https://openlibrary.org/works/OL1870486W/Education_For_Critical_Consciousness_(Continuum_Impacts)
Opposition formed in the Fourth International
/ 3 days ago
feb-2017-4th-int-mural
Let’s seize the opportunities, and build an international for revolution
and communism
I- The current state of the Fourth International
1.The “broad parties” policy: balance sheet of a catastrophe
The FI leadership replaced the strategic goal of building revolutionary
parties with the building of “broad parties.” A century after the
Russian Revolution, some ask: Is the principle “no revolution without a
revolutionary party” outdated? We do not believe it is. Over the last
few congresses, the FI leadership has been explicitly aiming at building
“broad” parties, without clear programmatic and strategic boundaries.
What are the results of this policy?
In recent times, we’ve seen major failures. In the Spanish state,
Anticapitalistas is preparing to form a joint majority with Pablo
Iglesias, thus adapting to a bureaucratic leadership that explicitly
seeks to govern in the framework of capitalist institutions. By trying
to gain electoral or mainstream media influence, we are led to sacrifice
our goal — the overthrow of the capitalist system.
The Syriza experiment was embraced to such an extent that the Greek FI
section, which refused to support it, was even accused in the IC of
being counterrevolutionary. Syriza was presented as a model for some
time, yet it amounted to a catastrophe. It was introduced as an
“anti-austerity” party and government. But it revealed itself to be a
destructive machine against workers and the people. The worst onslaught
we have seen in decades has been led by Syriza against youth and the
working class.
But these are only two examples in a series of catastrophes, and no
serious analysis of these disasters has been undertaken to help draw
conclusions. The list of failures is long: in Brazil, the FI section
participated in the Lula government; in Italy, the FI comrades supported
in Parliament the formation of a Prodi government and voted for the war
budget; in Portugal, the section recently supported the SP government
agenda. The common feature in all these failures is the support of
political forces or governments acting in the framework of capitalist
management, resulting in the dislocation of the FI sections.
The policy of building “broad parties” instead of revolutionary parties
did indeed lead to the dissolution of our forces into reformist
coalitions. Indeed, why build a revolutionary current if there is no
revolutionary communist program to stand up for? The situation is
alarming. Over the years we have seen FI sections disappear, dissolve or
adapt at an accelerating rate. Our ability to defend either the
principle of class independence or to maximize the ability of our social
class to act independently from the bourgeoisie and its State, is
undermined when support is given to a politician linked to a bourgeois
party, like Bernie Sanders, or to a personality with no ties to the
labor movement, like Pablo Iglesias.
1.“New situation, new program…” or the present relevance of the
revolution and a revolutionary communist program?
Why has the FI leadership been steadily pursuing this policy for years
in spite of the series of failures ? It implicitly gave up on the
relevance of revolution, seeing it as something to be accomplished in
the distant future. In its view, the balance of forces is so unfavorable
that the task of the hour is to rebuild an elementary class
consciousness, based on the struggles of the oppressed in reaction to
the ruling class onslaught. There is no need for a revolutionary
compass, no need for an organized battle for a transitional program, and
no need for a communist program. It is sufficient for them to regroup
all those who are ready to resist, reformists and revolutionaries alike,
to slowly accumulate experience and strength, and to wait for better
days. In order to accomplish that goal, the adequate tool is indeed the
“broad party.”
This becomes a justification for allying everywhere with social forces
who are not even reformist in the classic meaning of the term. They look
to forces with no communist programmatic basis and with no social basis
in the working class.
Yet the present relevance and necessity of a revolutionary program was
demonstrated by the revolutionary processes south of the Mediterranean
Sea and by the situation in Greece: the rising and more radical forms of
class conflict call for revolutionary responses. Wasn’t it absolutely
necessary to stand for the abolition of the debt, the nationalization of
the banks and key sectors of the economy under workers’ control?
These demands are not reserved for contemplation in history books of the
Russian Revolution. The FI leadership did not support its Greek section,
who, with its modest forces, tried to implement such a revolutionary
policy. This of course implied a political battle against the Syriza
leadership. That precise battle wasn’t waged. In the name of the
necessity of a “new program” and “new parties” adapted to the “new
situation,” the FI leadership supported Alexis Tsipras right up to the
11th hour (quote from the FI declaration of August 2015). The example of
Greece is extremely telling. It demonstrates the impossibility of
reformism as a solution in periods of capitalist crisis. Not only did
the Syriza-led government prove to be one of the harshest of bourgeois
governments, but Syriza itself switched almost totally, in just about
one year, from left reformism to bourgeois social democracy.
The formation of the government along with the nationalist bourgeois
ANEL party — which was never protested by those who later formed the
Popular Unity party, currently the party that the FI leadership supports
in Greece — the inclusion in it of many former political and
administrative personnel from both main bourgeois parties, ND and PASOK,
and above all the break with the vast majority of its youth and militant
base, have irreversibly changed the character of Syriza party. This is a
fate that is shared by all reformist parties that wish to handle the
crisis inside the framework of capitalism, despite the intentions of
their leadership.
This is a conclusion that the FI leadership never reached. Instead, it
refers to an unexplained “capitulation” of Tsipras, deprived of any
class content. The practical consequence is the FI leaders’ eagerness to
repeat the same mistakes. It continues to ally with and to adapt to
Iglesias’ policy today, via the majority of the Spanish section.
1.C) A militant deficiency and a serious democratic problem
FI International Committee meetings are now reduced to debates of
analysis of no practical consequence. The debates go on without any
internationally coordinated campaign being defined or planned. Yet, all
around the world we have comrades leading struggles in direct
confrontation with capitalism. Theoretical discussions must be informed
by practice: balance sheets of the sections’ activities should feed the
discussion. The confrontation of ideas should lead to defining common
tasks. Without common goals, on an international scale, and without
political and material mutual support, it is impossible to grow our
organizations beyond a certain point in each country.
But above all, our international has to be more than a discussion club;
it must be a tool for revolutionary action. Tackling the political
problems of worldwide class struggle together, and thinking about the
problems we encounter in each of our countries, and trying solve them
together – that is what a “world party” should do. Building such an
international party, at least taking steps in that direction, is today’s
task.
The recent expulsion by the majority of the Spanish State section of the
Anticapitalistas minority, which enjoyed 20 per cent support at the last
congress, and which now constitutes IZAR, reveals a serious democratic
problem. The leadership refuses to allow criticism of the majority
orientation of the Fourth International. Worse, the refusal to allow the
Spanish minority current to address the IC, on the pretext of a veto by
the section, is contrary to all of our principles of workers’ democracy.
That includes the possibility of defending oneself in the process of an
expulsion.
The principle exists in many reformist organizations. But it didn’t
exist in the FI for the IZAR comrades. So it became acceptable for the
majority of a section to expel its minority at will… without any
opportunity of appeal. Fortunately the majority of the French section
comrades, members of the NPA, do not hold this authoritarian view of
political differences and did not act that way towards its minority! Our
Socialist Action Canada comrades were expelled, and still are victims of
the same kind of exclusion now. Of course there is a political logic at
work behind those expulsions. Basic democratic rules are cast aside when
it concerns comrades who disagree, to the left of the leadership’s
policy. At the same time, heads of the FI favor working with groups
outside of the International, and apply pressure on the section to
isolate it, as happened in Greece.
The FI leadership often introduces our international organization as the
“most democratic” international tendency. Indeed, confronted with
situations of split caused by political differences, the IST in the
Spanish State and the IWL in Brazil showed more openness by maintaining,
in both cases, relations with the various groups that emerged from the
splits.
We cannot avoid drawing the balance sheet of the policy advocated by the
majority at the latest (2010) congress of the FI. The next IC must set
the date and launch the discussion leading to the world congress, which
must be held in 2018.
II- A situation with opportunities for the revolutionaries and for
communist ideas to grow stronger
We do not share the FI leadership’s appreciation of the current
situation. While it does feature an increasingly violent onslaught by
the bourgeoisie, it is nonetheless contradictory and holds possibilities
for revolutionary communists to be heard and to gain strength.
1.A) The tendency of the rate of profit to fall: the root of the crisis
The fundamental problem for capitalists still is the tendency of the
rate of profit to fall. The ecological crisis is combined with the
economic crisis, and thus capitalism is in a situation of protracted
crisis, which it cannot escape spontaneously. To restore the rate of
profit, capitalists are forced to turn their mode of domination upside
down, by inflicting an historical defeat on the working class. That is
the meaning of the ongoing capitalist onslaught. Inter-imperialist
tensions are rising and military interventions are multiplying. The
number of refugees is exploding, racism and xenophobia are openly
encouraged by the governments of every great power. Barbarism is not
just a predictable possibility for the future; it is the reality for a
major part of humanity.
1.B) Traditional leaderships and the “new reformism” — Adapting to the
current capitalist onslaught
Far from fighting the capitalist offensive, the labor movement
traditional leaderships are adapting to it. Social-democracy is
completely integrated into the state apparatus and the leaders that
arose from Stalinism go along with the national bourgeoisie’s policies.
The massive retreat of the social democracy and labor party-type
formations is not limited to Europe. It is worldwide. In Canada, for
example, we saw the trade union-linked New Democratic Party (NDP)
leadership pledge, in the campaign culminating in the October 2015
federal election, a “balanced budget” come-what-may. Implementation of
that policy would prevent an NDP government from reversing most of the
harsh austerity measures introduced by the previous Stephen Harper-led
Conservative Party regime. The political default of the NDP, and the
“strategic voting” stance of much of the union bureaucracy, funneled
workers’ discontent with austerity into a victory for the Liberal Party
of Justin Trudeau, which briefly feinted to the left of the NDP.
As far as the so-called “populist” currents in South America go, they
demonstrated their inability to change the situation to any important
degree, and they reject any clear break with imperialism and domestic
capital.
The so-called “new reformisms” are a symptom of rising political
awareness, a reflection of the rise of struggles. But Syriza’s policy in
power shows the extent to which these forces adapted to capitalism in
crisis, in record time, and are ready to implement the bourgeois agenda
themselves, even lacking the mass working class roots the “old”
reformists had acquired.
The anarchist or autonomous currents manage to channel part of the youth
revolt. We must have a policy to address these currents, sometimes with
possibilities of tactical agreements with some of them. In any case, we
should not abandon the field of radicalism to them, while explaining why
their policy is at an impasse.
1.C) Chronic instability of the system, mass resistance and politicization
The balance of forces is very unfavorable to us. But mass resistance
shakes every continent. The crisis of the system feeds a chronic
political instability.
The brutality of the capitalist onslaught feeds phenomena of social and
political regression. The traditional left, when it comes to power,
leads the capitalist onslaught, thus opening a space for the far-right.
But this is far from being the majority sentiment in the working class.
In the electoral base of these far-right currents, we can nonetheless
find a significant number of workers, who have been among the first
victims of capitalism. A solid fightback of the working class, winning
significant victories, could regain many of those who have been
temporarily captivated by far-right demagogy.
The effect of the onslaught, in the context of crisis, is not one-sided.
It also spurs mass resistance movements and a new politicization. The
dynamic of polarization is well illustrated by Trump’s election.
Although he symbolizes the increasingly reactionary policy of the ruling
class, he was elected in a situation where mobilizations are on the rise
and the interest in socialist ideas is higher than in decades inside the
main global power. In the same way, worldwide possibilities for social
explosions and collective struggles are rising.
Among significant sectors of youth and the working class, there is a
perception that this is a rotten system leading to failure. Most of the
time, struggling masses know what they do not want anymore, and have
profound disgust for the capitalist system, without knowing with what to
replace it, and how. But we are not only observing struggles as a
mechanical response to the attacks, but also processes of accumulation
of experience, politicization, regroupment and organization.
Massive national mobilizations against the challenge to the Labor Law
in France, the struggle of low-wage workers for the right to form a
union and win a $15/hour minimum wage, and the rise of Black Lives
Matter in the United States, the unprecedented student mobilizations in
Quebec, the massive workers’ strikes in Asia, particularly in China and
India, are renowned. But we also see the renewed interest in socialism
illustrated by Jeremy Corbyn’s double leadership victory in the British
Labour Party, and the renewed interest in socialist ideas in the United
States. All these signs indicate that the elements for anti-capitalist
awareness are present. It is, nonetheless, a very uneven and limited
process. Currents hostile to socialism are reaping the fruits of the
deep discontent. The electoral audience of the FIT in Argentina, the
recomposition of the union movement in South Africa, despite the
limitations of both experiences, and above all, the renewed interest in
“socialism” in the United States indicate that anti-capitalist ideas can
acquire a mass audience.
III – The working class always plays a central role
A commonly held view in militant circles feeds scepticism concerning the
present relevance of revolution. It contends that the neo-liberal
onslaught supposedly eliminated full time work and weakened the working
class so badly that it no longer plays a central role.
In fact, the working class is globally more numerous today than ever. In
South Korea alone there are as many wage-earners today than there were
in the whole world at the time of Karl Marx. The working class, which in
our view is composed of wage workers who do not exercise management
power, today constitutes between 80 and 90 per cent of the population in
the most industrialized countries, and almost half of the total global
population.
Globally, the number of industrial workers worldwide went from 490
million in 1991 to 715 million in 2012 (ILO data). Industry even grew
faster than services between 2004 and 2012! The industrial sector did
not shrink, but the agricultural sector did, from 44 to 32 per cent of
the global workforce.
It is true that the industrial working class dropped numerically inside
the old capitalist powers. But its role in class struggle is far from
being secondary, as was proved for example by railroad and oil refinery
workers in France in the mass strikes of 2010 and 2016. And the
proletarianization of services created new wage-earning sectors in the
old capitalist metropolises who recently proved their combativity.
Cleaning workers, for example in the historic strikes in Netherlands in
2010 and 2012, and retail and fast-food workers involved in the Fight
for $15 movement in the United States, reflect this trend.
It is not true that the rise of part-time work made the working class
unable to lead significant struggles and play a revolutionary role. In
the past, much less job security and the absence of big industries did
not stop the Parisian workers from taking power during the Commune of
1871. Today, workers find the path to mobilization in spite of the
obstacles created by the capitalist onslaught. The biggest strike in
decades in France, biggest in numbers and length, was the strike of
undocumented workers in 2009-2010, which involved 6000 strikers,
including 1500 short-term contract workers organized in a strike
committee, over 10 months. The 2009 general strike in Guadeloupe showed
the ability of workers to unite the oppressed and threaten the power elite.
By reorganizing industry worldwide, capitalist globalization created new
working classes in the southern countries, whose potential was shown by
the recent mobilizations: the wave of strikes happening in China since
2010, the 2015 massive strikes in Bursa, Turkey, the formation of mass
militant unions in Indonesia, the role of the union movement and of mass
strikes demanding the resignation of South Korea’s Prime Minister in
late 2016.
These struggles develop, for the most part, despite the union leaders.
For these struggles to end up challenging the system, it is necessary to
rebuild a worldwide class struggle workers’ leadership. Building a class
struggle wing of the labor movement, independent of the official union
leaderships, particularly able to launch the building of organs of
self-organization, strike committees, is a central task for a
revolutionary international. Differentiation or breaks inside the labor
movement indicate the opening of new possibilities. Examples include the
process of creation of a new union confederation, breaking with the ANC
in South Africa, differentiation inside the CGT in France, and
discussions on the prospect of forming a class struggle “workers’ block”
after the Labor Law Reform movement.
If we take into account all these factors, the global working class
never had such a potentially powerful role. Every sector of the working
class does not have the same objective weight in the production
apparatus and is not able to play the same role. And we have to take
that into account in our efforts to organize and recruit. But the
revolutionaries have to take seriously the central role of the working
class, and develop a solid political intervention in relation to it.
This task should be taken on not only by the national sections, but be
the subject of regular discussions at the international level.
IV- Our proposals
1.A) Building revolutionary vanguard parties — the present relevance of
Leninism
Here is how Lenin in “Left Wing Communism, An Infantile Disorder”
defined party discipline, how a party of cadres for the revolution is
built, the opposite of the Stalinist caricature:
“The first questions to arise are: how is the discipline of the
proletariat’s revolutionary party maintained? How is it tested? How is
it reinforced? First, by the class-consciousness of the proletarian
vanguard and by its devotion to the revolution, by its tenacity,
self-sacrifice and heroism. Second, by its ability to link up, maintain
the closest contact, and—if you wish—merge, in certain measure, with the
broadest masses of the working people—primarily with the proletariat,
but also with the non-proletarian masses of working people. Third, by
the correctness of the political leadership exercised by this vanguard,
by the correctness of its political strategy and tactics, provided the
broad masses have seen, from their own experience, that they are correct.
Without these conditions, discipline in a revolutionary party really
capable of being the party of the advanced class, whose mission it is to
overthrow the bourgeoisie and transform the whole of society, cannot be
achieved. Without these conditions, all attempts to establish discipline
inevitably fall flat and end up in phrase-mongering and clowning. On the
other hand, these conditions cannot emerge at once. They are created
only by prolonged effort and hard-won experience. Their creation is
facilitated by a correct revolutionary theory, which, in its turn, is
not a dogma, but assumes final shape only in close connection with the
practical activity of a truly mass and truly revolutionary movement.”
“No revolution without a revolutionary party.” This means that beyond
the diversity of tactics revolutionaries may adopt in building their
party according to the country and the situation, building revolutionary
parties, parties to take the power and for communism, is still the
strategic goal.
In order to build revolutionary organizations who are not content with
proclaiming principles, our goal is to build a party of cadres capable
of giving life to the programmatic principles, which means trying to
give each of our members the means to acquire the highest possible level
of education, to be able to play a part in the destruction of capitalism
and the building of another society. But education must be consistent
with our political militant practice. To be able to get rid of the
system that generates exploitation and oppression, we have to narrow the
gap between the private sphere and the public sphere as much as we can.
That gap is the product of the capitalist system we live in.
Against that logic of “separation,” we consciously pursue the prospect
of revolution and are consistent in our choices and ways of life. It’s
the complete opposite of individual frustration. On the contrary, it is
a freely agreed emancipation and association against the dominant
ideology disseminated by the state, school and family. It is designed to
regroup in order to reach a common goal — the destruction of the
capitalist system, based on exploitation and oppression, to build
another society, the communist society.
Seeking to plant roots in the working class and in oppressed sectors is
instrumental. It must be systematically discussed and conducted with
dedicated tools. The present relevance of the insurrectionary general
strike as the main “strategical hypothesis” in most of the world, our
analysis of the central role of the working class thus must have
immediate consequences in practice, in our sections and internationally.
What does it mean? It means that we have an active approach to gaining a
base in the key sectors of the capitalist economy. An effort must be
made in that direction, in each section, but also that the International
should help to reach that goal, and participate in the effort. Through
theoretical input, but also centralization of information. It also means
that we systematically develop an independent political intervention to
address our class.
Every revolutionary must think about how we can fight back against both
the austerity policies and the capitalist-patriarchal system. The only
way to defend our social achievements and to gain new ones is still the
mobilization of the working class and the youth. Every social
achievement has been reached as a result of the mobilization.
Twentieth-century history demonstrates it. Workers’ and women’s rights
have not been gained at the polls but through strikes and
demonstrations. In that sense, our main task is to re-build class
consciousness. The most effective way to do so is still by the struggle
of the working class interest against that of the bourgeoisie. Rallies,
demonstrations, occupations, assemblies, strikes—those are still the
best tools for raising the consciousness of the oppressed.
This does not mean that we ignore parliamentary elections. But we do
subordinate them to mobilization. In our strategy, the elections cannot
be a goal but a means for strengthening our class’s mobilization towards
raising class consciousness. The workers and the youth must adopt the
struggle against every kind of oppression and link it to their struggle
for class emancipation. For doing so, it is necessary that the
working-class mass organizations include in their platforms elements
like equal pay for equal work, respect for LGBTQI rights and the
socialization of domestic labor.
The strategic hypothesis we advance to end capitalism and patriarchy is
a non-stop series of mobilizations that make the working class aware of
the necessity of taking power for real social change. Strikes are not a
fetish but an essential route to raise workers’ reliance on their own
potential power. Strikes are “schools of class struggle” because they
are moments in which the working class can self-organize. It is by means
of conflict that workers create automatic responses and mechanisms to
resist the bourgeoisie’s policies. Revolutionaries should not ignore
today’s struggles, even if they are small. To the contrary, we must take
part in them. Therefore, we need to find solutions to our deficiency in
having a strong presence within the working class and taking part in its
battles.
A revolutionary International that does not prioritize youth is doomed
to disappear
Youth still plays the role of tactical vanguard. The theory developed by
Ernest Mandel is still relevant today. Whether we look at the processes
of the Arab revolutions, or at the mobilizations in Latin America, in
Mexico and Chile, or in France in the mobilization against the CPE, and
in all likelihood soon in the USA with the anti-Trump mobilizations, we
see this. Its role in struggles is always paramount, and recruiting
youth is plainly vital for any revolutionary organization.
To be consistent with that stance, we reaffirm our current’s
theoretical, practical, and militant hallmarks. We stand up for youth
autonomy, an autonomy subordinated to the proletariat and its historical
interests but with forms of organization that are not independent but
autonomous from the labor movement organizations and the parties we
build. So we set as a goal, when it is possible, the building of
revolutionary youth organizations. The youth sectors in our parties are
a mediation to achieve that goal.
We should also have a specific orientation to address students. It is a
part of youth that actively participates in the overturns during
revolutionary processes. So the international youth camp plays a
fundamental role for this policy. But it should not become a space where
voicing disagreement with the FI leadership is excluded. Forbidding the
participation of the NPA youth sector in the last camp shows a worrisome
theoretical and practical/political weakness.
Similarly disturbing was the refusal to allow four IZAR comrades into
the camp to have a workshop. Some of them have been building the FI for
15 years. They had to host their workshop in the parking lot, with over
70 young comrades who wanted to understand, debate and share, in
attendance. These episodes are symptomatic of a paralyzing and fearful
sectarianism. It is a de facto form of mis-education, as young comrades
become accustomed to such exclusionary practices on the pretext of
ideological purity and struggle against “factionalism”.
There is no Chinese Wall between the project for the society we
advocate, communism, and the party we are trying to build. There has to
be consistency between those two forms. Our party won’t be an island of
communism because it lives and develops in a framework of social
relations determined by patriarchy and the capitalist system. But we
must get as close as we can to our goal. This of course regards the
relations between members, which have to abide by democratic principles
and not contradict our program of struggle against all oppression. But
beyond that, it is the freely agreed association of men and women
struggling for communism and abiding by relations which cannot be in
contradiction with these emancipation principles.
We oppose every form of “separation” forged by Capital between
intellectual work and manual work, between men and women, between
nationals and foreigners, between the private and public spheres. We
reject every form of taboo inside the organization, but instead build a
programmatic and practical/militant unity of all the comrades, through
debate and verification in practice.
1.B) Advocating for a transitional program for the 21st century
The FI should advocate a set of key measures, a transitional approach,
starting with everyday issues and demands, linking them to the question
of power and to the aspiration for a new society. Eventually, the
connection of the current struggles is established to the aim of
challenging the pillars of the capitalist system.
A primary focus of this program is the expropriation of the key sectors
of the economy. The bank crisis and bail-outs provided a new opportunity
to explain and popularize the need for bank nationalization. Company
bankruptcies, massive lay-offs, and the struggles to which they give
rise, also offer an occasion to bring the struggle for workers’ control
up to date and explain the need to requisition the great means of
production, distribution and exchange. A transitional approach is
embodied in the demand “No layoffs, for workers’ control over hiring.”
Fossil and mineral resources are not infinite. The maximum peak of
extraction will soon be reached. Capitalism with its structural logic
aims always to increase consumption — to utilize more raw materials and
energy. The goal of capitalism is to always produce more and maximize
profit. Capitalism cannot be “green”. Capitalism destroys the
environment and species. It destroys our planet. But, once again, there
cannot be a consistent ecological policy without a consistent struggle
against capitalism and without understanding that the only subject able
to end capitalism, and the ecological disaster it provokes, is the
working class.
If we share this analysis, we should draw the conclusions from it, in
terms of our social basis, our intervention and our orientation. Indeed,
the working class, allied with other sectors, is the one force, in the
face of the ecological catastrophe, that is capable of imposing a
program of anti-capitalist ecological transition. Such a transition will
focus on replacing fossil and nuclear energy with green, sustainable
alternatives, and on the need for a worldwide planned economy.
The capitalist world still is structured and organized by imperialism
whose interests are never bound by any commitment to any people. This is
notwithstanding the fact that Capital can sporadically choose to support
a specific struggle with its own methods and goals.
Anti-imperialism should be a central focus of our propaganda and
activity. We are against all imperialist interventions and for the
withdrawal of all imperialist troops. By standing in solidarity with,
for example, the Kurdish people, we do not avoid pointing to the central
responsibility of imperialism for the development of reactionary
currents such as ISIS, and for the horrendous conditions experienced by
the peoples of the region. Even so, recognizing that the reactionary
currents also have their own logic and autonomy, we participate in
demonstrations to defend the Kurdish people, while linking our
unconditional defense with our clear-cut rejection of imperialist
intervention. That is why we do not endorse calls to action that ask our
government to provide weapons to the Kurds. We do not foster the
illusion that our bourgeoisie could defend the peoples of the region.
Facing our own imperialism, it is not our role to create illusions on
the theme: arms, not bombs. That is exactly what happened when the Red
Green Alliance members of parliament voted for the war budget on the
pretext that it would allow sending weapons, but who were very quickly
faced with the second step, the only important one for the Danish
government, and the others, sending Danish F-16 jets which are today
bombing Iraq, in alliance with France and the United States.
Insurgent working classes will have to confront both “their own”
national state apparatus and international imperialist institutions such
as the European Union. “The main enemy is at home” means that we fight
simultaneously against the international imperialist coalitions in which
“our own” bourgeois class takes part. While firmly opposed to any
nationalist, capitalist alternative, we know that an anti-capitalist
revolutionary policy is incompatible with membership in the EU.
We know that the struggle against imperialism, racism, austerity and
capitalist domination is not a struggle to be waged only at the level of
a single country. But neither can it be waged without breaking with the
capitalist policies of the EU, the ECB, with European finance capital,
with the xenophobic, anti-immigrant policies of “fortress-Europe”. To
attack the national bourgeoisie’s power is to break with all the
institutions of the EU. Against the Europe of the Troïka we defend
international solidarity, we strive for a free socialist alliance of the
workers and peoples of Europe.
Inseparable from the imposition of worldwide austerity is the
corresponding rise in imperialist wars and interventions. Led by U.S.
imperialism, the world’s sole superpower, and its historic imperial
European counterparts, we are almost daily witness to wars of saturation
bombing, mass murder, wars of privatized or mercenary armies, drone
wars, sanction and embargo wars, and near-secret wars, as is the case
with the U.S. Africa Command’s re-colonizing and plundering of Africa.
French imperialism too, as well as other former European colonizing
powers, increasingly intervene in Africa and elsewhere to maintain and
expand their interests.
There are no “humanitarian wars” conducted by the imperialist beast.
There never have been. The term itself is repulsive to revolutionaries,
whose raison d’etre is opposition to all imperialist interventions and
wars. Unconditional support for the right of oppressed nations and
peoples to self-determination is a fundamental revolutionary socialist
principle. The FI must unconditionally reject any and all calls on
imperialism to aid in the defeat of local tyrants and dictators. Such
“aid” inevitably comes with strings attached – lethal strings that are
more akin to the hanging rope than to any kind of “benign” or
“democratic” assistance.
The liberation of the oppressed can only be achieved through their own
independent mass organizations and through the construction, in time and
regardless of the difficult circumstances, of revolutionary socialist
parties of the Leninist type. Rejection of imperialist intervention in
all its variations is the prerequisite for successful national
liberation struggles, and for all other gains. Free from the imperialist
yoke, oppressed nations are best positioned to determine their own
future and to effectively challenge their own bourgeoisie.
In the face of imperialism’s incessant wars of conquest, the FI’s
central demands should focus on “Bring the Troops Home Now!” and “Right
to self-determination for all oppressed nations!”
We defend the peoples’ right to self-determination. But we do not follow
the leadership of any national bourgeoisie, even if it comes from an
oppressed nation. In the oppressed nations we support a balance between
the democratic fight for the right to self-determination and the fight
for a society without classes. It means that, according to our strategy,
the struggle for national freedom can be useful for working class
emancipation only when led by the working class itself. Thus, we fight
for working class independence from the bourgeoisie in the oppressed
nations. For example, the struggle for the right to self-determination
of the nations oppressed by the Spanish State would be useful if linked
to the fight against capitalism and lead by our class.
This program is not an electoral platform, a program for government. It
can only be realized by a joint mobilization of the working class and
the oppressed, bringing a Workers’ Government to power, to destroy the
bourgeois state by relying on self-organized organs arising from the
mobilization of our class in alliance with all sectors of the oppressed.
1.C) Building a revolutionary international
We insist, we have to set as a goal the building of a militant
international, an organization capable of leading internationally
coordinated campaigns. Even with modest forces, an organization based in
several countries, acting in coordination, can magnify the effectiveness
of its political intervention.
Our international must renew its discussion of a revolutionary communist
program that addresses the reality of 21st century capitalism, instead
of holding disjointed theoretical discussions with no real link to
political practice.
We, alone, cannot embody the revolutionary communist international. We
must try to unite revolutionaries from various traditions, based on an
agreement on the current situation and the tasks. It is through common
practice that political discussions may lead to principled unity.
Regroupment of revolutionaries internationally should be one of the
goals to be discussed in the FI. Building a revolutionary international
capable of having a significant influence will not happen only by
recruiting to our organization. The FI should invite other revolutionary
national or international groups to start discussing the need for a
common response to the crisis of capitalism, common campaigns, and to
address what type of organization can and should be built.
We know that a policy of seeking discussion with militants from other
political traditions won’t lead to unity in the short term. We realize
that leaders of each of the various Trotskyist “internationals” are
convinced that they are correct in their programmatic, strategic and
tactical stance. Moreover, it is the rule that each group is convinced
of the need to build an “international” around its own group
exclusively. Even so, we have to recognize that we won’t build an
international for revolution and communism simply by primitive
accumulation around our own nucleus.
There is always something to learn from the various Trotskyist
revolutionary traditions, and even from forces beyond that sphere. There
are different experiences and activists of value in many currents and
organizations. It is through theoretical and programmatic debates, in
creative combination with intervention in the field of class struggle,
that the national and international explosions, regroupments and
recomposition of forces will occur.
Temporary conclusion
This contribution is the basis of a first unified effort to launch a
debate leading to the next FI world congress. We defend the present
relevance of an international that grasps the opportunities in the
present situation, and that builds an international for revolution and
communism. Based on the political key points of this contribution, we
want to foster a broad debate addressed to revolutionary currents both
inside and outside of the FI. We will advocate our ideas at the
International Committee meeting, and beyond, anticipating and insisting
that the next FI congress, which cannot reasonably be postponed any
longer, and really must be held in 2018!
From that point of view, we will initiate a debate with every FI
comrade and section willing to communicate with us. We intend that this
debate be respectful of differences, and for the unfolding process to
help reinforce our international in a context of global capitalist
crisis. To that end, we will organize an international conference as a
further step in that direction, and to promote a political regroupment
inside the FI in relation to providing an alternative to the current FI
majority. Our over-riding aim is to build a political current as broadly
as possible to defend the prospect and to affirm the present relevance
of building an international for revolution and communism.
Xavier Guessou, Comité Politique National NPA
Armelle Pertus, Comité Exécutif NPA
Gaël Quirante, Comité Exécutif NPA
Juliette Stein, Comité Politique National NPA
Mariajo Teruel, dirección política estatal (IZAR-Malaga)
Javier Castillo, dirección política estatal (IZAR-Madrid)
Tomás Martínez, dirección política estatal (IZAR-Almería)
Rubén Quirante, dirección política estatal (IZAR-Granada)
Jeff Mackler, National secretary Socialist Action
Michael Schreiber, editor, Socialist Action newspaper
Christine Marie, political committee, Socialist Action
Barry Weisleder, federal secretary, Socialist Action/Ligue pour l’Action
Socialiste
Elizabeth Byce, federal treasurer, SA/LAS
Julius Arscott, central committee member, SA/LAS
Giuseppe Caretta, Collettivo Guevara
Angelo Cardone, Collettivo Guevara
Kleanthis Antoniou, Political Bureau OKDE-Spartakos
Taxiarhis Efstathiou, Central Committee OKDE-Spartakos, National
Coordination Body ANTARSYA, General Council of ADEDY (public sector
workers’ national confederation)
Fani Oikonomidou, Political Bureau OKDE-Spartakos
Manos Skoufoglou, Central Committee OKDE-Spartakos, Central Coordination
Committee ANTARSYA
Kostas Skordoulis, Control Commission OKDE-Spartakos
Share this:
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
28Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)28
Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
February 3, 2017 in Fourth International, International, Marxist
Politics and Philosophy.
Related posts
In Defense of Marxism: In Defense of the Fourth International
Statement by the Socialist Action Political Committee
Fourth International in Crisis
Post navigation
← Cuarta Internacional oposición
Get Involved!
Donate to help support our work
Get email updates
Join Socialist Action
Newspaper Archives
Newspaper Archives Select Month February 2017 (5) January 2017 (13)
December 2016 (12) November 2016 (19) October 2016 (12) September
2016 (10) August 2016 (10) July 2016 (14) June 2016 (14) May 2016
(9) April 2016 (12) March 2016 (14) February 2016 (8) January 2016
(11) December 2015 (11) November 2015 (9) October 2015 (8) September
2015 (10) August 2015 (7) July 2015 (13) June 2015 (9) May 2015
(10) April 2015 (12) March 2015 (9) February 2015 (11) January 2015
(10) December 2014 (12) November 2014 (11) October 2014 (9) September
2014 (6) August 2014 (10) July 2014 (11) June 2014 (10) May 2014
(11) April 2014 (10) March 2014 (9) February 2014 (11) January 2014
(11) December 2013 (10) November 2013 (11) October 2013 (17)
September 2013 (13) August 2013 (10) July 2013 (11) June 2013 (15)
May 2013 (14) April 2013 (14) March 2013 (12) February 2013 (10)
January 2013 (17) December 2012 (7) November 2012 (8) October 2012
(19) September 2012 (2) August 2012 (27) July 2012 (18) June 2012
(3) May 2012 (19) April 2012 (14) March 2012 (17) February 2012 (19)
January 2012 (17) December 2011 (3) November 2011 (33) October 2011
(14) September 2011 (13) August 2011 (34) July 2011 (24) June 2011
(19) May 2011 (19) April 2011 (15) March 2011 (15) February 2011
(16) January 2011 (15) December 2010 (17) November 2010 (1) October
2010 (6) September 2010 (3) August 2010 (8) July 2010 (7) June 2010
(2) May 2010 (9) April 2010 (3) March 2010 (8) February 2010 (3)
January 2010 (9) December 2009 (6) November 2009 (5) October 2009
(16) September 2009 (3) August 2009 (2) July 2009 (5) June 2009 (2)
May 2009 (7) April 2009 (6) March 2009 (16) February 2009 (9)
January 2009 (10) December 2008 (11) November 2008 (8) October 2008
(16) September 2008 (14) August 2008 (18) July 2008 (12) June 2008
(3) May 2008 (2) April 2008 (3) March 2008 (14) February 2008 (11)
January 2008 (11) December 2007 (8) November 2007 (1) July 2007 (1)
June 2007 (1) April 2007 (1) March 2007 (1) February 2007 (3)
December 2006 (11) November 2006 (11) October 2006 (13) September
2006 (15) August 2006 (11) July 2006 (18) June 2006 (7) May 2006
(14) April 2006 (6) March 2006 (14) February 2006 (5) January 2006
(2) December 2005 (9) November 2005 (8) October 2005 (13) September
2005 (12) August 2005 (9) July 2005 (16) June 2005 (16) May 2005
(16) April 2005 (12) March 2005 (14) February 2005 (19) January 2005
(15) December 2004 (14) November 2002 (17) October 2002 (19)
September 2002 (22) August 2002 (21) July 2002 (15) May 2002 (21)
April 2002 (21) February 2002 (15) January 2002 (15) December 2001
(17) October 2001 (24) September 2001 (18) July 2001 (19) June 2001
(18) October 2000 (17) September 2000 (21) August 2000 (19) July 2000
(16) June 2000 (26) May 2000 (21) April 2000 (22) March 2000 (28)
February 2000 (18) January 2000 (20) December 1999 (20) November
1999 (26) October 1999 (25) September 1999 (18) August 1999 (40) July
1999 (38) June 1999 (24) May 1999 (27) April 1999 (25) March 1999
(26) February 1999 (29) January 1999 (24) July 1998 (12)
Search
View socialistactionusa’s profile on Facebook
View SocialistActUS’s profile on Twitter
View SocialistActionCT’s profile on YouTube
Subscribe to Our Newspaper
Upcoming Events
No upcoming events
Category Cloud
Actions & Protest Africa Anti-War Arts & Culture Black Liberation Canada
Caribbean Civil Liberties Cuba East Asia Economy Education & Schools
Elections Environment Europe Immigration Indigenous Rights International
Labor Latin America Latino Civil Liberties Marxist Theory & History
Middle East National Oppression Police & FBI Prisons South Asia
Uncategorized Vote Socialist Action Women's Liberation
View Calendar
Blog at WordPress.com.