je kako Deutscher sam iznosi, ili navodi Trockijeve citate, kako je Trocki zapravo bio po mnogo čemu veći staljinist od samog Staljina.
Trocki je još u dvadesetima zagovarao brzu i radikalnu industrijalizaciju i stvaranje seljačih zadruga.
Jedna pseudoreligija kao što je takozvani "znanstveni socijalizam" je od svog začetka obnovila jedan izrazito drevan vid upravljanja društvom.
Sovjetski Savez je bio oživjela okamina, probuđeni trilobit, u sociološkom smislu nanovo oživljeni dinosaur.
Nema ničega novog u ideji komunizma, Sovjetski Savez je oživio zastarjeli sustav znan kao teokratski socijalizam.
Isto kao što u bespućima povijesti nailazimo na pseudoreligije Sumera i drevnog Egipta koje su se klanjale demonima i koje su održavale državnu birokraciju vojskom robova, Sovjetski Savez je bio odraz nečega već viđenog tisućama godinama prije Krista.
Komunizam je poput svakog izroda Francuske revolucije regresivan.
Čitajući ovu hagiografiju stekoh dojam da je jedini iole normalan u sovjetskoj administraciji bio Buharin koji je želio nastaviti s NEP-om i koji je branio privatno vlasništvo na selu.
Već više od trideset godina ne postoji Savez Sovjetskih Socijalističkih Republika, u narednih trideset godina rastakanje onoga što je ostalo od Sovjetskog Saveza će doživjeti jednu novu razinu, svi oni koji su živjeli u tom razdoblju će umrijeti, još više spomenika će se uništiti.
Metapolitički i geopolitički će biti izuzetno zanimljivo što će se događati s Ruskom Federacijom kroz ovo desetljeće, tridesete i četrdesete.
Spengler je davno ubrao da Rusija nikada neće postati zasebna civilizacija, vječno će biti raskoljena između faustovske i, zaboravio sam kako je Spengler prozvao azijatsku civilizaciju. Oprostite.
Na nespenglerijanski i naivni način nadam se ipak pobjedi faustovske civilizacije u Rusiji, uspostavi istinske parlamentarne demokracije.
Zanimljivo je kako su sibirska prostranstva progutala tako mnogo buntovnika, od Trockoga do Jurja Križanića.
Dakako, ti butnovnici su bili izrazito heterogeni; od ubojica poput psa Trockoga do umnih silnika poput Jurja Križanića.
Hasta luego mis murcielagos!
March 13, 2026
Excellent account of the struggle for the soul of Russian communism in the 1920's
August 8, 2016
Reading The Prophet Unarmed is a bit like watching a horror movie in which the protagonist - a man taking his family on vacation - continues to drive down an ominous country road despite repeated warnings that a dangerous madman may be on the loose. You want to scream at the screen, What the fuck are you doing, man!? Don't you know he's going to kill you! He's going to kill ALL of you!!
*
While reading Deutscher's excellent biography, it's important to keep in mind that the personal tragedy of Leon Trotsky is by no means a synecdoche for the much broader tragedy that befell the Soviet Union under Stalin. Trotsky was expelled from the party and exiled over a series of fairly scholastic debates within Marxism. Stalin would then adopt many of Trotksy's ideas as his own. Throughout the twenties Trotsky, not Stalin, was the strongest advocate of rapid industrialization and class war against the kulaks. These were the policies that would lead to genocide in the thirties. Perhaps if he'd been the one in power, Trotsky would have tried to carry them out in a less brutal fashion. Still, the policies themselves were inherently brutal. It's not really possible to non-violently destroy a society.
*
Deutscher is obviously sympathetic to Trotksy and the revolution to which he dedicated his life. This puts him in a somewhat awkward position vis-a-vis Stalin. While he laments the terror, Deutscher is unable to condemn categorically the convulsions to which Stalin subjected his country in the '30s. The rapid industrialization of the Soviet Union led to unspeakable horrors to millions and millions of people. At the same time, it also transformed it from a primitive backwater to a modern society with mass literacy and, eventually, a higher standard of living. Moreover, if it weren't for this transformation the Soviet Union very likely could not have defeated Hitler in the second World War.
Is it possible to separate these two aspects - the terror and misery from eventual improvement? or were they indivisible parts of a single process? To ask these questions is to enter into a morally queasy position. Nonetheless, I fear that such queasiness is what intellectual honesty demands.
*
While reading Deutscher's excellent biography, it's important to keep in mind that the personal tragedy of Leon Trotsky is by no means a synecdoche for the much broader tragedy that befell the Soviet Union under Stalin. Trotsky was expelled from the party and exiled over a series of fairly scholastic debates within Marxism. Stalin would then adopt many of Trotksy's ideas as his own. Throughout the twenties Trotsky, not Stalin, was the strongest advocate of rapid industrialization and class war against the kulaks. These were the policies that would lead to genocide in the thirties. Perhaps if he'd been the one in power, Trotsky would have tried to carry them out in a less brutal fashion. Still, the policies themselves were inherently brutal. It's not really possible to non-violently destroy a society.
*
Deutscher is obviously sympathetic to Trotksy and the revolution to which he dedicated his life. This puts him in a somewhat awkward position vis-a-vis Stalin. While he laments the terror, Deutscher is unable to condemn categorically the convulsions to which Stalin subjected his country in the '30s. The rapid industrialization of the Soviet Union led to unspeakable horrors to millions and millions of people. At the same time, it also transformed it from a primitive backwater to a modern society with mass literacy and, eventually, a higher standard of living. Moreover, if it weren't for this transformation the Soviet Union very likely could not have defeated Hitler in the second World War.
Is it possible to separate these two aspects - the terror and misery from eventual improvement? or were they indivisible parts of a single process? To ask these questions is to enter into a morally queasy position. Nonetheless, I fear that such queasiness is what intellectual honesty demands.
March 24, 2011
As riveting as a biography can get. Deutscher bests his effort in The Prophet Armed by sympathetically giving Trotsky his due without prostrating himself before the revolutionary's legacy. He manages to frankly address Trotsky's inconsistencies and shortcomings -- both as a political theorist and as a man -- while also extolling his many virtues. This balance allows the reader to comfortably come to their own conclusion about Trotsky's most turbulent period, feeling that they are evaluating a three-dimensional person, not some biographer's slanted view.
As far as the 'narrative' goes it is detailed without bogging down, involved in political theory without reading like a primer on Trotskyism and generally very well-written. This was a fascinating period of an incredible man's life and one can profoundly feel the gravitas of the spiraling situation as well as the ferociously powerful intellect of the book's subject through Deutscher's excellent writing style.
More than The Prophet Armed which was largely straightforward, linear 'storytelling,' this book called for incredible nuance and consideration from the author. Deutscher pulls it off with aplomb. Trotsky's fall from favor is, without exaggeration, the most tragic true story you will ever read, simply because of what was at stake. In The Prophet Unarmed the reader lives that tragedy in all its heart-rending misery. Highly, highly recommended biography.
As far as the 'narrative' goes it is detailed without bogging down, involved in political theory without reading like a primer on Trotskyism and generally very well-written. This was a fascinating period of an incredible man's life and one can profoundly feel the gravitas of the spiraling situation as well as the ferociously powerful intellect of the book's subject through Deutscher's excellent writing style.
More than The Prophet Armed which was largely straightforward, linear 'storytelling,' this book called for incredible nuance and consideration from the author. Deutscher pulls it off with aplomb. Trotsky's fall from favor is, without exaggeration, the most tragic true story you will ever read, simply because of what was at stake. In The Prophet Unarmed the reader lives that tragedy in all its heart-rending misery. Highly, highly recommended biography.
Read
May 27, 2007 The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky 1921-1929
This is the middle volume of Isaac Deautscher's magisterial political biography, a fascinating account of ideology vs. Realpolitik. Trotsky was by my lights an evil genius (considering the system he had a hand in creating) who got creamed by an incomparably more brutal evil genius –and thus becomes a sympathetic figure. Stalin was no aberration; the revolution was not betrayed, it just devoured its own! Dated, of course, but for that very reason it remains trenchant nearly two decades after the downfall of the USSR.
This is the middle volume of Isaac Deautscher's magisterial political biography, a fascinating account of ideology vs. Realpolitik. Trotsky was by my lights an evil genius (considering the system he had a hand in creating) who got creamed by an incomparably more brutal evil genius –and thus becomes a sympathetic figure. Stalin was no aberration; the revolution was not betrayed, it just devoured its own! Dated, of course, but for that very reason it remains trenchant nearly two decades after the downfall of the USSR.
November 1, 2025
Stalin gegen Trotzki - das ist Brutalität. Penibel und packend beschrieben von einem Trotzki Sympathisanten im Jahr 1959.
November 2, 2023
I really enjoyed this detailed and affectionate biography of Trotsky. It’s filled with fascinating vignettes of how he engaged with politics and governance. Having studied Stalinism at university, I understand that Deutscher’s assessment of Stalin’s rise to absolute power is no longer the consensus amongst historians. But it is still an important work.
It does much to contextualise the 1920s in Soviet Russia and the passion that the Communists felt for their party. It highlights just why Trotsky was worshipped by a significant minority of Communists across Europe. The author clearly idolised Trotsky, and while he attempted to present a balanced portrayal of the man, it does not capture quite how flawed, arrogant and, later, disruptive he was. Still, it is fantastically written and paints a comprehensive portrait of Trotsky, and to a lesser extent the other Oppositionists.
I particularly enjoyed the last chapter which documents his exile in Alma Ata. It perfectly encapsulates the impotence that Trotsky and the Opposition felt in this period following their expulsion. It shows how conflicted, guilty and useless these men and women felt by being unable to influence policy. It’s fascinating to consider the debates that formed after Stalin turned to the left, which made many Oppositionists question why they entered a struggle with the Party in the first place. It goes a long way to explain why many of them were prepared to die in silence for the Party a decade later.
It does much to contextualise the 1920s in Soviet Russia and the passion that the Communists felt for their party. It highlights just why Trotsky was worshipped by a significant minority of Communists across Europe. The author clearly idolised Trotsky, and while he attempted to present a balanced portrayal of the man, it does not capture quite how flawed, arrogant and, later, disruptive he was. Still, it is fantastically written and paints a comprehensive portrait of Trotsky, and to a lesser extent the other Oppositionists.
I particularly enjoyed the last chapter which documents his exile in Alma Ata. It perfectly encapsulates the impotence that Trotsky and the Opposition felt in this period following their expulsion. It shows how conflicted, guilty and useless these men and women felt by being unable to influence policy. It’s fascinating to consider the debates that formed after Stalin turned to the left, which made many Oppositionists question why they entered a struggle with the Party in the first place. It goes a long way to explain why many of them were prepared to die in silence for the Party a decade later.
October 3, 2008
In 1984 when I and Linda Harrington went to visit Mother and her new husband, Egil, we stayed for a while at their home on a mountain lake north of Oslo. Hilly farm country, she told me that there was still one farmer up there who remembered when Leon Trotsky lived briefly in the area during his exile from the Soviet Union, after Turkey and before Mexico. At my insistence, she introduced me to the fellow, their neighbor, but his English and my Norwegian were so bad that not much was exchanged beyond a confirmation of her story and a lot of smiles.
September 8, 2024
يقول نيتشه : إذا كنت تريد قراءة سيرة، لا تبحث عن واحدة عنوانها " السيد فلان وزمانه " ، بل عن واحدة عنوانها " مقاتل ضد زمانه "
وهذه السيرة هي واحدة من أهم السير التي قرأتها، كيف لا وهي سيرة ليون تروتسكي، المناضل والمفكر الثوري والماركسي وأحد قادة وزعماء الثورة البلشفية ومؤسس الجيش الأحمر .
سيرة رجل عاصر أهم أحداث القرن العشرين الثورة الروسية والحرب العالمية الأولى والثانية، فترة صراع الأفكار والطبقات والمذاهب والأحزاب السياسية .
يقول مؤلف الكتاب : إن حياة تروتسكي وعمله الهائلين يشكلان عنصرين أساسيين من تجربة الثورة الروسية، وحتى من حبكة الحضارة المعاصرة . إن الطابع الفريد لأحداث حياته والصفات الأدبية والجمالية الخارقة لمحاولته تدافع عن نفسها بنفسها وتشهد على أهميته . ومن المستحيل ألا تحدث طاقة فكرية بهذا السمو، ونشاط بذلك الإعجاز، وشهادة بذلك النبل، كامل تأثيرها، إذ أن ذلك يتعارض مع كل معنى التاريخ . فهذه هي المادة التي تصنع منها الأساطير الأكثر سموًا والهامًا . إلا أن أسطورة تروتسكي منسوجة من وقائع ثابته وحقائق يمكن التحقق منها . هنا لا ترفرف أية أسطورة فوق الواقع، بل يرتفع الواقع بالذات إلى مستوى الأسطورة .
إن دور تروتسكي في الثورة الروسية لابد أنه سيفاجئ البعض . فمنذ حوالي ثلاثين عامًا تكالبت آلة الدعاية الستالينية الضخمة على محو اسم تروتسكي من سجلات الثورة، وحين تركته فيها كان ذلك بصفة خائن من الطراز الأول . وبالنسبة للجيل السوفياتي الحالي ولغيره أيضًا، تشبة حياة تروتسكي واحدًا من تلك القبور المصرية القديمة التي يعرف الناس أنها ضمت في الماضي جثمان رجل عظيم ورواية منجزاته المحفورة على ألواح من ذهب، إلا أن لصوص مقابر ومخربي آثار عاثوا بالضريح فسادًا وتركوه فارغًا وموحشًا إلى درجة أنه لم يعد ثمة أثر واحد للألواح التي كان يتضمنها سابقًا .
.
سيرة تستحق القراءة ضخمة مليئة بالتفاصيل والأحداث والنقاشات والمجادلات والقضايا السياسية والشخصية والتاريخية
تناول فيها المؤلف حياة تروتسكي ونضاله مع الاعتقالات والنفي والمنفى ، وعن موقفه وصراعه مع ستالين وتبدل مواقف رفاقه ، عن تنبؤاته وآراءه وأفكاره .
سيرة جميلة ومتعبة 😄
" الإيمان الذي تنقصه الأعمال هو إيمان ميت
May 15, 2024
Notes:
- The tradition of literature has never embraced the working class, so the cry against tradition by proletkult 'sounds hollow' addressed to them.
"The cry against tradition had its justification as long as it was directed at a literary public and against the inertia of established styles and forms. But it sounded hollow when 'readdressed to the working class, which does not need to break and which cannot break with any literary tradition because it is not at all in the grip of any such tradition.' The all-out crusade against passéism was a storm in the intelligentsia's tea-cup, and an outburst of Bohemian nihilism. 'We, Marxists, have always lived in tradition, and we have not, because of this, ceased to be revolutionaries.'"
- Isaac Deutscher argues that Bolshevism and Jacobinsm are at their core substitutionist ideologies, and this leads from the one-party system to the rise of the Stalinist faction in the Soviet Union, like Robespierre's Committee of Public Safety leads to Napoleon Bonaparte.
- At different points, Trotsky is willing to cooperate with Stalin against Bukharin on the sole condition of full inner-party democracy. Trotsky's adamant refusal to share power with Stalin without this condition leads to his expulsion first from Moscow and the Politburo, and then from the USSR entirely.
- The tradition of literature has never embraced the working class, so the cry against tradition by proletkult 'sounds hollow' addressed to them.
"The cry against tradition had its justification as long as it was directed at a literary public and against the inertia of established styles and forms. But it sounded hollow when 'readdressed to the working class, which does not need to break and which cannot break with any literary tradition because it is not at all in the grip of any such tradition.' The all-out crusade against passéism was a storm in the intelligentsia's tea-cup, and an outburst of Bohemian nihilism. 'We, Marxists, have always lived in tradition, and we have not, because of this, ceased to be revolutionaries.'"
- Isaac Deutscher argues that Bolshevism and Jacobinsm are at their core substitutionist ideologies, and this leads from the one-party system to the rise of the Stalinist faction in the Soviet Union, like Robespierre's Committee of Public Safety leads to Napoleon Bonaparte.
- At different points, Trotsky is willing to cooperate with Stalin against Bukharin on the sole condition of full inner-party democracy. Trotsky's adamant refusal to share power with Stalin without this condition leads to his expulsion first from Moscow and the Politburo, and then from the USSR entirely.
January 17, 2025
This reads pretty well!
Idk what to think about trotskys ridiculous story. Conflict aversion was always my bugaboo in dsa and I feel like it sabotaged several opportunities here. This whole book is just one after another "here's this chance he had to avert the course of history but here's why he made some stupid deal with Stalin instead" etc.
It is sad to see how turning away from democracy buried the party of lenin.
Idk what to think about trotskys ridiculous story. Conflict aversion was always my bugaboo in dsa and I feel like it sabotaged several opportunities here. This whole book is just one after another "here's this chance he had to avert the course of history but here's why he made some stupid deal with Stalin instead" etc.
It is sad to see how turning away from democracy buried the party of lenin.
November 26, 2018
This was harder to get through than The Prophet Armed - which is to be expected, given that the story of a revolution should probably have more exciting set pieces than internal policy debates. That being said, it's still highly readable, and I'm so glad that I'm taking the time needed to read a 3-volume biography of one man's life!
May 24, 2019
On est en 1926. Va s’engager une lutte à mort entre la gauche (menée par Trotsky, Radek, Kamenev, Zinoviev) le centre (mené par Staline ) et la droite (menée par Boukharine). Trois ans plus tard , tout le monde a perdu. Sauf Staline. Et Trotsky est expulsé de son pays. Superbe évocation de cette période charnière de l’URSS.
February 17, 2021
Um retrato angústiante do ascenso do estalinismo após a guerra civil. Um retrato de um homem atormentado com o horizonte socialista e com a fidelidade a um partido bolchevique já degenerado. Um documento importante.
September 15, 2021
unlike the first installment, this is not biography but hagiography. Sadly, this is evident in the very structure of the book even. Although it is relatively well-written, after the first pages it becomes a bit of a slog
April 26, 2023
He stood back and took in the immense picture of the revolution and grasped clearly the tragic motif that ran through it and affected all the warring factions. That motif was the 'inevitable disintegration of the party of revolution after its victory.'
October 7, 2025
Appears to me the best book of the series, seems like a quite definitive statement of the trotskyist version of the inner-party struggle between Stalin and his opponents. I do, however, feel I need to read an account going more into Stalin's perspective, maybe Stephen Kotkin.
October 17, 2020
A guide to follow the intrinsic logic of the conflicts within a revolution on its way to decay through the lenses of one of its most insightful icons.
June 11, 2024
I read all 3 volumes while living in England.
Learned much I was never taught in the US.
As excited as biographies get.
Learned much I was never taught in the US.
As excited as biographies get.
August 12, 2018
This was the really decisive period in the battle for the soul of socialism, and Deutscher does a spendid job of navigating the changing alliances and balance of power that began in the year before Lenin's death and ended with Trotsky's final exile from the Soviet Union.
With hindsight it is hard to see how Trotsky could have permitted Stalin to take absolute power. He was warned by Lenin, and Lenin provided him with his "testament" which, if Trotsky had revealed it to the Bolshevik Central Committee as Lenin had requested, would have put Stalin out of the picture, permanently. But Trotsky for reasons that are really unclear, didn't reveal the testament, and entered into compromises with Stalin; and failed to fight back when Stalin began to attack Trotsky and the "left opposition", even when it was clear that it had become a struggle for the future of the party and the socialist state. It is just incomprehensible.
It is hard not to wonder whether socialism could have taken a different course had Trotsky forced Stalin's ouster. I think it is possible, and that it is possible that the course of 20th century history would have been very different if he had done so.
Despite the terrible outcomes and the bitter struggle described in this book, it is a pleasure to read. Deutscher knew many of the principals personally, and shows a deep knowledge and understanding of the complex dynamics of that period. Even more so than in The Prophet Armed, Deutscher carries you through all the complexities while never losing the main threads.
This is history as it should be written.
With hindsight it is hard to see how Trotsky could have permitted Stalin to take absolute power. He was warned by Lenin, and Lenin provided him with his "testament" which, if Trotsky had revealed it to the Bolshevik Central Committee as Lenin had requested, would have put Stalin out of the picture, permanently. But Trotsky for reasons that are really unclear, didn't reveal the testament, and entered into compromises with Stalin; and failed to fight back when Stalin began to attack Trotsky and the "left opposition", even when it was clear that it had become a struggle for the future of the party and the socialist state. It is just incomprehensible.
It is hard not to wonder whether socialism could have taken a different course had Trotsky forced Stalin's ouster. I think it is possible, and that it is possible that the course of 20th century history would have been very different if he had done so.
Despite the terrible outcomes and the bitter struggle described in this book, it is a pleasure to read. Deutscher knew many of the principals personally, and shows a deep knowledge and understanding of the complex dynamics of that period. Even more so than in The Prophet Armed, Deutscher carries you through all the complexities while never losing the main threads.
This is history as it should be written.
June 9, 2016
The second volume of Deutschler's monumental Trotsky biography tells the story of the power struggle between Trotsky and Stalin following Lenin's death, the clash of economic and political theories as much as a series of inner party wire-pulling and shameless public propaganda, which eventually lead to Trotsky's exile. This was the real life game of thrones.
I am not a fan of biographies, but this gripping-thrilling-exciting book was love for the first sight (from the moment I read the first page in the second hand bookshop to be precise).
The clashes and hard fought battles of Trotsky with other prominent Communist leaders (such as the triumvir of Zinoviev, Kamenev and Stalin, or later on the same side with Zioviev against Stalin and Bukharin) are also described in detail, and so the portrait of a great economic theorist, literary critic, politician, speaker and revolutionary emerges in front of us. His stance on economic policy, the Kulak, N.E.P. men and workers are discussed as well as his view on permanent revolution as opposed to Stalin's "communism in one country".
Deutschler's masterpiece is a brilliant way for people to get some basic historical knowledge about the ways the USSR and the Politburo worked, and about this forgotten transition period of Russia from the Great October Socialist Revolution to the Stalinist regime. To me, this has to be one of the best reads of the year, wholeheartedly recommended to everyone.
I am not a fan of biographies, but this gripping-thrilling-exciting book was love for the first sight (from the moment I read the first page in the second hand bookshop to be precise).
The clashes and hard fought battles of Trotsky with other prominent Communist leaders (such as the triumvir of Zinoviev, Kamenev and Stalin, or later on the same side with Zioviev against Stalin and Bukharin) are also described in detail, and so the portrait of a great economic theorist, literary critic, politician, speaker and revolutionary emerges in front of us. His stance on economic policy, the Kulak, N.E.P. men and workers are discussed as well as his view on permanent revolution as opposed to Stalin's "communism in one country".
Deutschler's masterpiece is a brilliant way for people to get some basic historical knowledge about the ways the USSR and the Politburo worked, and about this forgotten transition period of Russia from the Great October Socialist Revolution to the Stalinist regime. To me, this has to be one of the best reads of the year, wholeheartedly recommended to everyone.
November 3, 2008
Also an incredibly dramatic biography. In the Prophet Armed we see the masses of Russia deafen history with their voices. Trotsky manages to hit their resonating frequency and is thrust into the fore-front of history. By the end of the first book war and famine have taken their toll and the masses fall silent. This is the context for Trotsky's defeat within Russia.
I should say, one gets a kind of nuance from reading these biographies (as with other classics on the Russian revolution: Ten Days that Shook the Earth, Trotsky's own history...) that one would expect to be completely absent from history itself given the prevalent discourse even on the left. Stalin didn't gain ultimate power over night. It was quite a while before he was in a position to even exile Trotsky, let alone imprison or murder Trotskyists. Stalin's power was quite tentative throughout what I've read, as was the power of the bureacracy through the few decades it survived.
I should say, one gets a kind of nuance from reading these biographies (as with other classics on the Russian revolution: Ten Days that Shook the Earth, Trotsky's own history...) that one would expect to be completely absent from history itself given the prevalent discourse even on the left. Stalin didn't gain ultimate power over night. It was quite a while before he was in a position to even exile Trotsky, let alone imprison or murder Trotskyists. Stalin's power was quite tentative throughout what I've read, as was the power of the bureacracy through the few decades it survived.
August 17, 2014
I just finished reading The Prophet Unarmed Trotsky 1921-1929! Great book by Isaac Deutscher. Trotsky denounced the bureaucratic degeneration of the workers' state; and he confronted Stalin's monolithic and infallibly led party with the demand for freedom of expression, debate and criticism, believing that on these alone could and should voluntary and genuine communist discipline be based! Love the analogy with the French Revolution and the Thermidorian reaction.... that was threatening the Russian Revolution. I would argue that Stalin played the Bonapart role...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 39 reviews