19.09.1996

Revolutionary unity

Statement by the Committee for Revolutionary Regroupment. The CRR is a group of comrades who were formerly members of the British section of the United Secretariat of the Fourth International (USFI)

The collapse of Stalinism and the sidelining of reformism by the political situation leaves us with the responsibility of being the continuation of the Marxist and Leninist tradition, the only tradition that has not failed the working class. For these reasons it is fundamental that we regroup and concentrate our forces.

This is no easy task. There are decades of sectarian hostility to overcome. There are also some fundamental differences between groups that cannot be bridged by discussion alone and will have to be resolved by history - an example being the current courting of unreconstructed loyalist paramilitaries by the Alliance for Workers Liberty (AWL) and Militant Labour. Even in these cases, however, we need to be aware that individual members of those groupings may not share the group view. Over the past decade all the Trotskyist groups have gone through massive changes.

Stalinism was a massive block to us in its claim to be genuine, existing socialism. Its collapse, while being a major defeat in opening the way for capitalism in Eastern Europe, has removed this block. Linked with this, the global capitalist offensive has forced us to revaluate our perspectives. The rise of the far right, in particular, has forced us to work closer together. We should expect instances of movement - both convergent and divergent - within this situation.

Any attempt to regroup Trotskyists must be on a basis of building a world party of socialist revolution. For any group to have such a commitment, it is almost inevitable that they will in practice attempt to construct international currents. In any regroupment initiative, therefore, we have to consider the effect of there being differing internationals, and not see international affiliations as sectarian barriers but as equally part of a global regroupment initiative.

Regroupment with other organisations has to be on a basis of collective discussion and a programme of shared work. It would culminate either in a decision that we were sufficiently close to fuse on a basis of democratic centralism, or an assessment by one or other party that there was not a basis for fusion. If a fusion took place, we would still have to have a commitment to discussing through the various issues that still divided us.

So far this discussion has been abstract, pitched at a level that few could disagree with. It is time to turn it into something more concrete. The first step has to be to try to build something with the organisations and individuals closest to ourselves. The closest organisations we would see as Socialist Outlook (SO); The Leninist Trotskyist Tendency and its British section, the Workers International League (WIL); the Liaison Committee of Militants for a Revolutionary Communist International (LCMRCI, split from the League for a Revolutionary Communist International [LRCI]); the LRCI and its British section, Workers Power (WP).

The CRR originated as a split from Socialist Outlook. We left that organisation because we saw the demise of democratic centralism within it due to the ensconced nature and demoralised politics of the traditional leadership and the inability of any alternative group of comrades to take over. While we see ourselves as close to many aspects of the political programme of SO there are many points of political conflict with the leadership. However, our biggest differences are with how SO puts this programme into practice. Our internal polemics against the leadership have therefore heavily stressed the necessity for the transitional method and the correct operation of the united front.

We have sought to clarify the theoretical basis of the continual capitulation of the SO leadership to left bureaucrats, other non-class social movements, etc. The WIL have been involved with us in a number of activities, such as Bosnia work and the clause four campaign. Their strength is their political analysis and grasp of the transitional method; their weaknesses are small size and consequent lack of implantation in the labour movement and campaigns. They appear to share with us an awareness of the need to regroup our forces.

The LCMRCI is an international grouping which is not politically homogenous. Nevertheless we share many important political positions with their national groups and with the international as a whole, including a similar assessment as to the degeneration of the LRCI, the historical period we are passing through and the assessment that Eastern Europe and the former USSR are now capitalist states. We have differences on ex-Yugoslavia and on the national question in general and on other issues. Discussion and clarification will enable us to decide whether we can form a joint international with them.

WP is further from us. This group takes an abstract and dogmatic attitude to struggles, rather than analysing them in their specific peculiarities. It tends to be ultra-left and sectarian in its practical work because it collapses the distinction between theory and programme and so relates to practical events on the basis of a theoretically abstract set of principles. This does not amount to a programmatic difference, however, and so should be capable of being encompassed within one organisation.

What is more likely to be a problem with WP is their insistence that their positions are correct and that all others are therefore wrong. The appropriate attitude for a revolutionary Marxist would be to approach questions from the standpoint of ‘what can we both learn from discussing and working with these comrades?’ rather than ‘how can I force my view upon them?’

CRR sees promoting a project of real revolutionary regroupment - involving attempting to work together while discussing out our differences with the aim of fusing our organisations together - to be of fundamental importance to the international working class.

However, such a project cannot be the be-all and end-all of a group’s existence, and cannot be conducted in a vacuum. Due to the particular circumstances of our formation we think that we can advance this project best at present by being a separate organisation. However, the separate existence of an organisation basing itself strongly on regroupment when there exists an organisation (WIL) with whom a principled fusion is possible is clearly a contradictory situation. When we come to the assessment that our continued separate existence is playing no further positive role in the attempt to draw Trotskyists together we will then have to consider fusion, hopefully on a wider basis than just ourselves and the WIL.