international REVIEWS
ASE TOO TO VOTE SAMÜEL TOS WIDE 41 SIGAF WEN FOR WALS THE VOTE PARLIAMENTARY BYE ELECTION rty MEATH DIVISION OR FOR MASTON COUNTY OF HILL Is a VOTE for I COMMUNISM PARLINMENTI BTL-ELECTER 1945 ONE SE NEATH 8013, 180 AT THR VOTE for HASTON Neath by-election, 1945 The view from Mount Olympus CHARLIE VAN GELDEREN Sam Bornstein & Al Richardson, War and the International, Housmans, £5.95. TO MANY READERS who found Born- stein and Richardson's first volume of the history of the Trotskyist movement in Britain (Against the Stream) a valuable contribution, this second volume will prove somewhat disappointing. In Against the Stream, the authors confined their criticisms of the current movements within the broad Trotskyist spectrum to the preface. The main text was almost a model of non-sectarian objectivity. Alas, this cannot be said of the new book. Although it contains much valuable material not easily found in other sources, War and the International is a polemic as much as it is a history. Overall it is a consistent and carping criticism of nearly everyone who considers herself or him- self a Trotskyist and the main target throughout is the Fourth International (FI) itself. This is particularly true of the last two chapters 'Back to Stalinism' and 'Trotskyism's Legacy'. It is as if the two authors are sitting on Mount Olympus, far away from the real INTERNATIONAL No7 November/December 1986
о рока я в 95540145 OUNTY OF GLAMORGA Motie + CAMORGAN
READ B
THE COMMUNIST PARTYS PAMPHLET ST TROUNGE THE TROTSKYTES"
A VOTE FOR HASTON IS A VOTE TOE FASCISM world, looking down on the pygmy humans below who dare to assume that they are Trotskyists. The pure gold of Trotskyism exists only in the minds of Messrs. Bornstein and Richardson and is not to be found in the realities of the class struggle as it exists.
This is not a Marxist approach to history but an idealistic one. Hegel's dialectics has been put back on its head.
For Bornstein and Richardson the golden age of British Trotskyism was the years of the Workers International League (WIL) and the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), when one of the authors was an active participant in the movement. In their hostility to the International they reflecttraditional British isolationism. The British leadership always knew best. Intervention from the International was, at best, tolerated, at worst, resented. This was true almost from the day British Trotskyism was formed, when Reg Groves and his comrades refused to heed Trotsky's advice to enter the Independent Labour Party and is still evident today in the proliferation of grouplets who consider themselves Trotskyists, but will have nothing to do with the Fourth International, Trotsky's lasting legacy to the world's working class.
Having said that, we must compliment the authors on their diligent research and in bringing to a new generation of revolutionary socialists a view of the past. The study of history, for revolutionaries, is not an academic exercise. We have to learn from it, to take from history what we can use in the present conjuncture and learn how to avoid the mistakes of the past.
The main section of the book deals with the war years. There can be no doubt that in that historic period it was the WIL which came to the fore as the authentic bearer of the Trotskyist banner. Unlike the official section, the Revolutionary Socialist League (RSL), WIL managed to keep most of its leading cadres out of the armed forces. Starkey Jackson, the outstanding organiser and publicist of the RSL was conscripted early in the war and just at the time when he and the reviewer were discussing approaches to WIL for joint work. Under Harber's leadership the RSL remained inside the Labour Party even though the Labour Party had become completely moribund for the duration of the war. With no real roots in the living movement of the working class, the membership turned in on itself, with almost continuous sectarian fissures, splits and expulsions.
With the Communist Party acting as the leading strike breaker after Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union the field was wide open for revolutionary socialist internationalists. The Wil leadership saw this opportunity clearly. It turned the organisation toward the industrial sector. These activities are well-chronicled in the book.
One cannot help wondering, however, how much stronger the movement would have been if wil and the Groves Group had not rejected the attempt to unify the movement prior to the founding conference of the Fl in 1938. Looking back one can say that the more dynamic leadership of WIL, its turn to the working class and its organisational abilities would have ensured for itself the effective leadership of the new organisation. It is hard to understand why it could not accept the draft Transitional Programme as an adequate basis for unification.
During the war years, WIl grew in membership and established real roots in the working class. It actively supported every manifestation of militancy. Socialist Appeal became the authentic voice of socialist internationalism amidst a chorus of social patriotism headed by the Stalinist Communist Party. But this growth also sowed illusions. The wil leadership saw itself as the revolutionary party. This is best illustrated by Ted Grant's speech at the second national conference of WIL on 2-4 October, 1943. He said: 27
Mayday demonstration, 1946 Wonderful day. Wonderful possibilities open up in front of us. You can feel revolution in the air. That attitude must permeate our conference. The correctness of our viewpoint should give us confidence in preparing ourselves for our role in the coming revolution. Whatever its fate may be, it is certain that we can, we must, we will play our part, and stamp our tendency as an influence, as a serious factor in the situation, as an organisation that will play its part in the revolution. When, twelve months ago, we called our thesis 'Preparing for Power', this was not a mad gesture. That is the serious problem with which we are taced. There was also a dent in WIL's internationalism when Ted Grant made his notorious 'OUR Eighth Army' speech. The reviewer was in Italy at the time, attached to the Eighth Army. I recall my shock when I read this speech and wrote to John Goffe about it. In no way was this army 'being hammered and tested and ... organised for the purpose of changing the face of the world'. This passage, believe it or not, concluded with the sentence 'This applies equally to all our forces'.
By 1945, the remnants of the RSL, including the tendencies arbitrarily expelled by Harber, had come together to form the Revolutionary Communist Party, British Section of the Fourth International. Almost from the start there was friction between the British leadership and the newly emerging European leadership. Here again is an illustration of the tragedy of WIl's organisational absence from the Fi during the war years. With the relatively greater freedom which existed in war-time Britain compared to occupied Europe, it should have been the natural home for the regroupment of a European leadership acting in close liaison with the International Secretariat in New York. 26 Because of its continued and uninter-
REVOLUTIONARY COMMUNIST PARTY S URTH rupted existence with the opportunities for open debate and discussion, the WIL leadership could have played a much more decisive role in building an international leadership. Much of the bitterness which subsequently developed could have been avoided.
It is not the purpose of this review to express an opinion on the various issues which arose in the aftermath of the war. With hindsight we can now say that if the British section had heeded the advice of the International and sent its major forces into the Labour Party we might have been spared the emergence of Healyism ano the Militant tendency. Readers should compare the issues as portrayed in the book, heavily biased against the International leadership, with the original documents.
A typical example of this bias is the way in which it deals with the allegedly sin ister role of Pierre Frank during that period, failing to mention that Pierre took his case to an International Contro Commission (December 5, 1945). While most of Frank's traducers were soon to find themselves outside the Fl, Pierre devoted the remaining years of his life to building the International.
The authors underestimate the difficulties which confronted the fl in the immediate period after the war. The world was not the one they had been led to expect. Stalinism emerged apparently more entrenched and stronger than ever; the expected slump turned out to be a boom making the debate on 'first in, last out and 'nons — out nothing more than a theoretical exercise. There were no copybook instructions in the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin or Trotsky on how to deal with the real problems which arose. Many
INTERNATIO of the new generation of leaders came fresh to Trotskyism. Under these conditions undoubtedly errors were made. As George Breitman put it, the road to the Fourth International was a 'rocky road'.
The authors have nothing but scorn for all the present groups who call themselves Trotskyists. Presumably they and they alone are the keepers of the true gospel. They still see issues in terms of the 1930s. The emergence of autonomous movements (women, blacks, gays, and so forth) mean nothing to them.
To them, as I note above, Trotskyism in its 'pure form ceased to exist with the passing of the WIL and the RCP. They claim that 'nine out of ten members of the Revolutionary Communist Party in 1946 were blue collar working class whilst 'nine out of ten members of modern Trotskyist organisations are white collar employees, civil service clerks, teachers or even film actors and television critics'. One wonders what are the bases for this statement. As one who served on the RCP Central Committee and Political Bureau from 1946 until its collapse I can vouch that this was certainly not true of its leadership. I would doubt, too, if their analysis of its membership is correct. Many of the 'blue collar workers' only entered the ranks of the working class as an alternative to conscription (the 'Bevin Boys' etc).
This book should certainly be on the shelf of every Trotskyist but it should be read with some skepticism and bearing in mind that it is written by two people who have long ago placed themselves outside the Trotskyist movement. It is typical of their attitude that they asked Fred Jackson, who opted out in 1948, to write the introduction.
INTERNATIONAL No7 November/December 1986