The Marxist Workers' Group: Basic Principles
Marxist Workers' Group
Below are the Basic Principles of the Marxist Workers' Group. We are
publishing these principles as a contribution to a discussion on the
previous documents posted here regarding the split in Workers' Voice.
While we seriously doubt that the "regulars" on this list care much about
principles, we feel that this document may have use to those few
working-class "lurkers" who occassionally read documents posted here.
Paris,
for the MWG
--
The Marxist Workers' Group: Basic Principles
In accordance with the spirit of the first four World Congresses of the
Communist International, the founding documents of the International Left
Opposition, International League of Communist-Internationalists and the
Fourth International, and in continuation of these decisions, the Marxist
Workers' Group establishes the following principles, and seeks to carry
them through on a practical level:
* * *
1. The Marxist Workers' Group recognizes the centrality of the Marxist
method, that is, dialectical materialism. We believe that unless we are
able to understand the contradictory developments of class society, from
its general movement to its particular incidences, we will not know how to
intervene and pull the working class in a revolutionary direction. The MWG
understands that unless we can see how historical developments in general
affect the tasks of building an international in particular, we are doomed
to failure.
The MWG is committed to the deepening of our understanding and application
of dialectical materialism as a necessary task for rebuilding the Fourth
International. We recognize that the degeneration of the Marxist movement
in general, and the degeneration of the Fourth International in particular,
was not due to the inadequacy of dialectical materialism, but, rather, the
failure of the centrists and reformists to grasp and apply it. We are
committed to getting down to the methodological roots of the degeneration
of the Fourth International, as well as to applying the same systematic
examination to the political differences between the organizations with
whom we are engaged in serious regroupment efforts.
The MWG recognize the need to strive to use the dialectical method in all
the big historical events of the international class struggle, as well as
in the small ones. This is in direct counterposition to the methods
popular in the petty-bourgeois left today -- pragmatism, empiricism,
impressionism, post-modernism, etc. All of these methods are variants of
anti-Marxist idealism.
2. The Marxist Workers' Group recognizes the proletariat as the only
revolutionary class. The proletariat, based on its relations to the means
of production, is the only class capable of carrying out the task of world
socialist revolution and world communism. Because of this, the proletariat
holds the central role as the motor force of the revolution and the
leadership of the revolutionary party. The MWG recognizes the necessity of
recruiting and politically developing proletarians for the purpose of
building revolutionary leadership.
While the petty-bourgeois centrist and reformist organizations give
lip-service to the need to build working class leadership, in reality they
duplicate all of the oppressive class-based divisions of capitalist society
within their organizations. Concretely, this division of labor takes the
form of intellectuals who compose the "theoretical leadership", and the
workers who compose the "organizers" and the "rank and file".
The MWG stands in stark contrast to this deeply ingrained "tradition" of
the petty-bourgeois left. We recognize that in order to develop a
revolutionary working class political leadership, concrete steps must be
taken. At least in the advanced industrial countries, the first of these
steps is the creation of an organization composed exclusively of working
class members.
This is necessary to enable working class people to develop as theoretical
and practical leaders, free of the constant pressures placed on them by
petty-bourgeois forces within the organization. In addition, we understand
that the working class has plenty of its own problems and contradictions.
Working class communists need an organization in which they can strive to
resolve these problems without having, at the same time, to contend with
the contradictions of the petty-bourgeoisie. Only in this way can we
develop working class cadres with the theoretical capacity and political
confidence to interact on an equal level with those from the
petty-bourgeoisie, and to effectively fight any attempt on the part of
non-working class forces to force working class revolutionaries to stay "in
their place."
Thus we openly declare our organizational policy to be that of
working-class separatism. While we are willing to establish working
relationships with committed revolutionaries from non-working-class
backgrounds, membership in the MWG is open only to the working class (for a
detailed statement on our conception of class see our article "Marxism and
Class," in the 1 January 1998 issue of Workers' Voice).
The MWG views the policy of working class separatism to be necessary under
the particular historic circumstances that exist within the advanced
industrial countries today. In terms of the semi-colonial countries we are
still exploring whether or not separatism is necessary. We do not currently
have sufficient information on the concrete conditions in those countries
to make this decision now, but we place a priority on gaining this
information and developing a position based on it as soon as possible.
Working class separatism is not a principle, but a prerequisite for
developing an organization that can admit some exceptional forces from
non-proletarian backgrounds when historic conditions allow for this. We
think there can be no unity with non-proletarian forces until there is
first some unity, political and theoretical development, and
self-confidence among proletarian forces.
3. The Marxist Workers' Group strongly adheres to the principle of the
independence of the proletarian party, always and under all conditions. We
strongly condemn an alliance with the "liberal" wing of the bourgeoisie
(either as a popular front or a propaganda bloc). The MWG recognizes that
this theory has led to disastrous defeats for the working class, including
in China (1926), Spain (1936), Chile (1973) and Portugal (1974). The MWG
strongly condemns the formation of two-class parties (e.g., Farmer-Labor
Party) and of the whole practice based on this theory. The MWG strongly
condemns the social-pacifism and social-patriotism of the centrists and
reformists. These rotten opportunist methods lead the proletarian party to
be dissolved into the bourgeois or petty-bourgeois swamp.
4. The Marxist Workers' Group adheres to the principle of the
international, and thereby permanent character of the proletarian
revolution. By this we mean that the working class, through its own
struggle for power, can only enact and complete the bourgeois-democratic
tasks in the neocolonies, in the process of fighting for, and initiating,
the socialist revolution.
The MWG strongly rejects the Stalinist theory of socialism in one country
and the policy of "national communism". The MWG also rejects the platform
of "national liberation" when it is placed above the socialist revolution.
In turn, we also reject the outdated tactic of the anti- imperialist united
front, which is used by the centrists and reformists to reject permanent
revolution and chain the working class to the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois
nationalists in the semicolonial countries.
The MWG rejects the formula of the "democratic dictatorship of the
proletariat and the peasantry" as a separate regime distinguished from the
dictatorship of the proletariat. The dictatorship of the proletariat,
popularly referred to as a workers' (or workers' and peasants') government,
wins the support of the peasant and oppressed masses in the course of
struggle, and no other formulation is necessary. We reject the anti-Marxist
theory of the peaceful "growing over" of the democratic dictatorship into a
socialist one. In turn, we also reject the theory of the "peaceful
transition" of a social-democratic-led capitalist government into a
workers' government.
5. The Marxist Workers' Group recognizes the unconditional obligation of
every worker to defend neocolonial and semicolonial countries against
imperialism. We condemn the centrists and reformists who, in word or deed,
adhere to "dual defeatism" in such conflicts as a rejection of proletarian
internationalism and anti-imperialism, and, thus, the permanent character
of the proletarian revolution. The MWG recognizes the possibility of
neocolonial and semicolonial forces sometimes playing the role of proxy
army for imperialism. The Bosnian Muslim and Croat forces in the Yugoslav
Civil War are a clear example of what a proxy army is. Thus, we defend
those forces who are attacked by proxy armies in the same way we defend
neocolonial countries against explicit imperialist attack.
The MWG recognizes the right of any oppressed nation to self- determination
and secession. This does not mean that we advocate secession in every case
at every time, (more often than not we would counterpose the creation of an
integrated workers' state) but only that we defend the right of secession,
even when we disagree with the decision to secede.
At the same time, we also recognize that the right to self-determination is
conditional based on concrete circumstances. The MWG recognizes that the
defense of a workers' state, no matter how degenerate, is a higher
principle than the bourgeois right to self-determination, in particular
when this right is used to undermine a workers' state. The example of
Yugoslavia, where the secession of Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia were
spearheads for capitalist restoration, as well as the example of the former
USSR, where secession and capitalist restoration was sought the Baltic
republic of Lithuania, provide excellent examples of the relativity of the
right of self-determination.
However, we would support the right of such nations to form independent
workers' states. Obviously, this would only be a tactic that we would use
to fight for greater multinational working-class unity, which itself would
only be a step on the road to a non-national, simply human communist
society.
As opposed to the restorationists, and their centrist and reformist
hangers-on, the MWG counterposes the struggle for workers' democracy,
workers' control, and, in the case of the deformed workers' states,
proletarian political revolution as a means to achieve a real fight for
self-determination. We fight for the creation of integrated and
multinational workers' committees and militias to smash imperialist
designs.
The MWG recognizes the unconditional obligation of every worker to defend
neocolonial and semicolonial "national liberation" movements against
attacks by imperialism and their comprador bourgeoisie. Concretely, we
defend organizations like the ETA in Spain, the FARC in Colombia and the
LTTE in Sri Lanka against attacks. However, the MWG does not tail or give
political support to these movements. We counterpose our Marxist program
of permanent revolution against the petty-bourgeois nationalists.
6. The Marxist Workers' Group recognizes that the former Soviet Union,
Poland, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Albania,
Bulgaria, Romania, Mongolia, and China have passed over into capitalism, in
spite of its lack of completion. At the same time, the MWG recognizes that
these states are not transforming into imperialist powers, even on a
regional level. On the contrary, we recognize that these countries are
being turned into neocolonial "killing fields", subject to the whims of
world imperialism.
The MWG further recognizes that any state whose productive forces has moved
beyond capitalism, but does not have organs of workers' power, is a
deformed workers' state. We adhere to the principle of unconditional
defense of these deformed workers' states against imperialism and internal
counterrevolution, including when this internal counterrevolution is
cloaked under the guise of "self-determination" and bourgeois "democracy."
Under the concrete conditions today, with the collapse of Stalinism in most
of the degenerated and deformed workers' states, including the former USSR,
we do not have any illusions, in the absence of a revolutionary upsurge, in
the ability of any remaining workers' states to survive into the next
period. The developments in the last period have confirmed in a
devastating way Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution and the
impossibility of building socialism in one country. Currently we are
reviewing the situation in Vietnam, North Korea and Cuba to determine if
they can still be considered workers' states, and, if so, how close they
may be to traveling down the path of capitalist restoration.
The MWG believes that the best way to defend the advances of the workers'
states is to fight for proletarian political revolution through workers'
democracy and internationalism. We strongly adhere to the principle of no
political or military support to capitalist restorationist forces --
whether they be "fast-track" or "slow-track" restorationists. But we also
recognize that it may be necessary to make a tactical military bloc against
imperialism and/or its native allies with organizations whose membership is
actively attempting to fight restoration. This applies even to
organizations in which the leadership is committed to restoration but is
unable to put its intentions into practice due to the concrete situation in
which it finds itself. The purpose of such a block would be to exploit the
contradictions between the ranks of such an organization, who want to
defend the workers' state, and the restorationist leadership -- to expose
the leaders in the eyes of the ranks and to break the ranks from the
leaders.
Concretely, this would have meant that any organization large enough to
pose a viable alternative leadership to that of the CPSU should have fought
side-by-side with those forces who mobilized against Boris Yeltsin in
August 1991 and October 1993, while simultaneously counterposing an
independent program and preparing the anti-restorationist forces for a
fight against the "slow-track" restorationist leadership.
The MWG fights to build mass revolutionary proletarian parties in the
former and current workers' states. We reject the centrist and reformist
conception that any deformed workers' state exists in which the
construction of a Trotskyist party is unnecessary.
7. The Marxist Workers' Group recognizes the necessity of systematic
communist work in the proletarian mass organizations, particularly in the
trade unions. Trade unions are the first line of defense of the working
class against attacks by capitalism. The MWG also endorses the tactic of
intervention in mass bourgeois workers' parties, with the goal of
crystallizing a revolutionary proletarian opposition which can form the
basis of a mass revolutionary proletarian party.
The MWG rejects the Third Period Stalinist theory and practice of "Red"
trade unions. Such formations are created by organizations as an excuse to
avoid a struggle against the trade union bureaucracy. However, we
recognize that, in the epoch of imperialist decay, trade unions can succumb
to the pressures of capitalism and become transformed into company unions.
This does not negate our obligation to organize within these trade unions.
On the contrary, we recognize the need to organize within company unions,
with the goal of building an independent union.
The MWG recognizes the right of workers from superoppressed backgrounds to
build caucuses in the proletarian mass organizations. We believe that
these kind of caucuses are necessary to insure that their interests are
represented in these organizations.
The MWG struggles to build and develop independent rank-and-file
organizations to fight for control of the trade unions on the basis of a
militant working class program. Alongside this, we fight for the
organization of the masses of unorganized and unemployed workers. We fight
for the democratization of the trade unions, their complete independence
from the bourgeois state, and the formation of a revolutionary proletarian
leadership. The MWG believes that any bloc with the trade union
bureaucracy, section of the trade union bureaucracy or individual
bureaucrats can only be temporary and tactical, depending on specific
circumstances.
The MWG recognizes that the police and officer corps (including
Non-Commissioned Officers) of the military are not part of the working
class. We recognize that the inclusion of these elements in the mass
proletarian organizations is unacceptable. We reject the centrist and
reformist conception that these elements are simply "workers in uniform".
8. The Marxist Workers' Group rejects a strategic orientation toward
bourgeois workers' parties. We reject the centrist confusion that equates
an orientation toward bourgeois workers' parties as an orientation to the
working class. The MWG also rejects the strategy of deep entrism of
revolutionary Marxist currents into such parties.
The MWG recognizes that work in these bourgeois workers' parties depends on
tactical considerations, and that it is not a matter of principle.
Concretely, while we may intervene and work in a section or branch of a
bourgeois workers' party, this is not the same as a principled stance which
calls for working in all sections of that party.
The MWG recognizes the tactical character of giving critical support to
bourgeois workers' parties, independent working-class candidates and
ostensibly revolutionary organizations with a working-class base in
elections. The MWG applies a specific set of criteria when analyzing the
possibilities of giving critical support to candidates. For example, in
the British General Election of 1997, we gave critical support to the
candidates of the Socialist Labour Party, and said that we would consider
giving critical support to individual candidates of the Labour Party if
they were running against the capitalist program of Tony Blair's New Labour
(none did).
9. The Marxist Workers' Group recognizes the necessity to mobilize the
working class under transitional demands corresponding to the concrete
situation in each country, and in combination with democratic demands, when
they serve to break the masses from imperialism and further the struggle
for socialism. However, we recognize that the progressive nature of such
demands is fluid and conditioned by historical developments. They can also
serve reactionary ends as Lenin argued about the call for a constituent
assembly after the Bolsheviks won control over the Soviets.
Likewise, we recognize that the differences between democratic and
transitional demands is not fixed, but shaped by the dynamic of concrete
developments. These differences are usually summed up as follows:
Democratic demands, while supportable by revolutionaries, can be won under
capitalism if the masses mobilize in a potentially revolutionary way.
Transitional demands can only be achieved with the establishment of a
workers' state though they address the working class' immediate needs under
capitalism. There is no dividing line set in iron between the democratic or
transitional nature of some demands.
For instance, some have argued that the demand for "Land, Peace, & Bread"
in 1917 Russia was a democratic demand. However, when Lenin raised this
demand peasants were expropriating the land, rank and file soldiers were
shooting their officers, and the means for producing food were being seized
by the peasants and working class. In this context, the demand for "Land,
Peace, & Bread" was a call for the masses to take power under the
leadership of a revolutionary working class party. Land, peace, and bread
could not be achieved by a capitalist Russia. They could only be won by the
establishment of a workers' state, and therefore, should be considered a
transitional demand under these circumstances.
The MWG recognizes the necessity to mobilize superoppressed workers around
specific programs based on transitional demands. We believe that it is
necessary to address the specific concerns of the superoppressed, while
struggling to unite their struggles with the struggles of the whole of the
proletariat.
10. The Marxist Workers' Group recognizes the need for a deep understanding
of the tactic of the united-front -- what it is, and when and how to apply
it. Based on this understanding, we apply this tactic, in ways appropriate
to our organizational development and the specific historic conditions
under which we function.
The MWG condemns the ultimatistic slogan of the "united front from below",
which in practice means a rejection of the united front and, consequently,
a refusal to build workers' councils (soviets). Concretely, this slogan is
a hallmark of Third Period Stalinism. It was imposed on the workers'
movement by the Communist Party of Germany, and led to the ascension of
Hitler and his Nazis in 1933, the defeat of the proletariat, and their
atomization and disorganization for over 12 years. The MWG also rejects
the centrist confusion contained in the term "socialism from below", which
is used in practice to reject the task of building a mass revolutionary
party capable of leading the proletariat to power.
The MWG condemns the opportunistic application of the united front, which
builds a bloc with the "leaders", without the masses and/or against the
masses. Concretely, we oppose the building of "united fronts" which are
based on non-aggression pacts and the subordination of the revolutionary
program to the designs of the reformist "leadership".
11. The Marxist Workers' Group recognizes that racial and national
minorities, women, gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people
suffer oppression under capitalism that exists in addition to class
oppression. The MWG recognizes that this superoppression is rooted in
class society and is inseparable from the social conditions under
capitalism, while at the same time going beyond the "normal" level of
oppression that comes from class exploitation.
As opposed to centrists, the MWG rejects the economist position that
mechanically reduces all oppression to class oppression while ignoring the
additional oppression suffered by those mentioned above. We also reject
the position that there is "reverse oppression" and understand that
expressions of mistrust and contempt that stem from oppression suffered
under class society are not "reverse oppression".
The MWG recognizes that revolutionary organizations and comrades within
them are not immune to the racist, sexist, homophobic and other backwards
methods of functioning that exist within capitalist society. We understand
that when such backward methods and attitudes appear within a revolutionary
organization they must be met by sharp and immediate struggle. The MWG
believes that this, along with the recruitment and development as
organizational leaders of the most oppressed working class comrades is a
prerequisite for building a mass revolutionary organization, nationally and
internationally.
12. The Marxist Workers' Group fights to rebuild the Fourth International
(World Party of Socialist Revolution) as a mass Marxist International, with
sections in every country, and representing oppressed nationalities.
The Fourth International, founded by Leon Trotsky and his co-thinkers in
1938, began its backslide into centrism during the Second World War. The
decapitation of the leadership of the Fourth International before and in
the early stages of the war, including the assassination of Trotsky by a
Stalinist agent in 1940, contributed to the disorientation of the
International. In addition, many of the sections of the International
began degenerating in the direction of "national Trotskyism". The most
concrete example of this latter development was the formal dissolution of
relations with the Fourth International by the American Socialist Workers
Party.
By the end of the War, untested, inexperienced cadre had assumed the
leadership of the International. Rather than applying the Marxist method
to the unfolding events following the War, the leadership of the
International fell back on old conjunctural formulas, developed by Trotsky
in the Transitional Program, as a concrete method and analysis. The basis
of this method was the theory of catastrophism, that is, the sudden and
inevitable collapse of capitalism. The catastrophist method was coupled
with a sterile outlook that relied on impressionism and eclecticism. This
method led to further disorientation as the Stalinists consolidated their
control over Eastern Europe, and established deformed workers' states.
The 1948 split between Tito and Stalin signaled a new stage in the
degeneration of the Fourth International. The leadership of the
International misinterpreted the feuding between Stalin and Tito as a sign
that the Yugoslav leader was breaking with Stalinism. In fact, Tito broke
with Stalin to continue his pursuit of a nationalist agenda. It was in the
wake of the Tito-Stalin split that the degeneration of the Fourth
International took a new turn, under the leadership of Pablo.
Pabloism, the theory developed and accepted by the leadership of the Fourth
International, transformed the centrist sterility of the post-War
International into an opportunist tailism of antiproletarian forces. Soon
catastrophism had become a reliance on forces like Social Democracy and
Stalinism, and the conception of "centuries of deformed workers' states" as
a necessary stage of historical development. In the neocolonial countries,
Pabloism's logical extension was the tailing of bourgeois and
petty-bourgeois nationalist forces. This came to a head in 1952, when the
leadership of the Fourth International helped in the betrayal of the
Bolivian Revolution. Under the direction of Pablo, Grant, Healy and
Cannon, the Fourth International called for the victory of the "National
Democratic Revolution" and the building of a nationalist government. This
was a conscious betrayal of the proletariat on the scale of the Stalinists'
betrayal of the 1926 Chinese Revolution.
The 1953 split in the Fourth International, which began the organizational
fragmentation and crisis which exists to this day, was a falling out among
centrist tendencies. If the members of the MWG had been a part of the
Fourth International in the period following the Second World War, we would
have organized an international faction for the regeneration of the
revolutionary traditions of the International. In the 1953 split, we would
not have sided with either the Pabloites or the Cannonites. Both sides of
the split were accomplices in the subordination of the International to
Titoism, the rejection of the historic tasks of the Fourth International,
and the betrayal of the Bolivian Revolution. On the contrary, we would
have been forced to take our fight to the working class, as a public
faction of the Fourth International.
13. The Marxist Workers' Group rejects the "rebuilding" of the Fourth
International on the basis of a vague and unprincipled program. We reject
the method of the centrists who attempt to build an International on the
basis of tactical agreements and non-aggression pacts. Concretely, we
oppose the "parity committee" conception created by the Morenoite LIT,
popular among most centrist currents today.
The MWG also recognizes the occasional need to build liaison committees
with other Trotskyist and leftward moving centrist organizations to further
develop the process of political clarification and, when possible,
fusions. We stand by the method put forward by the International League of
Communist-Internationalists (also known as the International Communist
League) in their 1933 Declaration of the Four. We see these liaison
committees as arenas in which the divergent tendencies can openly debate
and discuss their political differences and attempt to clarify and resolve
them.
14. The Marxist Workers' Group adheres to the principle of party democracy,
not only in words but also in fact. The MWG recognizes the need to develop
democratic centralism on a national and international scale. We further
believe that democratic centralism can only be established on the basis of
deep programmatic and methodological agreement. The MWG rejects the
conception of an "International" that is organized around a "flagship"
section or cadre. Likewise, we also reject a federated structure as
anything other than a temporary and tactical step.
The MWG strongly condemns the bureaucratic method of "monolithism". This
method, which stems from a petty-bourgeois method of organizational
functioning, is comprised of the oligarchical rule of a bureaucratic
clique, the gagging of the thought and will of the party, deliberate
suppression of information from the ranks of the party, deliberate
suppression of organized opposition, administrative action based on
political disagreement, etc.
The method of bureaucratism, which is prevalent in the centrist and
reformist organizations, takes on many forms at different stages of its
development. Ultrademocratism and anti-centralism are forms in which a
small minority (and even an individual) can prevent the positions of the
majority from being implemented. Thus the majority and the minority are
denied the opportunity to see the majority position tested in practice,
and, based on the results, to say which side was proven correct.
Undergroundism is frequently used as an excuse to deny the most basic means
of democratic functioning (meetings of the entire organization and the
ability to challenge leadership decisions) on the basis of potential state
repression. It turns legitimate, temporary, emergency measures into an
organizational principle in order to shield the leadership from
rank-and-file criticism.
Finally, hyperactivism denies all but a select handful of "theoretical
leaders" the ability to learn enough political theory to effectively
challenge the established leadership. In many cases members who want to
study Marxism are discouraged from doing so by moral lectures about their
"lack of practical activity". Further, hyperactivism keeps the members so
exhausted that they are rarely able to think seriously about the political
positions taken by the leadership, let alone to develop an opposition to
them.
All of the above are examples of incipient (at best) forms of
bureaucratism.
* * *
The fundamental principles enumerated above are of basic importance for the
strategy of the proletariat in the present period. Recognition of these
principles, on the basis of the method of the first four World Congresses
of the Comintern and the founding documents of the ILO, ILCI and Fourth
International, is an indispensable condition for membership in the Marxist
Workers' Group.
--
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\||||||||||||||||||||||||////////////////////////
\ Marxist Workers' Group Ph#: (313) 535-7161 /
\ P.O. Box 19221 Fax: (313) 535-4212 /
| Detroit MI 48219-0221 marxis...@geocities.com |
/ worker...@earthlink.net Workers of the World, Unite! \
/ http://www.geocities.com/~marxistworker/ \
////////////////////////||||||||||||||||||||||||\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
William Gilders
> Thus we openly declare our organizational policy to be that of
> working-class separatism. While we are willing to establish working
> relationships with committed revolutionaries from non-working-class
> backgrounds, membership in the MWG is open only to the working class (for a
> detailed statement on our conception of class see our article "Marxism and
> Class," in the 1 January 1998 issue of Workers' Voice).
I just love this one! Let's just be glad the MWG didn't exist when Marx,
Engels, and Luxemburg went looking for a revolutionary group to join!
Geez!
Bill
(One of those terrible petty bourgeois intellectuals....)
TGSCUNY
>While we seriously doubt that the "regulars" on this list care much about
>principles, we feel that this document may have use to those few
>working-class "lurkers" who occassionally read documents posted here.
>
>
The anti-MWG "regulars" on apst hereby confirm and declare our complete
unwillingness to care much about "principles," when what these "principles"
amount to is the unconditional right of the MWG to impose and get away with
petty moralistic slanders upon opponents and to rip off the party press of
their former sectarian fishbowl, The Wovo.
Wonderful! The new MWG intends to abolish this historic tension between
revolutionary intellectuals and workers--by excluding all revolutionary
intellectuals! Wait a sec--I seem to recall this "method" being used before:
Does the name STALIN ring a bell?!
Does this "working class" requirement make a distinction between workers (i.e.,
who are working) vs. lumpen middle class assholes who can't hold down a job?
Ah, but maybe you ought not to exclude the buffoon contingent--you'd obliterate
yourselves as an organization!
What a scream!
>Currently we are
>reviewing the situation in Vietnam, North Korea and Cuba to determine if
>they can still be considered workers' states, and, if so, how close they
>may be to traveling down the path of capitalist restoration.
We will all wait with baited breath until the grand viziers of theoretical
(albeit proletarian-based, let's not forget!) Marxism make their final and
unimpeachably scientific pronouncement on this question. Back to you, Walter!
Well, I guess we can't report on anything further until the answer from the new
MWG comes, so the show is now in hiatus. This is Walter Cronkite--AND THAT'S
THE WAY IT IS! Goodnight, everybody!
>As opposed to centrists, the MWG rejects the economist position that
>mechanically reduces all oppression to class oppression while ignoring the
>additional oppression suffered by those mentioned above.
Funny, this sure sounds like the Love and Rage-ites caricature of the
Trotskyist Left. Maybe you should fuse with them-you seem to share a similar
view of the rest of the Trotskyist Left.
We also reject
>the position that there is "reverse oppression" and understand that
>expressions of mistrust and contempt that stem from oppression suffered
>under class society are not "reverse oppression".
"Reverse oppression."? Who are you quoting, here? Who among the Trotskyists
would ever be stupid or reactionary enough to use such a right-wing term?
There are certainly those, like myself, who would argue that blacks, women,
gays, etc. are human (Oh God, yes, it's true!) and thus are capable of an
hostility and separatism (Oh, I forgot--you believe in that, for workers!) vis
their white/male/straight working class and intellectual allies which is simply
not rational. There is certainly the possibility, which again, you seem to be
ignoring, that ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, a black man, for example, might
"oppress" a white woman or man (by beating the shit out of them, raping them,
or abusing them personally). But nobody is arguing that racism or sexism
systematically oppresses whites/males/straights.
This is basically a straw man you are creating to justify your real, petty
moralistic, cultural-idealist contention that "blacks can never be racist,
women can never be sexist, gays can never be heterophobic"--no matter what kind
of shit they might personally pull on those of the opposite race or gender.
Well, unfortunately, many of us on apst are un-"principled" enough
(intellectual enough?) to see through this stupid little maneuver. So perhaps
you have good reason to exclude us from your organization.
>
>The MWG recognizes that revolutionary organizations and comrades within
>them are not immune to the racist, sexist, homophobic and other backwards
>methods of functioning that exist within capitalist society. We understand
>that when such backward methods and attitudes appear within a revolutionary
>organization they must be met by sharp and immediate struggle.
Oh, and also, you might add that such labels should be always held in reserve
in case one among your ranks starts showing a marked inclination to rocking the
boat and thus to "intellectual" pretensions. For such labels are quite
convenient for the purpose of frame-ups and character assassinations.
The MWG
>believes that this, along with the recruitment and development as
>organizational leaders of the most oppressed working class comrades is a
>prerequisite for building a mass revolutionary organization, nationally and
>internationally.
>
>
So basically, you guys (i.e., Marty and Lisa) are "the most oppressed working
class comrades," because you're not only purportedly "working class" (what a
joke!) but gay as well?!
Enough of this ridiculous horseshit.
Tom