Left in the Limelight

lighos

YISM

GE left. [!] It is also easing to see tha the International Marxist. Group has broken from the stance of assuming that its complete programme is the only correct one an attitude which excludes many socialists who have abandoned the right thinking of 1938. In this respect we feel that groups such as Big Flame and the Socialist Workers Party have much to offer Socialist Challenae. Even

LEFTIN THE

LIMELIGHT

tsk yism lay ide range of so ailable to our re well otherwise oured anew. ial for this fea ttached Challenge accepted? In tis bring age the le int formation which we readers to or without tl ft regular feati ther material ernationally, and views t feel ought submit sugge their own co Tro na w ake as may se sav mater tents a Trotskvism Todav' we w es ers in The dissolving by the Interna.

tional Marxist Group of their paper Red Weekly and the appearance in its place of Socialist Challenge has provoked a wide range of response from adulation amongst certain amorphous sections of the left, to a sharp rebuke by Workers Action paper of the International Commun- ist League, roundly denouncing Socialist Challenge and the IMG's call for 'left unity' as a "rot en bloc" with "more to do with bourgeois diplomacy than Marxism". But perhaps the most penetrating comments have come on the letters page of Socialist Challenge itself, where all manner of "left' wing forces have praised what they see as the merits of the paper. Many of these letters sound suspiciously satirical in tone, but are published straight-faced without comment by the Socialist Challenge editorial board, who apparently feel that the subordina- tion of programme to "unity" is what the paper is all about.

Socialist Challenge No. 4 130 June) carried the following example, headlined "Non-aligned greetings' "We would like Socialist Challenge as break out of the sect of the British left. Both of us were to welcome an attempt to arian tradition Challence organisations in the late 60s and early 70s. We well remember how at that time the left endlessly discussed whether the USSR was state capit- alist or a workers' state. We are glad to see that Socialist Challenge has broken out of this petty sectarian attitude and concentrates on one important fact: the USSR isn't what we want. (11 We are also glad to see that 'Our Policies' Socialist Challenge recognised that such things as 'sliding scale of wages, 'open books*, and so en, while on occas being useful demands should become static and a bar to unity though Trotskyi practice the side revolutic We h the last left, ben the wo liberatio Sociafist both these groups reject Trotskyism in words [!] they have in practice shown themselves to be on the side of the class struggle and thus inary Marxists ave not been few years on ig involved in a en's moveme With thee challenge we very the i sm nt 3321 and committed to active in organised all way in and gay nce of here is aligned secome ted to

HELEN

AINES

emergence of incentive ts like o involved ng social and gham!" An unmanne however appear leading IMG me complained: "Perhaos more socialis more spreadi

REID

(Birm (Birmingham)" urse and ist MI = 109x for

MIKE

however appeared in No. 3 in which leading IMG member Valerie Coultas ec oppo No. Valer site i in ie Ce ew ich ta was surpi points in clude geoisie planner Won't Challenge this poin explicit?" was surprised to see that your four points in "Our Policies' did not in- clude the expropriation of the bour- "Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but I to opr he ›nomy. readers emain is no he geoisie and the planned economy. 820 cl ntic, your id n the Ip fou i in Challenge remain a little confused if of little made So nfi Socialist 895 this point is not made absolutely abse Making the left: fiaht When WSL founder me bers were bureaucratically expelled from the Workers Revolutionary Party in December 1974 one of the 'crimes' with which they were indicted was that they were "soft on reformism" The pretext for this charge by the WRP leadership was that in the opposition document, written by i thin t call fo on le expose Wilson ted to Fight"

WRP'S

1960s, the Party to place demands l Labour MPs in order their refusal to fight the government. Thornett poin- he successful "Make the Lefts campaign waged by the erunner the SLL in the d stressed the crude and sectarian manner in which the WR

GE de uncing had descended to sim all social democrat and union leaders, falsely. as "corporatists".

This meant the WRP was unable to fight the illusions many workers retain as to the role of the 'lefts".

These criticisms were ruthlessly suppressed bv the Healv leadershio.

and WR towards abstract Labour the Li hatched P policy lurched even further sectarianism with the demand to "Bring down the Government" even before b-Lab coalition deal was this vear. Bi 1g = last month's Parlia two 'left' Labour M mentary Ps (Wise and ment mem: the 1 They ritual social ingly 77 поокег) against tne govern- obviously stirred some distant ories on the editorial board of VRP's daily paper News Line.

broke for a moment from this formula for each and every democrat, write a surpris- apt What Think (17 June to We government is no longer any use to man or beast. Yesterday it lost an important clause in the Water Bill!

Its future cannot be left in the hands of parliamentarians. The Liberals would like to pull out when they like to force an election on terms favourable to the capitalist enemy.

This is what happened in Australia in November 1975 in the Canberra coup, and the Tories stormed to their biggest ever victory over the Labour Party headed by Gough Whitlam.

The initiative to force this government out of office rests with the working class. The mass arrests at Grunwicks in north London shows what kind of a Labour government this is. The tim issues are c against the against defence of e to mobilise is now. The lear: against Phase Three, cuts, against rising prices, nemployment, and in rights." basic trade un

TR TSK YISM TODA

NECT

WRP lander Pro hancellor day delivered attackina two "Chancellor Denis Healey nis Heale bullying abour MP yester speech s. Mrs Audrey Wise and from the Midland did not think 'the ever forgive them the Financa Bill Jeff Rooker, both s. He said that he movement' would for voting against on Tueslav nicht. What 'moveme to? The Moven Fiddlers and Tax Or the Movement ratic Politicians in ner is he Evaders of Socia the Servi International

(SDPSIMF)?

If he means the labo Monetary referring Bankers,

(BETE)?

Democ e of the und Just critiq of Mandel One magazine many readers will not easily encounter is a new publica- tion entitled international Correspon- dence, which appeared in our lette box a few weeks ago. Inside the cover the magazine pro claims that it is: "Published in English for the Organising Committee for the Reconstruction of the Fourth Inter- national by its British Sections." (sic!)

While we know very little of the whereabouts or activity of the OCRFI's "British Sections" we do know that its nrincinal force intar- nationally is t Pierre Lambert The OCI was, until 1971, u the International Committee Fourth International with the Socialist Labour League (now 1 Revolutionary Party) led by Healy. The "Special" May edit International Correspondence matarial rolatod to the die French OCI led nited in of the British Norkers Gerry Ion. of carries Piceinn the leading up to the forthcoming World Congress of the "United" Secretariat of the Fourth International. This takes the form of reprinting Ernest Mandel's 25 Theses on World Revolution, together with a lengthy critique of these Theses by the OC 's Stephane Just. Just makes a large number of points against Mandel - several of which are wrongly conceived or inadequate. But the OCI's early history in defending "orthodox Trotskvism" against rev- isionist conceptions (which turned away from the responsibility of Trot- skyists to give independent leadership o th legir entr kg class) polemic b akness of / bles y attack Aandel's Ju "Comrade E. Mandel writes: *The fact that the objective condi- tions for world socialism have existed at least since 1914 t not since 1905, does not lead to 1 au omatic or inevitable victory for world socialism, essentially because of the central role played by the subjective factor in the achievement of socialist revolution. If we bear in min tence of Comrade Lambert sis quoted methods u Transitio used at the tho: above we sed at the nal Prog the begi can see that beginning of ramme and ning the supporter and trade the contrary, Wise erve full support against the Budget Lib-Lab coalition. recriminations with have many), it is then it is an affront to ever y Lal unionist. For and Rooker for their strategy of f we have them (and hạt they di Th unis poncy a ey should keep vote long time it up. And Benn-ites and all th should join them at of the division bell. The next big oppor hoot mod when dram th Tribu a earli no'-ites est call present to the neither ment. nationa

NATO.

The Britain Market tun ity comes Callonhan s the Bill for Direct European Parliamen European' nor s a caucus for rporations, the Elections t. This is 'parlia- he multi- sanks and Lib-Lab Bill further ties to the capitalist Common i.e. roaring prices, currency higher unemployment. ir MPs are duty-bound to inst this reactionary, anti- class Bill and smash the pact Liberals. monstrous anarcny. Labo vote ag working with the This called a

YISM

PA GE

Felicit eses on the word Revolution comparable. Has Comrade Man- deliberately proceeded in this in order that the plan of the es could be directly related to foundation programme of the rth International? One would to think so, as it is an excellent to help the discussion. This permits several differences to be noted. Mandel writes that the socialist revolution and the construc- tion of socialism "require a conscious effort by the toiling masses" lend of 2nd sentence, Thesis 1). Thesis 2 continues: "The crisis of humanity is the crisis of revolutionary leadership (and of class consciousness) of the proletariat" (3rd sentence, Thesis 2).

We have just seen that the Transi- tional Programme only says: The historical crisis of mankind is reduced to the crisis of the revolu- tionary leadership of the proletariat.

The four additional words of Mandel must have for him a consid- erable importance, as he feels obliged to integrate them into the principal proposition of the founding programme of the Fourth Interna- tional. More especially as this "con- cept" runs like a red thread through the 25 Theses. Thus: "In the final analysis, the tempor ary restabilisation of capital after 1923, the victory of Stalinism in Russia, the emergence of fascism in Europe (and semi-fascism in Japan at the end of the 1930s), the long decline in the level of working class consciousness, and the outcome of the Second World War, with all its horrors (from Auschwitz to Hirosh imal are the result of the long series of defeats for the international revolution that occured between 1923 and 1943 (although this series of defeats was of course interrupted by partia geographically limited upsurges) (Last sentence o Thesis Granted, what is written here is that "the long decline of the level of consciousness of the proletariat" is the result of the defeats incurred by the international revolution between 1923 and 1943. But the same thing can be said of the revolutionary leaderships; the crisis in the revolu- tionary leaderships has, to a large extent resulted from the defeats suffered by the proletariat. It is none the less a determining factor. It is a prime cause of the crisis of human- ity, that is to say of new defeats of the proletariat, of the delay in the victory of the world proletarian rev- olution. Furthermore, Comrade Mandel, by integrating his concept into Trotsky's fundamental proposi- tion clearly shows that he attributes the same importance and the same role to it as he does to Trotsky's proposition. Comrade E. Mandel shows several occasions that it should be understood in this way.

Thesis I begins with this sentence: "The basic subjective difficulty in achieving a victorious socialist rev- olution in West Europe, a difficulty resulting from the whole past history of the labour movement, lies in the deep reformist and semi-reformist illusions of broad toiling masses, in other words the widespread identi- fication of their own democratic freedoms with the institutions of the bourgeois democratic state.

The illusions of the masses cannot be denied. But what does he mean by the phrase, "the low level of con- sciousness of the masses"? Can one place this "low level" on the same plane as the crisis of the revolution- ary leadership"? These questions are worth asking. If this were true it would be necessary to draw the con- clusion that the masses are "uncon- Mandel ble, obviously for the defeats revolution in the sciously" respon somehow objective of the proletarian world. Illusions of the masses are no new thing. They are more or less impor tant, deep and durable. They depend on various factors which vary accor- ding to the country, the moments in time, the historical experience, the strength and implantation of the traditional organisations, the trad itional working class parties. But they exist at all epochs and in all countries. They must be taken into account. They cannot be put on the same level as "the crisis of the revol- utionary leadership to which the crisis of humanity is reduced".

Let us examine the matter in a concrete fashion. Were not the hundreds of thousands of workers who followed the priest Gapon in procession, that bloody Sunday in 1905, bearing a petition to the Czar, proof of the illusions in both the Czar and the priest Gapon, his methods and policies? Is it not as Comrade Mande rites, the obvious expression of a very low level of the consciousness of the masses"?

Looked at from a certain point of view, it is a fact. Yet, they were writing the first page of the Russian revolution, to which 1905 was the prologue. These same men, the selfsame proletariat built the first soviets on the initiative of the social democrat militants (mensheviks and bolsheviks) and other revolutionary organisations. They built the first Petrograd soviet. Their class move- ment led them, despite and through their illusions to establish the organs of their class unity, the "parlia ment", their revolutionary commit- tees, the organs of their future Comrade Mandel writes, the obvious power, of proletariat... "The defeat of Ger revolution in 1918 a 1923 nothing whatever to llusions of the masses, level of class consciousness" of German proletariat. The cause the dictatorshi p of the the do and German the absence UI revolutionary leadership, which the German CP had been unable to assume. As Trotsky explains, a correct policy for the party which stands on the terrain of the proletarian revolution does not guarantee victory in every case, but the existence of the Marxist party applying a correct policy, "forming a revolutionary leadership and freeing the masses from their illusions in the course of the class struggle and the revolution, is an indispensible condi- tion for the victory of the revolution.

The same lesson emerges from the Hungarian revolution of 1919, from the revolutionary crisis in Austria, Italy and elsewhere prior to 1923. It was not the "Parliamentary, reform- ist or semi-reformist illusions" that brought the revolution or revolution- ary crises to defeat, but the political action of social democracy and the political immaturity of the CP's, which were not up to the tasks of building a revolutionary leadership, or the realisation of those tasks which are incumbent on a revolu- tionary leadership. City: for him the long destine in specify: for him the level of consciousness of the workina class" beains in 1923 and accentuates proletariat defeats. Th for thought In what consciousness proletariat lo 1918 or 1923 the high level German prole progressively as the suffers mulative us food assertion cu gives was the "level of of the German wer in 1933 than in ? To tell the truth, it is of consciousness of the tariat in the years pre- ray ce fo ceeding 1933 llowing the c and oming in to the months power of the

PAGE 28

Nazis in Ja ing. Despite the immense machine of repression of the Nazis, the working class stood behind its parties, social democracy and the German CP, wait- ing for the leaders of their parties to lead them, and to organise the fight against Nazism. Even after the coming to power of Hitler, while terrible repressions and provocations were unleashed, at the elections of March 1933, in spite of the extra- ordinary falsifications, the proletariat voted massively in favour of the SPD and CPD. And after 1933, is it necessary to recall the heroism of the Vienese proletariat in February 1934, fight- ing, guns in hand against Dolfuss's troops and defending foot by foot their neighbourhoods? Only a deep class consciousness could sustain such heroism. And finally did the French and the Spanish proletariats show signs of a "low level of class consciousness" between 1934 and 1938 - or on the contrary - of a very high level of consciousness?

Without going into detail we can say: the French working class imposed the Workers United Front on the SP and CP of France in February 1934, as well as on the CGT and CGTU; from the Asturian insurrection to the Spanish revolution in 1936/38 the Spanish proletariat showed proof of a fanatastic class consciousness, and how fragile and easily overcome its "reformist or semi-reformist illu- sions". Even in the 1936 elections, the French working class did not vote "Popular Front" but for its parties. The Radical Party suffered a resounding defeat at the first round, and it was saved from disaster only by the withdrawal in the 2nd round, of SP and CP candidates in a number of constituences; the SP and especially the CP of France on the other hand massively increased their vote and the number of delegates elected..... "The "low level of conscious- ness", or the "decay of the level of working class consciousness", or yet the reformist or semi-reformist illusions of the masses" , are not responsible for the defeats of the proletariat before World War II. On the contrary, the proletariat showed a tananite a annennis.. " curat, a so are incredible.

qpaunty, a revulu reformist leaderships at first, then these leaderships and Stalinist leaderships together, misled the struggles of the prol iat, blunting their revolutionary e These are the leaderships which opposed to the revolutionary dencies of the proletariat, reformist illusions and semi-refor the have the illusions, which i ave spread and propagated them. To draw this balance is not now necessary - from the parliamentary cretinism of the Social democracy, the ultra-leftism of the CP's ending in Popular Fron- tism - it is wall known; the "non- maturity" of the massas of which Trotsky spoke in 1938 resulted from these policies and from nowhere else.

The failure to assign the causes and responsibilities of the defeats, to put on the same plane the crisis of the revolutionary leadership and "the consciousness of the masses" which, seen in this light, is no more than a lifeless abstraction, opening the door to dangerous conclusions - the masses are spontaneously

TROTSK YISM TODA

reformist, even Stalinist!

the masses have the leaders which they deserve! the masses carry therefore the responsibility for their defeat!

it is necessary to "revolutionise" tham ideologically, or by exemp.

lary acts, or both together!

These conclusions derive from each other. If the masses have reformist illusions, it would mean that the reformist parties and the Stalinist parties (which some call reformist) are the parties which suit them. They have the leadership which they deserve, and in conse- quence carry the responsibility for their defeats of which the main cause lies in their illusions."

Boycottist case During and immediately after the June elections in Spain the Internat- ional Marxist Group carried extensive material on the campaign waged by an electoral front including the Liga Communista Revolutionaria (LCR), one of the Spanish groups adhering to the 'United' Secretariat of the Fourth International.

They were rather more reticent about the very different campaign waged by another group also related to the USFI - the Communist League (LC). The LC fought consistently for a boycott of the June elections, and in doing so, along with a number of other groups, ran the gauntlet of pol- ice repression reserved specifically for boycottists. The Workers Socialist League's an- alysis of the Elections has been carr- ied in detail in two whole page art- icles in Socialist Press. We will not repeat here our argument for a boy- cott position. Instead we thought readers would be interested in one of the campaign leaflets distributed by the boycottists during the election. Communist League (LC), Organis- ation of the Fourth International (OCI), CNT (the anarchist trade union), EMAS and LAIA (two organ- isations of the Basque left in Alava, one of the four provinces of Euskadi.

ALERT AGAINST THE

ELECTORAL FRAUD

the people of Alava: Our people have the righ to exercise their freedoms because that right has been won with enormous and heroic sacrifices. For this reason the people must give no support to political operations which attempt to avoid their demands, which try to manipulate their wish to be free, which are a trick de their aspirations. The Suarez government has called a general election. It is an election whose framework has been agreed with the most purely reactionary section of Francoism (the Popular Alliance); an election before which the so-called "democratic oppos- ition" has shamefully backed down; an election which places extreme limits on freedom of expression and which scandalously sabotages the demand for amnesty and the action of the parties and organisations of the working class etc...; an election in short which guarantees a parlia ment in whose corridors the urgent demands of the workers are smashed and converted into anti-working class laws, and to which the youth, the poor peasantry and those fighting for women's rights will have no access.

It is a parliament which sets up in advance an impassable and oppres sive barrier against the national rights of the Basaue people and all the other nationalities. It is a parliamen which is trying in the name o "democracy" to protect, through al the repressive institutions the rule o the repressive Francoist oligarchy.

n the name of freedom, amnest: all our social and political right

DON'T VOTE

BOYCOTT THE FRAUD

ELECTIONS

LETTERS

We welcome letters from particularly on points arisi this magazine. Letters shot brief as possible Write tr

TROTSKYISM TODAY,

31, Dartmouth Park Hill, London NW5 1HR read fi d bi