The Stalinists demanded the workers still support the bourgeois government, even after they were being massacred. The USC, even as Zelensky's government attacks Ukrainian workers, still call on those workers, and all others, across the globe, to support it, and demands it be given weapons and money!
In China, it was true that the workers and poor peasants had been incredible in their revolutionary struggle, given the mistakes and betrayals of the Stalinists they had to deal with, in addition to the power of the Chinese militarists, backed by imperialism. But, that did not change the reality of their defeat, and the dominant role of those other forces.
“We have seen that in spite of three years of mistakes the situation could still have been saved in Shanghai by receiving Chiang Kai-shek not as a liberator but as a mortal foe. Moreover, even after the Shanghai coup d’état the Communists could still have strengthened themselves in the provinces. But they were ordered to submit themselves to the “Left” Guomindang. Khitarov gives a description of one of the most illuminating episodes of the second counter-revolution carried out by the Left Guomindang:” (p 283)
Similarly, if socialists tell the truth that Zelensky and NATO are the “mortal foe” of the working-class, and not their liberators, as Jim Denham and the AWL claim, (and the same applies to their mirror image who portray Putin and Xi in that role), then they would be in a better position to organise a real struggle by workers for their self-emancipation.
Trotsky relates the account, given by Chitarov, of the second counter-revolution, undertaken by the Left KMT. Even according to Chitarov, it took place “under simply unbelievable circumstances”. In Changsha, the army consisted of 1,700 soldiers. By contrast, the peasants, around Changsha, amounted to 20,000, in armed detachments.
“In spite of this, the military command succeeded in seizing power, in shooting all the active peasants, in dispersing all revolutionary organizations and in establishing its dictatorship only because of the cowardly, irresolute, conciliatory policy of the leaders in Changsha and Wuhan. (p 284)
The armed peasant detachments began to mobilise, to advance on Changsha, and their overwhelming numerical superiority would have assured success. The march on Changsha was set for May 21st., but a message sent by Tchen Duxiu, on behalf of the Central Committee of the CCP, told them to desist, and avoid open conflict. Two detachments failed to get the instruction, and were massacred by soldiers. The basis of the CCP's instruction was to avoid conflict with the Left KMT, in order to try to maintain the alliance against Chiang Kai Shek.
“This is approximately how matters proceeded in the rest of the provinces. Under Borodin’s guidance – ”Borodin is on guard!“ – the Chinese Communists carried out very punctiliously the instructions of Stalin: not to break with the Left Guomindang, the chosen leaders of the democratic revolution. The capitulation at Changsha took place on May 31, that is, a few days after the decisions of the Eighth Plenum of the ECCI and in full conformity with these decisions.” (p 284)
Of course, Stalin and the ECCI blamed the Chinese party for the errors and betrayals, but the reality was that they were acting in accordance with the instructions from the leaders of the ECCI, and, often, directly from Stalin.
“Together with the revolution, they were crushed by the opportunist leadership. Not the one that had its seat in Canton, Shanghai and Wuhan but the one that was commanding from Moscow. Such will be the verdict of history!” (p 285)
No comments:
Post a Comment