Socialist Action /April 1999
Fourth International in Crisis
By JEFF MACKLER
The programmatic heritage of the Fourth International (FI), the world
party of socialist revolution founded in 1938 by Leon Trotsky and his collaborators
in response to the degeneration and betrayal of the Stalinized Third International,
has been proposed for elimination.
The Feb. 21-26, 1999, Amsterdam meeting of the International Executive
Committee (IEC) of the FI, a body of some 40 delegates elected at the 1995
World Congress of the FI, voted by a 60 percent majority to propose to its
affiliated parties around the world the substitution of new statutes "inspired
by the basic approach of the first workers' International."
A final decision on the statutes will be taken at the World Congress
set for 2001.
The original programmatic basis of the Fourth International is stated
in section I.3 of the current statutes, which have served the FI for the
past 61 years:
"The Fourth International," according to its preamble statement,
"seeks to incorporate in its program the progressive social experiences
of humanity, maintaining the continuity of the ideological heritage of the
revolutionary Marxist movement. It offers to the vanguard of the international
working class the indispensable lessons to be drawn from the October 1917
Revolution in Russia, the subsequent struggle against Stalinist degeneration,
and the new revolutionary developments following World War II."
The statutes continue: "The Fourth International stands on the programmatic
documents of the first four congresses of the Third International;the International
Left Opposition; the Movement for the Fourth International; the Transitional
Program adopted at its founding congress in 1938 ... and the key documents
of the world Trotskyist movement since then."
These references to the programmatic heritage of the FI, as well as the
fundamental organizational structure of the FI are proposed for elimination.
The proposed statutes changes are designed to codify the orientation
pursued by the FI leadership for the past decade and longer.
The main resolutions adopted by the last several world congresses and
the many failed fusion attempts over this period demonstrated that the FI
leadership was moving to abandon its Trotskyist and revolutionary heritage
in favor of a "regroupment" with non-revolutionary currents ranging
from assorted "ex-Stalinists" emerging from Moscow, Chinese, and
Albanian-oriented Stalinist parties to middle-class formations like the
European Greens.
Back to the First International?
The proposed new statutes quote at length from the founding document
of the First International, founded by Karl Marx and others in 1864.
Marx's International was shortlived, in the end becoming entangled in
endless disputes between its revolutionary wing-led by Marx-and a disparate
assortment of anarchists, utopian socialists, and "middle class"
reformists who rejected the central role of the working class in the struggle
against capitalism.
Marx himself was instrumental in breaking with these currents, which
he deemed antithetical to the formation of a revolutionary international
movement.
With the passing from the historic scene of each of the first three international
socialist movements, the succeeding world revolutionary movement sought
to incorporate in its program the lessons learned from past defeats, the
programmatic gains that retained their relevance, as well as the fundamental
principles conquered by the new generation of revolutionary fighters.
The Second (or Socialist) International, on the eve of World War I, fell
prey to national chauvinism, with virtually all of its leading parties defending
their own capitalist governments as the world's imperialist nations engaged
in a world slaughter that pitted worker against worker in the interest of
capitalist profit and plunder.
Marx's ringing maxim, "Workers of the world unite! You have nothing
to lose but your chains!" was turned into its opposite, with workers
of the world killing each other at the behest of their capitalist bosses.
The refusal of Lenin's Bolshevik Party to support the Russian imperialist
government in the First World War, and the associated Bolshevik-led victory
of the great Russian Revolution of 1917, laid the foundation for the formation
of the Third (or Communist) International.
The new international included in its ranks the revolutionary currents
that stood against the imperialist war and rejected, as a matter of class
principle, participation in and support to coalition capitalist governments.
But with the rise to power of Stalin in the USSR and the destruction
of the basic institutions of workers democracy created by the 1917 Russian
Revolution, the Third International too abandoned its revolutionary heritage.
By the late 1920s it had succumbed to national chauvinism.
Stalin purged from the ranks of the party and murdered virtually the
entire leadership of the revolution, including the most dedicated followers
of Lenin and Trotsky.
The result was a 60-year Stalinist rapprochement with world imperialism,
in which Stalinist-influenced struggles of workers and their organizations
worldwide were used as bargaining chips to affect deals with imperialism
designed to preserve the ruling bureaucratic caste in the USSR and maintain
capitalist stability at the same time.
Despite self-serving capitalist propaganda equating Stalinism with communism,
in fact Stalinism represented the graveyard of revolutions and a deadly
counterrevolutionary force in the workers' movement.
The process of rebuilding the international revolutionary movement began
anew in 1933 and culminated in the founding of the Fourth International
in 1938.
The FI represented the historic continuity of the revolutionary socialist
movement from Marx and Engels through Lenin and Trotsky.
Is U.S. immune from economic crisis?
The proposal to abandon the FI's program is indicative of the deep demoralization
that permeates the ranks of those at the head of the FI. This was reflected
in every agenda item discussed at the February IEC meeting.
The meeting opened with majority reports on "The World Political
and Economic Situation." Two majority representatives presented the
leadership's view in oral reports. The majority, a combination of secondary
leaders who have no clear vision as to how to proceed, presented no written
texts.
This writer, representing Socialist Action/USA, reported on a written
counter-resolution adopted by Socialist Action's national convention last
summer and distributed to all IEC members present.
Socialist Action is prohibited by reactionary U.S. legislation from maintaining
formal relations with the FI. Its participation, nonetheless, has been in
fraternal solidarity with the FI.
The majority reporters argued that U.S. imperialism had emerged in the
past decade as the world's unchallenged and hegemonic superpower, virtually
free to intervene militarily and economically anywhere on earth. The United
States was deemed to be essentially immune from the great economic and political
pressures that are currently wracking all capitalist nations.
The demise of the previous Stalinist leaderships of the Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe, according to the majority, has disoriented virtually
the entire left.
According to the majority, "Social democrats are social liberals,
Stalinists are social democrats, former guerrilla currents are right-wing
social democrats and populist nationalists are today right-wing nationalists.
"In truth, the bemoaning of the current rightist course of these
reformist forces further indicates the majority's orientation. Most of these
forces were previously seen by the majority as components of and allies
in the coming revolutionary struggles.
That is, rather than look to the fresh forces emerging from the existing
workers movements, the FI leadership sought alliances with forces that consistently
betrayed worker's struggles in favor of alliances with capitalism.
The United States, according to the majority, is no longer concerned
about the USSR but rather "is paranoid about terrorism, rogue states,
and terrorists getting nuclear weapons."
"There's a real feeling of powerlessness since the Gulf War. No
one opposes NATO's expansion to the east. There is no willingness to do
anti-imperialist work. We're at the beginning of the 19th century, organizing
the workers' movement with minimal demands," the majority reporter
continued.
In addition to this one-sided and demoralized presentation, the majority
reporter argued for the first time in the FI's history that "it would
be ultraleft to say that we will have nothing to do with the United Nations.
.. The UN issue is very complex and can't be settled with simplistic answers.
"There's a difference between UN peacekeeping missions and the Iraq
war. What about people who are demanding NATO intervention in Kosovo? ..
We can't condemn all UN and NATO interventions. We have to take them case
by case."
Socialist Action rejected all imperialist interventions for any reason
whether they be initiated by the United States, the imperialist-controlled
United Nations, or the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance.
At the same time, we rejected the majority premise of American imperialist
omnipotence and immunity from the inherent and unresolvable contradictions
of world capitalism.
We pointed to the growing crisis of capitalist overproduction as ever
increasing compe tition for shrinking world markets drives every capitalist
state to modernize its productive capacities and replace workers with machines.
We noted the generalized decline in world capitalist profit rates and
the associated impending protectionist trade wars, financial crises, and
increasing tendency to collapse-as with the so-called Asian Tigers like
South Korea, as well as Indonesia, Mexico, and Brazil.
The incapacity of the weaker capitalist states and the so-called developing
economies in Asia and Latin America, not to mention industrialized Europe,
to compete on world markets pushes them closer and closer to ruin, as whole
industries are closed and increasing millions are left without jobs.
Rather than stability, we described the rising unemployment and underemployment
in the United States and worldwide, camouflaged by statistical manipulations,
as ever eroding the quality of life.
We pointed to the rise in capitalist-promoted racism and anti-immigrant
prejudice, to the growing disparity between rich and poor, to the rise of
poverty in the advanced capitalist nations, to the massive cuts in social
services, and to the devastation of the underdeveloped world.
We noted that the United States was the world's leading debtor nation,
with a growing proportion of its budget required to service its debt while
at the same time being incapable of resolving this problem through Keynesian-style
deficit spending.
The option of Keynesian pump priming was open to U.S. imperialism following
World War II when it emerged as the world's leading creditor nation and
both its allies and enemies stood in ruin.
At the cost of 45 million dead in the imperialist slaughter, the United
States stood unchallenged in regard to access to world markets. A half century
later it is increasingly compelled to close or threaten to close its borders
to more competitive foreign products while at the same time pressuring its
world capitalist "allies" to open theirs to U.S. exports.
Capitalism restored in ex-USSR?
The second major debate at the IEC was over the class nature of the ex-USSR
and the former Stalinist states of Eastern Europe. The majority contended
for the first time, with virtually no proof, that capitalism had been restored
in these degenerated and deformed workers states.
The gains of the Russian Revolution, however distorted by Stalinism,
were gone, said majority supporters. There was nothing to defend. Russia
was treated as an imperialist power, comparable to the major capitalist
nations of Western Europe.
Socialist Action rejected the fundamental assertion that capitalism had
been restored. Our reporter, Nat Weinstein, characterized the ex-USSR and
Eastern Europe as rapidly degenerating workers states in transition to capitalism,
but far from having completed this transition.
The big struggles of the working class in these nations, he asserted,
were ahead, not behind. There were no solutions to Russia's plight, including
massive shortages, and social cutbacks, devastation of key sectors of industry,
unemployment, etc., in the context of the world capitalist market.
The initial illusions held by Russian and Eastern European workers that
capitalism would bring prosperity were giving way to a grim awareness that
the profit system is inimical to human progress.
For the majority, the demise of the Stalinist states represented a historic
setback for the worldwide workers' movement. "We have lost most of
the last century," the majority has proclaimed.
For Socialist Action, despite the difficulties, the repudiation of Stalinism
and the demise of the former Stalinist leaderships removes a major obstacle
standing in the way of the world socialist revolution.
Popular fronts
Another decisive discussion at the IEC concerned a resolution on Mexico
fraternally presented by Socialist Action and signed by delegates from Germany,
Sweden, England, Ireland, and Austria. The resolution read in part:
"The IEC considers that the electoral alliance of the Mexican section(s)
of the Fourth International, the PRT, with the capitalist PRD (Cardenas),
contradicts the fundamental principle of working-class independence, a principle
that is central to the FI's program."
This resolution was overwhelmingly defeated. While a few of those who
voted against it stated that they agreed with the basic content but opposed
the method of resolving disputes by organizational condemnations before
a written discussion could be organized, the vast majority not only agreed
with the PRT's support to Cardenas, but supported similar violations of
working-class independence that have become the norm in FI functioning.
In past years the Peruvian section (now defunct), the Uruguayan section,
and others, participated in multi-class electoral formations in which openly
bourgeois parties and prominent representatives were present. Revolutionary
socialists have always rejected such multi-class electoral formations where
the program of socialism and class independence is subordinated to the program
of capital, albeit presented with a "left" face.
These popular front agreements between capitalists and workers parties-usually
led by Stalinists, social democrats, and privileged trade-union bureaucrats-are
sought by capitalist forces, especially in times of crisis. They are designed
to subordinate the independent struggles of workers against capital to electoral
solutions based on promises of capitalist reform.
The aim of both the bureaucratic misleaders and their capitalist allies
is to harness the energies of the mass movement to the service of capitalist
reform. The result has always been the dissipation of mass movements and
the betrayal by capitalist politicians and their parties.
In past years, the FI majority argued, in the case of Peru, Uruguay,
and perhaps today in the case of Brazil and the Basque Country, that multi-class
popular fronts were in order provided only that the workers had "hegemony"
in these formations. The FI had previously and historically rejected this
position.
By definition, capitalists are always in the minority of such formations
that include masses of working people and their organizations. It is not
the numbers that are decisive but rather the agreement of the workers' parties
to subordinate their program to that of capital.
The very presence of capitalist forces in electoral formations, even
miniscule in numbers, signals to all that the interests of capital are not
to be undermined.
No capitalist would participate if this were not the case. History has
recorded an unbroken list of popular front formations that betrayed worker's
interests in favor of capitalist interests and continued capitalist rule.
Today, the FI majority has dropped even the pretense of opposition to
multi-class electoral fronts.
The past spurious argument justifying such fronts, "working class
hegemony," has been dropped in favor of open support to capitalist
parties, as is the case today in Mexico.
For the past decade the Mexican PRT (Revolutionary Workers Party), formerly
a party of 5000 members and the largest section of the FI, has been part
of an electoral alliance with the capitalist party of Cuauhtemoc Cardenas,
a bourgeois nationalist, currently the mayor of Mexico City.
The PRT not only signs electoral agreements with Cardenas's PRD (Party
of the Democratic Revolution). PRT members run as candidates and serve in
the National Assembly-having been elected on the capitalist PRD slate.
The subordination of the once revolutionary PRT to capitalist politics
has been a disaster for Mexican Trotskyism. The PRT has lost virtually all
its members. Its most recent split left the FI without any section in Mexico.
For almost a decade, the FI majority has refused to prepare a balance
sheet on the PRT experience, defending the PRT leadership's electoral decisions
in virtually every instance.
The IEC vote to reject the PRT's class-collaborationist course represents
a codification of a practice that has become the norm for several FI sections
as well as the FI majority. This decision is in keeping with the majority's
move to abandon the program of the FI outright.
As one leading reporter for the majority declared at the IEC, "If
we had continued to change the program of the FI in the form of resolutions
at World Congresses as we have done in the past, people would say, 'Why
don't you just change the statutes and be up front about it?'"
The reporter concluded, "Yes, we will now be up front about it.
We will change the statutes."
A small minority at the IEC registered their opposition to the course
of the FI leadership. Others registered their displeasure with this or that
agenda report but abstained from voting or supported majority position.
The formal discussions and debates in the coming year or so in the Fourth
International-as well as the debates inside each section of the FI-will
determine the final outcome of the sharp divisions evidenced at the IEC.
Until now, the slow pace of the world class struggle has fueled the demoralization
of many of the FI's members and sections.
A change in this situation will inevitably help to stem the tide of retreat
and liquidation embarked on by the current leadership. The fight for the
FI and its program will be a critical test for FI revolutionaries in the
coming year.
Socialist Action /April 1999 |