The AWL/USC attack Socialist Appeal saying,
“Attard then blurs it all together: “What is happening in Ukraine is not a revolutionary uprising by an oppressed colony or a case of self-defence by a proletarian regime.” So there seems to be a broad, inclusive “good” category, into which however Ukraine does not fall.”
But, it is not a question of “good” regimes that can be supported, which is a typically petty-bourgeois, moralistic way for the AWL to view things, but, precisely the class basis upon which both Lenin and Trotsky made such distinctions. Trotsky noted, for example, in opposing the idea that a distinction should be made between “democratic” and “fascist” states,
“In the same manner we cannot speak of fascism “in general”. In Germany, Italy, and Japan, fascism and militarism are the weapons of a greedy, hungry and therefore aggressive imperialism. In the Latin American countries fascism is the expression of the most slavish dependence on foreign imperialism. We must be able to discover under the political form the economic and social content."
(Fight Imperialism To Fight Fascism)
The AWL/USC have abandoned the very basics of Marxism, founded upon class analysis in favour of morality. And, not only is the Marxist position on which wars we determine as progressive a function of class, and the class nature of the state, but the question of which forces we support in national struggles is also a function of their class nature, as set out in The Theses On The National and Colonial Questions. It makes clear, as Trotsky reiterated to the Stalinists, in relation to the Chinese revolution, and the national war against British and Japanese imperialism,
“second, the need for a struggle against the clergy and other influential reactionary and medieval elements in backward countries;
“third, the need to combat Pan-Islamism and similar trends, which strive to combine the liberation movement against European and American imperialism with an attempt to strengthen the positions of the khans, landowners, mullahs, etc...
fifth, the need for a determined struggle against attempts to give a communist colouring to bourgeois-democratic liberation trends in the backward countries; the Communist International should support bourgeois-democratic national movements in colonial and backward countries only on condition that, in these countries, the elements of future proletarian parties, which will be communist not only in name, are brought together and trained to understand their special tasks, i.e., those of the struggle against the bourgeois-democratic movements within their own nations. The Communist International must enter into a temporary alliance with bourgeois democracy in the colonial and backward countries, but should not merge with it, and should under all circumstances uphold the independence of the proletarian movement even if it is in its most embryonic form;
sixth, the need constantly to explain and expose among the broadest working masses of all countries, and particularly of the backward countries, the deception systematically practised by the imperialist powers, which, under the guise of politically independent states, set up states that are wholly dependent upon them economically, financially and militarily. Under present-day international conditions there is no salvation for dependent and weak nations except in a union of Soviet republics.”
Lenin bracketed the second and third points, and his opposition, here, would certainly have included opposition to the fascist forces of the Azov Battalion and Right Sector that play a significant role in Ukraine. And, as Trotsky specifically noted in opposing the Stalinists, we do not give support simply to such struggles but “only on condition that, in these countries, the elements of future proletarian parties, which will be communist not only in name, are brought together and trained to understand their special tasks, i.e., those of the struggle against the bourgeois-democratic movements within their own nations.” Forget about moralising terms such as “good”. How does anything set out, here, justify support for the war conducted by the Ukrainian state, on the basis of a progressive struggle for national liberation, on the basis of permanent revolution?
No comments:
Post a Comment