SOCIALIST
OUTLOOK
Gerry Healy: a victim of 1953 split
Alan Thornett, in his obituary to Gerry Healy in Socialist Outlook No 21, rightly points out the serious damage done by Haly revolutionary Marxist tradition in
But in order, as Alan Thomett concludes, *to ensure that there Is never room left for his ilk to do such damage again", it is necessary to understand the causes of Healyism.
Although Healy came from third-period Stalinism, and later apod its methods, he was essentially a product nf thc split in the Fourth International that started in 1953. Although Herly did not cause the 1953 split, he was cer winiv one of iis most obvious victims.
Two ycars aller the 1974 expulsion of Thomell and what became the Workers" Socialist League from Healy's organisation, he International Marxist Group published the famous/infamous famous/infamous scries of articles Faction and Party* written by Alan Jones, taking the form ofa polemic against the comrades of the
The positions in those articles were broadly adopted by the IMG. Jones considered Healy's degeneration to have been inevilable because of his inahlity to distinguish betwoon a faction and a party. This idealistic and schematic nonsense (and these words are not used lightmindedly) has not been criticised. It has helped to lade the real causes of the 1953 split and in particular has helped to obscure any broad understanding of how the degeneration of Healy and his organisation could have heen avoided.
Revolutionary Marxists have a much greater history of defeats than of successes, and it is from these defeats that lessons really have to be drawn. The programmatic and tacti cal issues involved in the 1953 split are par ticularly topical given the present develop ments in Eastern Europe and the Sovict Union, and are well worth studying.
But it is essennal to study ail the questions that were raised (especially the organisational questions raised by the comrades of the carly International Committee of the Fourth Intemabonal) in order to understand the causes of the split; how these causes destroyed the International's ability to correct Healy's devloping national isolationaism: and how revolucionary Marxism in Britain can recover from the tremendous setback of the 1953 split
NW London
LETTERS Now who's not a Marxist?
In a recent article in the Financial Times (Weekend FT, 10/11 March 1990) Martin Jacques presents us with his most ludicrous Talsilication of Marxism yet.
The article takes the form of a fictional interview with the 'ghost" of Marx. Apart from this whimsical novelty, Jacques aticle pos sesses no originality whatsoover. Instead Jacques re-hashes all the old reformist and oppor tunist falsifications of Marx's work - and puts hem into the mouth of Marx himself!
Jacques repeats all the usual Marxism Today fallacies about the demise of the work ing class and the end of communism in Eastem Europe. These views have, of course, heen effectively rebutted in previous issues of Socialist Outlook:
He next claims that the Russian Revolution Failed completely. In reality, of course, Stalin undoubtedly hotrayed the revolution, but he did not destroy all its social gains, as Trotsky
According to Jacques's article, Marx would have favoured the reformist policies of the parties of the second International like the German Social Democrais" In Icality these were the people whose undermining of cless struggle 1s most strikingly expressed by Rosa Sri Lanka and the Tamil Tigers
In the March issue of Socialist Omiook (No 22) Sunil Femando draws the attention to the killing helds in Sri Lanka. But his judgement of the Tamil Tigers seems scciarian to
Towards the end of the article Fernando says: For the moment things aro relatively quiet in Sri Lanka because the governmenı has made common cause with the Tamil Tigers (LTTE), one of the Tamil nationalist groups, against the more progressive Tamil groups. and refers to the opportunist policies of the Tamil Tigers.
Fernando's article does not explain what relationship between the Sti Lankan army, the Indian troops in Sn Lanka and the Tamil Tigers in the North and Eastern provinces of the island.
The Sri Lankan government invited in the Indian troops to delcal the Tamil Tigers militarily - something the Sri Lankar army had been unable to do in years of fighting. For 32 months, 50,000 Indian troops tried to defcat the Tamil Tigers - unsuccessfully.
The Tamil Tigers (LTTE) fought the fourth biggest anny in the world - and the Indians lost the lives of more than 1,100 soldiers, with more than 2,000 scriously wounded. No guerrilla army would be able to do that without massive popular support.
The LTTE's popular support is widely recognised. In the Guardian Derek Brown writes from New Delhi that the Tamil Tigers "have emerged as the de facto power in the
Luxemburg's ironic formula: "Proletarians of all countries, unite in times of peace but cut each other's throats in time of war'. Furthermore, the bankruptcy of Social Democracy's reform policy has been demonstrated time and again this century
In addition to his claims for reform, Jacques tries to make a rejoction of revolutionary insurrection consistent with the writings of Marx, In order to demonstrate this he distorts Engels* 1895 Preface to Marx's The Class Struggles in France:
This shabby trick originated with the publication of ihis Preface by the German Social Democratic Leadership, who cut the proface to ry and justify the abandonment of insurreclion. The full Preface suggests some possiblity (with reservation) of peaceful revolution for Germany in the 1890s, bur that for most countries insurrection was still necessary.
Finally Jacques refers, unsurprisingly out of context, to Marx's comment that he was not a Marxist. One thing is certain; Marx would not have regarded Jacques as a Marxist!!
David Emm and Richard Pearson
High Wycombe Tamil provinces."
Now for nearly a year the LTTE has been in negotiations with the Sri Lankan government. Thesc negotiations seems to Fernando to be a proof of the Tamil Tigers "opportunist"
The Tamil population undoubtedly wants peace: After years of fighting with the Sri Lankan army, 4,000 civilians during the 32 months of Indian occupation.
One can compare the Tigers" negotiations with the Sri Lankan government with FMLN's negotiations and peace initiatives toward the government of El Salvador. Neither the LTTE not the FMLN have handed over their arms while negotiating. Both usc megotiations as part of the political struggie.
The Tamil Tigers" negotiations with the Sri Lankan government did increase the pressure on the government to get rid of the Indian troops. That is a step toward independence and self-determination for the Tamil provin-
Femando did not offer much political guidance in his article; but solidarity work with the Tamil people will have to recognise that the Tigers are the leading force in a national liberation movement. Socialists, and in particular revolutionary therefore take care to avoid sectarianism towards the LTTE.
Finn Jensen,
Manchester