The current situation: economic crisis and class struggle
Capitalism is undergoing a severe crisis with enormous political and social implications. Needless to say, capital’s crisis has been pretty much permanent since the ‘70s. However, the disastrous nature of the present crisis does not bode well for the proletariat if the present order of things remains unchanged. It is high time to put an end to this barbaric system. Faced with the drastic austerity measures that the bourgeoisie has imposed on us, we’re seeing the organization of some true mass movements of struggle, from Greece all the way to America via Egypt.
The need for the regroupment of revolutionaries and the function of the future class party
These embryonic movements of struggle are universally obstructed by the bourgeoisie, its government, its police, and its unions. The bourgeoisie has a vested interest in keeping these movements docile and harmless, so long as their revolutionary and subversive potential exists - hence the need for the bourgeois left. This state of affairs poses two problems that are intrinsically linked:
1. The emergence of groups of the political vanguard brings the communist program to the very heart of the class struggles.
2. The involvement of 'historical' political organizations already existing within the proletariat, and the Communist Left. In other words, the development of these two aspects in the building of an international class party is sorely lacking in the current class struggle. The establishment of an organized and centralized vanguard to ensure a clear political direction for revolutionaries and communists advancing these struggles to victory leading to the revolution.
The political basis for the regroupment of revolutionaries
The basic political positions for a regroupment of revolutionaries into a party are the legacy of the Communist Left, that is to say experience of different sections of the left that emerged within the Communist International in the '20s-'30s. The basic criteria are internationalism, the political recognition of the principle of dictatorship of the proletariat, rejection of bourgeois methods of control, such as unionism, parliamentarism and national liberation struggles, the recognition of the proletarian character of the October Revolution, the recognition of the need for an international communist party, as well as the rejection of bourgeois united front tactics. These are in fact, synthetically, class boundaries that distinguish proletarian organization from that of the bourgeois and the petty bourgeois.
The necessary debate between revolutionary groups and political clarification
Inter-revolutionary debate is vital for the formation of the party. Not only are the pre-existing proletarian organizations coming from more or less different historical experience, sometimes converging and sometimes differing, but the struggles, themselves, spontaneously induce a section of the proletariat in struggle to politically approach the communist program. The debate therefore serves to confront divergent positions, pass on experience and political positions to the inexperienced and finally to clarify the communist program, that is to say the underlying politics that must be put into practice for the revolution. The purpose of debate between revolutionaries is not to attempt an eclectic mix of different experiences and political positions, but to further delineate the true communist direction from the sectarian and the opportunistic, and to discard the latter.
We also agree that the development of a communist organization comes about through intervention within the class and through real struggles. Political clarification depends dialectically upon debate between communist groups and intervention in the class.
The fight against sectarianism and opportunism
The struggle against opportunism and sectarianism comes down to trying to restrict the influence, within the proletarian camp, of positions that oppose the fundamental political basis of the Communist Left. Sectarian and opportunistic political positions are unfortunately quite common in the proletarian camp. For example, from cliquishness (each to their own), to revisionism, modernism, going as far as liaisons with bourgeois political factions. Needless to say, the more that opportunism and sectarianism have their grip on the future party, the less able it will be to fulfill its revolutionary task.
The nature of specific political collaboration between different revolutionary groups
There’s a broad range of possibilities for collaboration between revolutionary groups. For example, it can take the form of joint intervention in a struggle with a leaflet on which there is mutual agreement. This can also take place through open political and public debate, in other words open to the class, on issues of political struggle and political regroupment. In short, any co-operation is advantageous to the consolidation of the class party.
ICT and its role
ICT, through its political experience within the Italian Fraction and Battaglia Communista, therefore from its historical experience, has a role to play in relation to emerging vanguard organizations, in aiding in their future development and growth. In a sense, its role is to take them under its wing so to speak, in order to pass on its political experience, as well as to participate with them in building an international communist party.
Proposal for common work between Klasbatalo, the IWG and the ICT
- Considering the pronounced, ever worsening world economic crisis and especially its impact on our class and its struggles,
- Considering the rapid development of proletarian struggles throughout the world,
- Considering the necessity for the proletarian vanguard to intervene as effectively as possible in these struggles,
- Considering the current state of dispersion of communist forces in North America,
- Considering that there seems to be a resolve, at least within the CWO, toward common work and mutual aid amongst revolutionaries:
“At the moment there are many groups and individuals around the world who recognize this but we are either too scattered, or too divided, to take a lead in forming such a united movement. Some object to it on principle declaring that the spontaneous movement will take care of itself. We wish we could share their confidence. We think responsible revolutionaries should re-examine their differences, asking ourselves if the things that we thought divided us now do so in the light of this new period in working class struggle. We should emphasize not the little we disagree on but the much that we agree on. We should seek to work together in common struggles not simply to recruit this or that individual to our own organization, but to widen the consciousness of what a real working class struggle means. In the face of the obstacles we have outlined above it would be suicidal not to. » (Editorial for Revolutionary Perspectives # 59)”
- Considering the positive attitude of the ICT (and of the IWG) towards Klasbatalo, this proposal would be a giant step forward in the fight against sectarianism, that is to say towards the regroupment of revolutionaries into a class party,
-Considering that the political divergences between two different political groups should not be a pretext for keeping to one’s own point of view while turning a deaf ear to the others, Klasbatalo proposes to IWG:
- That each of the groups, Klasbatalo as well as the IWG, agree to review their past mistakes as well as the criticism so addressed, and that if found in error to refute them politically and publicly rather than by keeping silent.
- Ultimately, in order for Klasbatalo and the IWG to re-establish fraternal political relations on the basis of solidarity and trust:
- It is necessary that joint work (translation, pamphlets, magazines, public meetings and especially interventions) between the IWG and Klasbatalo be advanced. It’s the IWG’s historic responsibility to agree to accept these proposals, or at the very least to discuss their terms.
January 29, 2012