Maruti Struggle: Only an International Perspective May Lead to Victory!

- Rajesh Tyagi/ 21.3.2017

What cannot be termed anything except the travesty of justice, 13 of the Maruti Workers in Manesar plant of Maruti have been condemned to life imprisonment while 18 others for lesser terms inside the Jail.

The matter relates to a management provoked brawl inside the Manesar plant of Maruti, where a mercenary army of bouncers was let loose upon the workers after they raised their voice against physical abuse of the workers who dared to protest the sweatshop conditions inside the plant.

The sentences have been passed at the end of a show trial in which prosecution failed miserably to adduce any cogent evidence against any of the accused worker in support of its bald allegations of assault, rioting and arson.

The capitalist establishment, however bent upon to doubly assure the foreign investors that the tyrannical regime it oversees, is ready to crush the workers at the drop of a hat, has imposed harshest sentences upon the workers.

In passing the sentences, the Court has overlooked its own finding that there were conscious attempts by the prosecution to manufacture evidence and frame up the workers through it.

The assault upon Maruti workers is part of the worldwide attacks of capital upon the working class. In the times of crisis, the endeavor of capitalists to arrest the falling rates of profits is resulting into a markedly violent drive towards repression of the working class in all countries. Core sectors of production like the automobile manufacturing, worst hit in the crisis, are witness to more and more such reprisals.

Workers of Maruti plant in Manesar, an automobile manufacturing hub of Asia, who had been pioneering the struggle against the onslaught of capitalist loot and exploitation, have been targeted by the corporate-state combine. This corporate-state assault on Maruti workers', is however integral to a far wider, worldwide, attack of capital against the international working class.

The left parties and the trade union federations under them, having sectarian, nationalist perspective, have assisted the corporates and the capitalist state by isolating the struggle of Maruti workers within narrow confines and have immensely contributed to this disarming of the workers in face of the united assault of multinational capital and the governments. Despite of their following in the Manesar-Dharuhera industrial belt and over the country in multi-millions, these trade unions and their bosses did never make appeal to the workers around to rise in class solidarity against the cruel neo-liberal regime of capital and its brutal enforcement by the big-business governments. Instead they consciously have subordinated the working class to the yoke of capital, preaching them to petition and appeal to the leaders, parties, courts and authorities of the elite establishment. These leaders have opposed any and all attempts of the working class at its own independent class mobilization.

Through this policy, these leaders have served capitalism by keeping the working class bound hand and foot before rapacious exploitation and loot of the capitalists, in the last whole century.

If working class has to succeed, it has to break off first from these false leaders, the thugs employed by capitalists. Instead, workers must appeal to their class brethren the world over for class solidarity. The movement must change its praxis. It must reject consciously all reactionary manifestations, be they local or national, in favour of an international perspective.

Pitiable appeals to the corporate, its representatives or to the state and authorities would only fall on the deaf ears and won’t make even a leaf to move. Only a united international assault of the workers upon the capital would usher into victory of the workers over the capital.

Workers all over the globe are facing the same loot and violence from the capital. The appeals of oppressed workers of Maruti would sure find their echo in class solidarity of workers across the globe.

Also Check: 
http://workersocialist.blogspot.in/2017/03/maruti-struggle-only-international.html
http://workersocialist.blogspot.in/2012/11/maruti-struggle-once-again-trade-unions.html

http://workersocialist.blogspot.in/2012/11/struggle-in-maruti-suzuki-at-manesar.html

http://workersocialist.blogspot.in/2012/07/press-statement-struggle-in-maruti.html

http://workersocialist.blogspot.in/2013/05/blog-post.html

http://workersocialist.blogspot.in/2011/10/maruti-strike-workers-remain-resolute.html

http://workersocialist.blogspot.co.nz/2017/03/maruti-struggle-only-international.html?m=1

How the Right Wing BJP Could Secure Unprecedented Victory?

Modi mobbed

Extreme right wing, hindu supremacist Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP), is voted to power, ousting the Congress-led UPA-II Government under Manmohan Singh, that ruled for a decade. While BJP alone secured 282 seats in run up to Lok Sabha, Congress got squeezed to 44 seats.

 

The spectacular victory of BJP, has come on the wave of widespread dissatisfaction and unrest against the misrule of Congress led government, that was marred by massive corruption, soaring prices, raging inflation, and vast unemployment.
 

Congress, hitherto the chief party of Indian big business, was trapped between the pressing need to put in place the most rudimentary welfare schemes in rural employment and food guarantees, on the one hand, while on the other, the dictates of the capitalist market that demanded dismantling of all such schemes, wiping out all social spending. Result was a double discrediting of the Government. As meagre spending, clubbed with corruption and pilferages, failed to bring the promised results, masses of workers and toilers turned against the Congress regime.  Alongside, the corporate gradually dissociated itself from Congress Government, leaning more and more on the right wing BJP, as in its estimation, the Congress regime failed to put the economic reforms in place, at desired pace. Large sections of big business, thus, mobilized their support behind the BJP.

Conscious of the explosive consequences of rule in the hands of fascists, the ruling big bourgeois, in its quest to arrest the fall of its economy that has set in after the 2010 currency crisis in India, is dragged behind the BJP. As the economy has since continued to shrink, dispelling the foreign investment, international credit rating agencies have recently issued ultimatum to the government, commanding it to ‘do or die’. 

The claims of corporate media, as to a 'sunami' in favour of Modi, are however, a blatant lie, as despite of an apparent parliamentary majority, BJP could get only a 31% share of popular vote, while its NDA allies added 7% more to it. This is the lowest share of vote, that any winning party has got, till date. Equally false are the claims that vote in favour of BJP is the vote for agenda of "economic reforms". On the contrary, the vote is against all 'reforms' that had been pushed by the ousted Congress regime. BJP could capture even this much vote, only as it succeeded in masquerading as an opposition to the rule and policies of Congress, while hiding its real agenda of pushing through the 'economic reforms' at far higher pace than ever.

Victory of BJP has come by 'default' against the anti-people policies, crushing failures and misrule of the Congress Government and the shameful complicity of Stalinist left with it.

Needless to say that Congress led UPA governments, have done their best to serve the interests of big business, including a massive drive for dismantling the public sector, withdrawing subsidies, and ending price controls over most essential commodities like diesel. However, the constraints of bourgeois-democracy to dupe the masses through keeping in some semblance of a welfare state amidst rabid reforms, ‘reforms with a human face’ as they put it, has prevented the UPA from daring to take to the harshest anti-people decisions.

In estimation of Indian big business and foreign investors, only a right-wing authoritarian government under the BJP can accomplish the tasks that Congress could not perform. These include, complete wiping out of social spending and taxing the working and toiling people even more, to shift the burden of all economic crisis upon their shoulders.

Ironically, the big-business succeeded in channelling the anger of the masses against its own regime and its own policies, to induce a push, towards the right, bringing the arch communal BJP to power.  

BJP is the political front of most rabid communal formation, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), that is ferociously hostile to working class and socialism, and is modelled on the patterns of Fascist black shirts under Mussolini in Italy. It holds its traditional social base among most backward sections of petty traders and small businessmen and ropes in most conservative elements in bureaucracy, security agencies, police and army, that are deeply inimical to working class and poors. It is flanked by equally communal Shiv Sena and MNS in Maharahstra, Akalis in Punjab and ethno-linguistic AIADMK in Tamilnadu, and TDP and TRS in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana respectively.

Rise of the BJP to power, is direct, first and foremost result of the shameful failure of the Stalinist left, which has failed the entire working class, behind it. Fascists could have and really have rode to power, only on the back of this failure of working class, to put challenge to the misrule of big bourgeoisie.

The left under Stalinists, instead of leading an opposition to the anti-people regime of Congress-led UPA, remained adhered to it and kept the working class completely dormant, inert and sterile. For decades, stalinist parties continued to support and sustain the minority governments under Congress. Even when the most reactionary neo-liberal policies were being put in motion since 1991, by the Narsimha Rao government, trashing even residues of ‘congress socialism’, public assets were being sold off to corporates at throw away prices, Stalinists stood support to this party of the big-bourgeois, on false slogans of democracy and secularism.

BJP led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) had come to power in 1998, due to the pro-investor thrust of Congress government since 1991, supported by Stalinists. But Stalinists drew no lessons and again supported the minority UPA-1 in 2004, assisting in resolving the political and constitutional crisis of the bourgeoisie. They continued the support till in June 2008, they were kicked out of the alliance on the nuclear issue. Still refusing to draw any lessons, they continued to lend support to the government of UPA-II formed in 2009 general elections, by holding back any opposition from the working class to the policies and actions of bourgeois government. More recently, Stalinists had been sending feelers for an alliance with Samajwadi Party (SP) of Mulayam Singh, while SP has been associated with the communal riots in Mujaffarnagar, hand in gloves with the BJP, to communally polarize the people in vote banks. It is worth to mention that similarly, CPI (Maoist) was instrumental in bringing the right-wing Trinamool Congress (TMC) under Mamata Banerjee to power in last assembly elections in West Bengal.

The state governments, that were led by Stalinists, in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, were platforms for implementation of the same neo-liberal and pro-investor policies, that were implemented by other governments including the right-wing governments. The government under Stalinist left-front in West Bengal was discredited for deploying the most rabid means through concerted police-goon violence against poor peasants, in Singur and Nandigram regions, while forcibly seizing farm-lands for big capitalists like Tatas. Tatas, were among the chief funders for recent election campaign of BJP.

Workers and toilers have again and again voted for Stalinists in expectation that these bearers of red flag would lead them in opposition to capitalism,  but Stalinists have betrayed them everytime, by delivering them, bound hand and foot, to the leaders and parties of capitalists.

Out of total 67 years, since the Indian bourgeois came to power in 1947, Congress had led the bourgeois governments at the centre for 54 years. In all these years, Stalinists had stood support to the regime, open or tacit and have assisted these governments to employ the most reactionary measures for loot and plunder of working class and toilers.

This political strategy of Stalinists, is, in turn, guided by the false Menshevik policy of Stalin and Mao, who argued that in democratic stage of revolution, working class has to ally with the bourgeoisie. For Stalinists, it is the democratic revolution in India, going on for decades, that underscores the need of an alliance between parties of workers and capitalists. Due to their misunderstanding of revolution in general and the democratic revolution in particular, Stalinists keep adhered to the parties of bourgeois, one after the other, chiefly to the Congress, the central party of the big Indian bourgeoisie. Through this adherence, Stalinists keep the working class tied to the political regime of bourgeois, and prevent it from taking to independent road, from rising in opposition to the class dictatorship of the bourgeoisie under the guise of democracy.

In this, four major parties of Stalinists and Maoists- CPI, CPM, CPI ML Liberation and the CPI (Maoist) share the essentially same perception and program, despite superficial differences among themselves, which remain of no more than archival importance in face of their rooting in the same politics of democracy extricated from socialist revolution, acceptance of alliances with bourgeois parties, and finally denial of proletarian dictatorship as the starting point for revolution.

As Stalinist-Maoist parties ally with the parties of Indian bourgeois, the hopes of the workers, toilers and rural and urban poors, get dampened and the ready vacuum is created instantly for manipulations by the ruling bourgeois to push the political swing towards more and more right.

Despite a strong anti-incumbency wave in the offing against the Congress-led regime, the Stalinist left front, instead of leading the working class and toilers behind it against the misrule of Congress, continued to look out for alliances with regional bourgeois parties like AIADMK, TDP, SP, RJD etc. into a third front, while these parties were engaged in bargaining between the chief bourgeois alliances of UPA and NDA.

Stalinists got total 11 seats in Lok Sabha in 2014 , i.e. half of the seats they secured in 2009. In 2009, they could secure half of what they secured in 2004. In 2014, the largest party of Stalinists, CPIM, failed to secure its official recognition as a national party.

Despite all demagogy in the name of the working class, Stalinists and Maoists, both have no faith in the strength and potential of the working class and their whole politics is centered around collaborations with sections of the bourgeoisie. Their fate is bound up with sections of bourgeois, its leaders and parties.

All other factors, like colossal propaganda campaign funded by big capitalists, role of corporate media etc. are of secondary importance in bringing BJP to power. The primary factor is the role of Stalinists in failing the working class, that has created an instant space for rise of fascists.

Without much effort, one would see, that in the face of a fascist advance, not only the Stalinists, but other bourgeois and petty-bourgeois formations of liberals, reformists and ambedkarites, proved themselves of no real worth at all. Even put together, they could not have prevented the fascists from taking to power. The truth, however, remains, that all these petty-bourgeois tendencies find themselves more in proximity and in agreement with fascists, than the revolutionary working class. They play dubious role in dividing the working and toiling people on the lines of caste, community, nationality, language, regional and ethnic identities.

Fascists have risen to power, albeit, by misinterpreting their real agenda to the masses, fanning wild hopes of millions for better living conditions, employment, curbing of corruption and crime, expansion of economy etc. However, in the settings of a full blown economic crisis under way on national and international arena and the self-contradictory nature of their agenda, that calls for far more social spending than ever before on the one hand and complete wiping out of last remnants of the welfare state on the other, the farcical agenda and false promises would blow up, very soon.

Despite its initial strivings to strike a balance between the two, the new government would soon find this balancing impossible, and would be forced to lean furiously against the aspirations of masses. Within no time this government would expose itself as a battering ram in the hands of corporates, imposing their savage agenda of most intense exploitation and violence against the people. The government, breaching all promises it had made to woo the voters, would fall back to old fundamentalist agenda of BJP- abolition of Article 370 of the Constitution that gives privileged status to Kashmir, Construction of Ram Temple in Ayodhya, and above all ouster of Bangladeshi migrants. It is also bound to trigger some sort of conflict with neighbouring countries, as the BJP had been long-time critique of Congress governments for going soft on Pakistan and China.

The hindu communal and fascist colouration of the BJP government, is bound to come in direct conflict, sooner than later, not only with religious minorities like muslims and Christians, but also with national, regional and ethnic minorities, apart from the working class and poors. This, in turn, would set off a whole series of social explosions, coupled with widest ever resistance, to its policies on economic and political front, bringing the mass of workers and toilers in direct conflict with the right wing government of big-bourgeois, and may have devastating consequences for it.

However, on this radical turn in history, the working class, the only class capable of rescuing the humanity from the clutches of capitalism decaying into fascism, remains on the fringes, fragmented and demoralized, due to decades of dominance of Stalinism over it. Bound up closely and subordinated to the sections of bourgeois through its leaders and parties, by the Stalinists, the working class has lost the last shreds of political class consciousness.

In order to push the political swing towards left, i.e, towards a proletarian revolution, working class has to strive, above all, for its class independence from all influence of the bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie. However, the present opportunist leadership of labour movement, the Stalinists and Maoists, would never permit this to happen. Therefore, purging of the old and emergence of the new leadership in the movement of working class, armed with a program oriented towards the October revolution, is the foremost requisite for a proletarian revolution. Only such leadership, organized into a party, can lead the working class to triumph over capitalism.

-Rajesh Tyagi/ 19.5.2014

Reblogged from http://workersocialist.blogspot.co.nz/2014/05/how-right-wing-bjp-could-secure.html

Also check these articles:

http://workersocialist.blogspot.in/2009/05/india-general-elections-lead-to.html

http://workersocialist.blogspot.in/2012/04/20th-party-congress-of-stalinist-cpm.html

India: Struggle in Maruti-Suzuki at Manesar and the Workers Socialist Party

 
We reprint an article on the long standing workers struggle at Maruti-Suzuki by the Workers Socialist Party of India. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Two day protest dharna on 7-8 November, organised by the 546 dismissed workers of Maruti-Suzuki at Manesar, under the banner of now defunct trade union, Maruti Suzuki Workers’ Union (MSWU), failed to make any dent, as the pro-corporate media ignored it and its Centrist-Stalinist leaders isolated the action, consciously.


Giving no weight to the protest, Maruti-Suzuki India Ltd. announced that it is gearing up to increase production. “Production is normal at Manesar. By December, we plan to roll out 1,950 cars per day, compared to the 1,700 units we produced in July,” said a company executive.

At present 4000 workers are employed in the Manesar plant, which company is planning to increase to more than 6000, recruiting about 500 per month.

Earlier, Maruti Suzuki had cut by a third its regular workforce and dismissed 546 employees in connection with the violent labour unrest at its Manesar facility on July 18, out of which more than 160 are still languishing in jail.

Workers had been conducting struggle against the sweat shop working conditions and total absence of minimum trade union rights, since 2009, inside the Manesar plant. The month long strike in 2011, had resulted in production loss of 77,000 units to the company. Entering into a blind alley in face of determination of the workers to a spontaneous strike action in 2011, the management had smothered the struggle through outright purchase of the trade union leaders in 2011.

After the whole leadership of MSWU, headed by Sonu Gujjar, had betrayed the struggle, receiving hefty bribes from the company, the company had started to virtually pulverise the workers inside the Manesar plant. The result was a clash on 18th July 2012, between workers and the ‘bouncers’ appointed by the management, resulting in arson inside the plant, death of an official and injuries to many.

The trade union bureaucracies under Social-Democrats (HMS), Centrists (NTUI), Stalinists (CITU-AITUC) and Maoists (AICCTU, IFTU etc), took no time in condemning the ‘violence’ terming the same as ‘unfortunate’ or a ‘wrong turn’ to the ‘peaceful’ struggle.

Immediately after the incident, on 20th July, the Deputy Commissioner of the city called a meeting of trade union leaders to pacify the nerves of workers, preventing them from starting a broad solidarity action in support of the Maruti Workers.The trade unions affiliated to Social-Democrats, Centrists, Stalinists and Maoists of many hues, not only obediently came in attendance, but pledged support to all efforts aimed at “industrial peace”. These trade union leaders forthwith intervened to prevent the workers at other plants in Manesar, from starting a strike action. This emboldened the pro-corporate state to unleash a reign of repression against the struggling workers. The police immediately arrested more than 100 workers who had been most active in the struggle and started a blind hunt to rope in others. While the trade union leaders held back the Maruti workers to fight back and other sections of workers from coming to their aid, the police registered false cases against the workers, continued to arrest them and subjected them to most brutal torture, as is described in a later investigation by the PUDR team. With the implicit collaboration of these trade union leaders, police thus succeeded in imposing savage terror.

To further isolate the dismissed workers, the trade unions have facilitated the signing of a separate wage settlement with the management in September this year, stipulating historic increase in monthly salaries upto Rs. 14,800/-, and regularisation of 1870 contract/ casual workers. What is being done to meet the imperatives of future increase in production, would be used as a tool to isolate the dismissed and arrested workers.

To keep the movement under their grip and hold back the workers under their control, these capitulationists, covert servants of the capital, have forged an alliance among themselves into a 'unity forum' that includes 14 such trade unions affiliated with different stalinist-maoist-centrist parties and groups. The task of this forum is to keep the workers at Maruti within confines of legal action and insulate them from influence of revolutionary idea of initiating a class action against their class enemies.

Arrest of around 160 workers on fake charges of conspiracy, arson and murder had presented itself as a great opportunity for opening a huge political offensive against the Congress government in Haryana and at Centre. Bare fact, that majority of those arrested included the workers having roots in agrarian communities in surrounding villages of Manesar, cutting across the caste divides of dalit-jat-gujjar, the divide upon which rests the critical built-up of bourgeois politics in Haryana, was a ready bastion for united class action of workers and peasants against the corpoarte state and bourgeois parties. But the trade union leaders, those compromisers, pushed the workers into blind alley of 'peaceful and legal demands'.

Shamelessly opposing the proposal of activists of WSP for giving clarion call to the workers in Manesar and all over Haryana, for a indefinite general strike against the state government, these trade union bureaucrats, misled the workers towards alleged ‘peaceful’ means of sloganeering outside the Haryana Bhawan at New Delhi, representations to state authorities, sending fact-finding teams, legal action in courts etc.

While outrightly rejecting the idea to support the two day protest dharna of Maruti workers, Union leaders at the Gurgaon plant of Maruti-Suzuki, Maruti Udyog Kamgar Union (MUKU), have indicated they would render limited support to protest rally on Thursday, as expression of ‘solidarity’. “We will not participate in the hunger strike but will support the rally on Thursday”, said Kuldeep Jhangu, general secretary of MUKU.

Trade union leaders have actively assisted the management, since very beginning of the struggle, in failing the workers’ struggle, by inducing divisions among the workers and thereby isolating the struggling workers. Firstly, they isolated the striking workers at Manesar plant preventing other sections of workers from coming to their aid. Then they divided the regular and contract/casual workers inside the plant. Then they isolated the dismissed workers from those who were still working. And lastly they isolated those who are under arrest, by cleverly restricting the demand for reinstatement only for those who are not implicated in criminal cases. “We want the reinstatement of all colleagues not charged by the special investigation team (SIT) and a proper and unbiased inquiry into the incident,” said Om Prakash, a member of HMS. Demand for a ‘proper and unbiased inquiry’ is yet another tool for reposing the faith in legitimacy of the openly pro-corporate state.

Workers at Maruti-Suzuki, despite all of their sincere wishes and best efforts, cannot win the struggle against the united might of corporates and the state under them, through their efforts alone. The struggling workers must join hands with their class brethren to launch a real and broad offensive against the combined might of corporate and the state.

Our Party- Workers' Socialist Party (WSP) calls upon the workers to first break away from the trade union bureaucracies and their false and opportunist leaders and turn to our Party, the only party of revolutionary marxism. Most militant of them must organise themselves in ‘action committees’ to head the struggle. These committees must be developed gradually into soviets of workers. The struggle at Maruti-Suzuki, and for that matter every serious conflict between workers and corporates, must be made a spearhead of a revolutionary offensive against the capitalist class and its political rule. Every such conflict must be looked upon as a conflagration having potential to lead to a real revolution, through dragging of working class to the whirlpool of political struggle.


Check Our Earlier Reports:

http://new-wave-nw.blogspot.in/2011/10/maruti-strike-workers-remain-resolute.html

http://new-wave-nw.blogspot.in/2011/10/unity-of-workers-at-maruti-suzuki.html

http://new-wave-nw.blogspot.in/2011/10/workers-strike-resumes-at-maruti.html

http://new-wave-nw.blogspot.in/2011/10/maruti-suzuki-struggle-social-democrats.html

http://new-wave-nw.blogspot.in/2011/09/maruti-suzuki-workers-struggle-at.html

Leon Trotsky: Learn To Think

A Friendly Suggestion to Certain Ultra-Leftists
(May 1938)

CERTAIN PROFESSIONAL ultra-left phrase-mongers are attempting at all cost to “correct” the thesis of the Secretariat of the Fourth International on war in accordance with their own ossified prejudices. They especially attack that part of the thesis which states that in all imperialist countries the revolutionary party, while remaining in irreconcilable opposition to its own government in time of war, should, nevertheless, mould its practical politics in each country to the internal situation and to the international groupings, sharply differentiating a workers’ state from a bourgeois state, a colonial country from an imperialist country.

The proletariat of a capitalist country which finds itself in an alliance with the USSR [1] [states the thesis] must retain fully and completely its irreconcilable hostility to the imperialist government of its own country. In this sense its policy will not differ from that of the proletariat in a country fighting against the USSR. But in the nature of practical actions considerable differences may arise depending on the concrete war situation. (War and the Fourth International, p.21, § 44.)

The ultra-leftists consider this postulate, the correctness of which has been confirmed by the entire course of development, as the starting point of ... social-patriotism. [2] Since the attitude toward imperialist governments should be “the same” in all countries, these strategists ban any distinctions beyond the boundaries of their own imperialist country. Theoretically their mistake arises from an attempt to construct fundamentally different bases for war-time and peace-time policies.

Let us assume that rebellion breaks out tomorrow in the French colony of Algeria under the banner of national independence and that the Italian government, motivated by its own imperialist interests, prepares to send weapons to the rebels. What should the attitude of the Italian workers be in this case? I have purposely taken an example of rebellion against a democratic imperialism with intervention on the side of the rebels from a fascist imperialism. Should the Italian workers prevent the shipping of arms to the Algerians? Let any ultra-leftists dare answer this question in the affirmative. Every revolutionist, together with the Italian workers and the rebellious Algerians, would spurn such an answer with indignation. Even if a general maritime strike broke out in fascist Italy at the same time, even in this case the strikers should make an exception in favor of those ships carrying aid to the colonial slaves in revolt; otherwise they would be no more than wretched trade unionists – not proletarian revolutionists.

At the same time, the French maritime workers, even though not faced with any strike whatsoever, would be compelled to exert every effort to block the shipment of ammunition intended for use against the rebels. Only such a policy on the part of the Italian and French workers constitutes the policy of revolutionary internationalism.

Does this not signify, however, that the Italian workers moderate their struggle in this case against the fascist regime? Not in the slightest. Fascism renders “aid” to the Algerians only in order to weaken its enemy, France, and to lay its rapacious hand on her colonies. The revolutionary Italian workers do not forget this for a single moment. They call upon the Algerians not to trust their treacherous “ally” and at the same time continue their own irreconcilable struggle against fascism, “the main enemy in their own country”. Only in this way can they gain the confidence of the rebels, help the rebellion and strengthen their own revolutionary position.

If the above is correct in peace-time, why does it become false in war-time? Everyone knows the postulate of the famous German military theoretician, Clausewitz, that war is the continuation of politics by other means. This profound thought leads naturally to the conclusion that the struggle against war is but the continuation of the general proletarian struggle during peace-time. Does the proletariat in peace-time reject and sabotage all the acts and measures of the bourgeois government? Even during a strike which embraces an entire city, the workers take measures to insure the delivery of food to their own districts, make sure that they have water, that the hospitals do not suffer, etc. Such measures are dictated not by opportunism in relation to the bourgeoisie but by concern for the interests of the strike itself, by concern for the sympathy of the submerged city masses, etc. These elementary rules of proletarian strategy in peace-time retain full force in time of war as well.

An irreconcilable attitude against bourgeois militarism does not signify at all that the proletariat in all cases enters into a struggle against its own “national” army. At least the workers would not interfere with soldiers who are extinguishing a fire or rescuing drowning people during a flood; on the contrary, they would help side by side with the soldiers and fraternize with them. And the question is not exhausted merely by cases of elemental calamities. If the French fascists should make an attempt today at a coup d’etat and the Daladier government found itself forced to move troops against the fascists, the revolutionary workers, while maintaining their complete political independence, would fight against the fascists alongside of these troops. Thus in a number of cases the workers are forced not only to permit and tolerate, but actively to support the practical measures of the bourgeois government.

In ninety cases out of a hundred the workers actually place a minus sign where the bourgeoisie places a plus sign. In ten cases however they are forced to fix the same sign as the bourgeoisie but with their own seal, in which is expressed their mistrust of the bourgeoisie. The policy of the proletariat is not at all automatically derived from the policy of the bourgeoisie, bearing only the opposite sign – this would make every sectarian a master strategist; no, the revolutionary party must each time orient itself independently in the internal as well as the external situation, arriving at those decisions which correspond best to the interests of the proletariat. This rule applies just as much to the war period as to the period of peace.

Let us imagine that in the next European war the Belgian proletariat conquers power sooner than the proletariat of France. Undoubtedly Hitler will try to crush proletarian Belgium. In order to cover up its own flank, the French bourgeois government might find itself compelled to help the Belgian workers’ government with arms. The Belgian Soviets of course reach for these arms with both hands. But actuated by the principle of defeatism, perhaps the French workers ought to block their bourgeoisie from shipping arms to proletarian Belgium? Only direct traitors or out-and-out idiots can reason thus.

The French bourgeoisie could send arms to proletarian Belgium only out of fear of the greatest military danger and only in expectation of later crushing the proletarian revolution with their own weapons. To the French workers, on the contrary, proletarian Belgium is the greatest support in the struggle against their own bourgeoisie. The outcome of the struggle would be decided, in the final analysis, by the relationship of forces, into which correct policies enter as a very important factor. The revolutionary party’s first task is to utilize the contradiction between two imperialist countries, France and Germany, in order to save proletarian Belgium.

Ultra-left scholastics think not in concrete terms but in empty abstractions. They have transformed the idea of defeatism into such a vacuum. They can see vividly neither the process of war nor the process of revolution. They seek a hermetically sealed formula which excludes fresh air. But a formula of this kind can offer no orientation for the proletarian vanguard.

To carry the class struggle to its highest form – civil war – this is the task of defeatism. But this task can be solved only through the revolutionary mobilization of the masses, that is, by widening, deepening, and sharpening those revolutionary methods which constitute the content of class struggle in “peace”-time. The proletarian party does not resort to artificial methods, such as burning warehouses, setting off bombs, wrecking trains, etc., in order to bring about the defeat of its own government. Even if it were successful on this road, the military defeat would not at all lead to revolutionary success, a success which can be assured only by the independent movement of the proletariat. Revolutionary defeatism signifies only that in its class struggle the proletarian party does not stop at any “patriotic” considerations, since defeat of its own imperialist government, brought about, or hastened by the revolutionary movement of the masses is an incomparably lesser evil than victory gained at the price of national unity, that is, the political prostration of the proletariat. Therein lies the complete meaning of defeatism and this meaning is entirely sufficient.

The methods of struggle change, of course, when the struggle enters the openly revolutionary phase. Civil war is a war, and in this aspect has its particular laws. In civil war, bombing of warehouses, wrecking of trains and all other forms of military “sabotage” are inevitable. Their appropriateness is decided by purely military considerations – civil war continues revolutionary politics but by other, precisely, military means.

However during an imperialist war there may be cases where a revolutionary party will be forced to resort to military-technical means, though they do not as yet follow directly from the revolutionary movement in their own country. Thus, if it is a question of sending arms or troops against a workers’ government or a rebellious colony, not only such methods as boycott and strike, but direct military sabotage may become entirely practical and obligatory. Resorting or not resorting to such measures will be a matter of practical possibilities. If the Belgian workers, conquering power in war-time, have their own military agents on German soil, it would be the duty of these agents not to hesitate at any technical means in order to stop Hitler’s troops. It is absolutely clear that the revolutionary German workers also are duty-bound (if they are able) to perform this task in the interests of the Belgian revolution, irrespective of the general course of the revolutionary movement in Germany itself.

Defeatist policy, that is, the policy of irreconcilable class struggle in war-time cannot consequently be “the same” in all countries, just as the policy of the proletariat cannot be the same in peacetime. Only the Comintern of the epigones [second-rate imitator or follower] has established a regime in which the parties of all countries break into march simultaneously with the left foot. In struggle against this bureaucratic cretinism we have attempted more than once to prove that the general principles and tasks must be realized in each country in accordance with its internal and external conditions. This principle retains its complete force for war-time as well.

Those ultra-leftists who do not want to think as Marxists, that is, concretely, will be caught unawares by war. Their policy in time of war will be a fatal crowning of their policy in peace-time. The first artillery shots will either blow the ultra-leftists into political non-existence, or else drive them into the camp of social-patriotism, exactly like the Spanish anarchists, who, absolute “deniers” of the state, found themselves from the same causes bourgeois ministers when war came. In order to carry on a correct policy in war-time one must learn to think correctly in time of peace.


COYOACAN, D.F.
May 22,1938
Leon TROTSKY

Source: New International, Vol.4 No.7, July 1938, pp.206-207.
Transcription/Mark-up: Einde O’Callaghan for the Trotsky Internet Archive.

Footnotes

1. We can leave aside then the question of the class character of the USSR. We are interested in the question of policy in relation to a workers’ state in general or to a colonial country fighting for its independence. So far as the class nature of the USSR is concerned we can incidentally recommend to the ultra-leftists that they gaze upon themselves in the mirror of A. Ciliga’s book, In the Country of the Big Lie. This ultra-left author, completely lacking any Marxist schooling, pursues his idea to the very end, that is, to liberal-anarchic abstraction.

2. Mrs. Simone Weil even writes that our position is the same as Plekhanov’s in 1914-1918. Simone Weil, of course, has a right to understand nothing. Yet it is not necessary to abuse this right.

G 20: Socialist Fight Leaflet

• Internationalism Now!

• Down with Economic Nationalism, Bj4Bw and “No2 EU” Europhobia!

• Build a Rank-and-File organisation that fights the bosses and the class treachery of the TU bureaucracy!


The G20 summit demonstrates the rapidity with which the crisis is unfolding. Whole economies like Iceland and Ireland are virtually bankrupt, financial meltdown has unleashed economic meltdown and no one can say where it will end. And the political ramifications for the left are equally rapid. The Lindsey Oil Refinery strikes were the August 4th for the British working class. Those like the SP and CPB who gave them enthusiastic support have now got their reward.

The Stalinists of the CPB, who have been the traditional bagmen for the class traitors of the TU bureaucracy, have welcomed the ‘Trotskyist’ SP into the fold of economic nationalism. Fronted by Bob Crow, with no consultation with his members, the new No2 EU platform is a straight British nationalist response which attempts to steal the votes of the UKIP. Like the infamous ‘foreigners out’ demonstration in Staythorp this appalling political treachery has struck fear into every immigrant worker and much of the black and Asian community. If even ’lefts’ like Simpson, Crow, Nellist and the CPB are prepared to tack so far right for opportunist gains how can we defeat the BNP?

But divisions are not really so bad if they reveal reality in time to fight back. The SWP has swung to the left after the split with Galloway and is now recruiting rapidly on leftist demands. Despite all the problems with their own capitulation to trade union bureaucracies and the popular frontism of the UAF, etc. their members are demanding a real fight now and revolutionists should give critical support as far as they go.

The future of the working class and poor, particularly immigrants, is indeed grim and they will be joined by a vast section of the middle class who will be rapidly driven down into their ranks. A year or so ago every right-wing think-thank in the planet trumpeted low taxation, deregulation and privatisation as the neo-liberal model that lead to robust economic growth.

The number of millionaires and billionaires burgeoned but this was necessary so the poor could benefit from some trickle-down, or ‘crumbs from the master’s table’ as one patronising bigot put it long ago. Today we are encouraged to hate these greedy bankers and fat cat finance capitalists but not the system itself, which the People’s Charter assures us is reformable.

The anarchist answer is to defend localism; local communities defending jobs and fighting the oppressive state is the only way. What is wrong with British jobs for British workers, Irish jobs for Irish workers and local jobs for local workers? Down with the EU, back to fortress Britain? But the door is then opened for the far right; economic nationalism is the field of operation of the fascists, it ties the workers to the bosses and must destroy the very basis of working class consciousness, its internationalism and its objective need to produce wealth on the basis of a world planned economy. Workers are the true global class whose interests can only be truly served by a planned world economy, capitalism is a global system run by a national bourgeoisie who are only interested in the own profit.

Revolutionary Trotskyism must provide the answer then with its aspiration for the world revolution. If the Waterford Crystal occupation becomes fashionable then the sacred right of private property, which underpins all global oppression, will be raised again as an international tactic. Only when private property is overthrown and collective, effective human rights are established and when we produce food and manufactures for human need, not profit can workers begin the struggle for international socialism. We must sweep away the ‘muck of ages’, sexism, homophobia and economic nationalism which leads to racism, wars and copper fastens all human oppression.

But we cannot do it effectively when we collaborate with a TU bureaucracy which seeks to jail militant Belfast Airport shop stewards. We cannot do it when we go on marches with Lindsey Oil Refinery strikers who shout ‘foreigners out’. Just as we must not capitulate to the trade union bureaucracy we cannot circumvent them either by ‘base unions’, we must fight and defeat them to reclaim the unions as class struggle organs.

Internationalists will then see their aspirations as real possibilities; no local answers, no trade union bureaucratic sell-out deals to save capitalism; occupy, organise and strike to unite the working class nationally and internationally, then the revolutionary struggles will begin in earnest.

Down with No2 EU, workers of the world unite!

Socialist Fight PO Box 59188,
London, NW2 9LJ.
Email: Socialist_Fight@yahoo.co.uk