The charge by Chiang Kai Shek, and Citrine, that the communists were interfering in the affairs of China and the British trades unions was just the same charge that imperialism made about the interference of the workers' state into the global class struggle, in general. It's an extension of the idea, codified in law, by Thatcher, that workers on strike cannot be supported by other workers taking solidarity action.
The opportunists and centrists echo that complaint, because they are, themselves, the ideologists of the bourgeoisie, infecting the workers' movement, which is why Blair did not demur from Thatcher's anti-union laws, and Starmer stands even further to the Right. Imperialism, itself, of course, assumes a right to intervene wherever it wants, and those same opportunists and centrists acquiesce in it, as Citrine did in relation to Britain's involvement in China, if not actively endorsing and supporting it, as they did in relation to the Korean War, The Iraq War, Syria, Libya, Serbia, and now Ukraine.
As will be discussed later, Trotsky sets out how imperialism presses down on social-democracy, which, in turn presses down on the centrists. The last few years has seen, for example, a variation of that, in Britain. It has been the social weight of the reactionary petty-bourgeoisie that has pressed down, through its capture of the Tory Party, on to the opportunists in the Labour Party that capitulated into petty-bourgeois nationalism and jingoism.
Starmer was marked by his encouragement, for purely opportunistic purposes, to distinguish himself from the Tories on Brexit, jingoism, lockdowns and so on, only by an attempt to wrap himself in an even bigger, brasher flag, to attack the Tories only for not being more extreme in their measures, and to have carried that through into his pro-imperialist stance on Ukraine. In turn, rather like in Game Theory, the other main opportunist parties, whilst unable to descend to that level, have also hid their light, for example over Brexit, under a bushel, and this weight of petty-bourgeois peer pressure has weighed down also on to the centrists that flutter like moths around the candle of these opportunist parties.
“If we chase after collaboration with such “leaders”, we are forced ever more to restrict, to limit and to emasculate our methods of revolutionary mobilization.” (p 57)
After the betrayal of the General Strike, in 1926, the position of the opportunist TUC leaders was weakened, and, had the CP prepared workers for it, and developed the rank and file organisation of workers, then, those leaders could have been swept away, and a new revolutionary leadership put in place, even if the actual betrayal and defeat of the strike had not been avoided. As Marx had written, in 1850, it is impossible to prevent the bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeois liberals from betraying the workers, but the political and organisational independence of the workers can, at least, minimise their ability to do so successfully.
There is no guarantee that, had the CP prepared British workers for the betrayal, by their leaders, it would have prevented that betrayal, but it would have made it more difficult for it to have led to workers accepting it, and going back to work; it would have created the conditions for an alternative leadership to have developed and stepped into their place, or to have by-passed them. Nor would it have guaranteed the success of the strike, but a defeat due to the balance of forces is not as demoralising as a defeat brought about by betrayal from your own side. Similar lessons are required, now, as the Tories seek to cut workers' living standards, by imposing below inflation pay deals, and the leaders of the LP and trades unions, are actively betraying workers.
“Through our false policy we not only helped the General Council to maintain its tottering positions after the strike betrayal, but, what is more, we furnished it with all the necessary weapons for putting impudent demands to us which we meekly accepted. Under the tinkling of phrases about “hegemony”, we acted in the Chinese revolution and the British labour movement as if we were morally vanquished, and by that we prepared our material defeat. An opportunist deviation is always accompanied by a loss of faith in one’s own line.” (p 57)
That was also true of the advice of Corbyn's Stalinist advisors, which failed to mobilise the huge rank and file base that had elected him, against the inevitable coup and betrayal organised by the Right, which undermined both the 2017 and 2019 election campaigns, and has subsequently demoralised and destroyed the massive growth in Labour activism that led to and resulted from Corbyn's election as Leader. Instead of warning of that betrayal and coup by the Right, Corbyn's advisors proposed compromise and chasing after them, and disavowed the demands from the base to press ahead with deselections and democracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment