Post by dodger on Jul 14, 2013 8:30:15 GMT
Any thoughts--kinda important--our method of work, what type of party might be needed for progress. How we see ourselves and others Our history. Do we ourselves measure up as an advanced detachment? Perhaps detached might better describe us. The term "Vanguard" useful in Lenin's time antagonizes all but the most supine and arrogant. Witness the long running saga, Comrade Delta. What lessons do they offer up? The Entryism into Labour or CPGB to what end? Endless quoting of Mao or latterly Hoxha certainly a substitute for thought. So what moves us down the road? A certain level of self confidence would not go amiss. strategic despising of our rulers, just how unnecessary or useless to society can the City be shown to be, before we act? The EU? Nato for our defence? Trade Unions, what are they? Do they have a role? To illustrate how irrelevant communists can make themselves a review of a book written by a long standing Trotskyist. Sam Bornstein and Al Richardson
: War and the International: History of the Trotskyist Movement in Britain, 1937-49 (Paperback)
www.amazon.co.uk/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1S60W4KWFX1Y9/ref=cm_aya_bb_rev
This is a very revealing account of Trotskyist groups in Britain. In 1937 Gerry Healy, Ted Grant, Sam Bornstein and others founded the Workers' International League, by splitting from the new Revolutionary Socialist League. The authors describe the RSL as `a regime of permanent factional conflict, resulting firstly in splits, and then in complete disintegration'.
By 1938, there were four Trotskyist groups in Britain. But Trotsky wanted a `Fourth International', so James Cannon was sent from the USA. He presented a `Peace and Unity Agreement' to all four groups and gave them 20 minutes to sign it. All but the WIL did so.
In World War Two, Trotsky's Fourth International opposed all `defencism' and called for a repeat of Lenin's policy in World War One. But what was right when the warring powers were all imperialist states was wrong when the world's only socialist state was the Nazis' main target.
John McGovern, an ILP MP, said, "We believe, along with the Trotskyist organisation, that this is a bloody imperialist struggle." The WIL called for `revolution in the Soviet Union' and the `overthrow of the bureaucratic clique in the Kremlin'.
The `Left Fraction' of the RSL saw any support for the war effort as chauvinism. The RSL even called bomb-proof shelters chauvinist. It called for `socialist internationalism and revolutionary defeatism', that is, for the defeat of the Allies and the victory of Hitler.
The authors write that the RSL `plainly failed the test of War'. It fell apart, into cliques, each around a supposedly charismatic leader. Each group developed its own `Trotskyist Opposition' or `Left Fraction'. The WIL became the Revolutionary Communist Party, the British section of the Fourth International, in 1944. It collapsed in 1949.
The authors denounce Trotsky's, and the Fourth International's, policy of entryism. One ILP member said that entryism "was morally unjustifiable because I can't see that you can be a member of any political party, accept the constitution - which is a political thing - and its rules and all the rest of it and preach something else. I think the workers just don't like it - they turn away from that - the honest workers turn away from that ..." But his principles had limits: he had just said that it would have been alright to `join the Communist Party - yes - work inside the Communist Party ...'
The authors point out that "The crisis of British Trotskyism was only the local expression of the crisis of the world movement, which failed totally to comprehend the changes in the international situation beginning as early as 1943, and has failed utterly to come to terms with them since." The authors detail Trotskyism's `worldwide disintegration in the course of the War'. The French and Vietnamese groups had already split before the war; the US, German, Chinese and Ceylonese split during it. The Fourth International `practically ceased to exist'.
The authors call this sorry tale of treachery and splits the `heyday' of Trotskyism in Britain. It quite possibly was!
: War and the International: History of the Trotskyist Movement in Britain, 1937-49 (Paperback)
www.amazon.co.uk/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1S60W4KWFX1Y9/ref=cm_aya_bb_rev
This is a very revealing account of Trotskyist groups in Britain. In 1937 Gerry Healy, Ted Grant, Sam Bornstein and others founded the Workers' International League, by splitting from the new Revolutionary Socialist League. The authors describe the RSL as `a regime of permanent factional conflict, resulting firstly in splits, and then in complete disintegration'.
By 1938, there were four Trotskyist groups in Britain. But Trotsky wanted a `Fourth International', so James Cannon was sent from the USA. He presented a `Peace and Unity Agreement' to all four groups and gave them 20 minutes to sign it. All but the WIL did so.
In World War Two, Trotsky's Fourth International opposed all `defencism' and called for a repeat of Lenin's policy in World War One. But what was right when the warring powers were all imperialist states was wrong when the world's only socialist state was the Nazis' main target.
John McGovern, an ILP MP, said, "We believe, along with the Trotskyist organisation, that this is a bloody imperialist struggle." The WIL called for `revolution in the Soviet Union' and the `overthrow of the bureaucratic clique in the Kremlin'.
The `Left Fraction' of the RSL saw any support for the war effort as chauvinism. The RSL even called bomb-proof shelters chauvinist. It called for `socialist internationalism and revolutionary defeatism', that is, for the defeat of the Allies and the victory of Hitler.
The authors write that the RSL `plainly failed the test of War'. It fell apart, into cliques, each around a supposedly charismatic leader. Each group developed its own `Trotskyist Opposition' or `Left Fraction'. The WIL became the Revolutionary Communist Party, the British section of the Fourth International, in 1944. It collapsed in 1949.
The authors denounce Trotsky's, and the Fourth International's, policy of entryism. One ILP member said that entryism "was morally unjustifiable because I can't see that you can be a member of any political party, accept the constitution - which is a political thing - and its rules and all the rest of it and preach something else. I think the workers just don't like it - they turn away from that - the honest workers turn away from that ..." But his principles had limits: he had just said that it would have been alright to `join the Communist Party - yes - work inside the Communist Party ...'
The authors point out that "The crisis of British Trotskyism was only the local expression of the crisis of the world movement, which failed totally to comprehend the changes in the international situation beginning as early as 1943, and has failed utterly to come to terms with them since." The authors detail Trotskyism's `worldwide disintegration in the course of the War'. The French and Vietnamese groups had already split before the war; the US, German, Chinese and Ceylonese split during it. The Fourth International `practically ceased to exist'.
The authors call this sorry tale of treachery and splits the `heyday' of Trotskyism in Britain. It quite possibly was!