Russian left unity proposal: for members and supporters of the RCWP-RPC

[Die Neue Zeit]

In response to the Russian letter and some recent May Day events involving physical confrontation between Trotskyist CWI and "red brown" CPRF activists (http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/5033), and in belated response to "official Communist" and "Anti-Revisionist" overtures towards Trotskyists ("Springtime for Trotsky" original link no longer accessible, but reproduced: http://www.revleft.com/vb/springtime-trotskyi-t140936/index.html?t=140936), I'd like to mention two things.

First, the British Marxist Mike Macnair said in a video on Trotskyism that Trotsky was expelled from the Party because he organized protest action against Party resolutions and stubbornly refused to apologize for it, going against even the most libertarian interpretations of "democratic centralism." Despite the Party's degeneration, Stalin's specific maneuverings here should be commended for preserving "unity in action." One aspect of left unity in Russia and the near abroad (i.e., the old Soviet space) should be the taking advantage of this overlooked event by "official Communists" and "Anti-Revisionists," especially by the Russian Communist Workers Party - Revolutionary Party of Communists (RCWP-RPC), instead of the usual demonizations.

Second, the other aspect of left unity means Trotskyist groups at least in Russia issuing written communications of a regretful tone (like issuing an apology) addressed to "official Communist" and "anti-Revisionist" groups by for this overlooked event, to do what Trotsky stubbornly refused to do. Only then can the Trotskyist criticisms of "achieving SIOC" and "Popular Fronts" be taken more seriously in Russia, with critical left unity based on the RCWP-RPC being in the driver's seat.

[North Star]

Hmm, I've never heard of Trotsky organizing demonstrations. I like Mike Macnair though. Could someone provide a link to the video or some proof of Trotsky actually organizing demonstrations?

[Die Neue Zeit]

It's a very, very long video, and his remarks are buried within:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7217010160620735399#

[North Star]

Thanks for the link!
I found this guardian.co.uk/news/1927/nov/16/mainsection.fromthearchive

[Their] aggressive activity in holding demonstrations during the revolutionary anniversary celebration and organising meetings of "conspirators" induced the Central and Control Committees to take immediate action.


The only problem with this is that this is from the bourgeois press quoting from Pravda so its reliability is questionable.

[Lorax]

Ultimately Stalin would have killed Trotsky along with the rest of the Old Bolshevik rivals to his authority whether or not there had been any ideological disagreement.

Neo- I don't think anyone is arguing that Trotsky organized demonstrations. Any public demonstration would have been unthinkable during the Stalin years. Everyone would be shipped to a forced labor camp in Siberia or summarily executed. By protest action, I think Macnair means simply that Trotsky was a leader of the left opposition within the Communist Party.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Stalin wasn't fully in power in the mid 1920s, when Trotsky's stunt occurred. This wasn't just being a member of the Left Opposition (let alone the Workers Opposition), but organizing something contrary to unity in action and then refusing to apologize for it!

[Lorax]

Thanks for the link!
I found this guardian.co.uk/news/1927/nov/16/mainsection.fromthearchive


The only problem with this is that this is from the bourgeois press quoting from Pravda so its reliability is questionable.

Pravda(it means truth in Russian) was a terrifically Orwellian name for that publication. The Guardian was far more likely to accurately report what Pravda printed than Pravda was to print what actually happened. It would be interesting to me if Trotsky really did organize street demonstrations against the government in 1926 or so, as I would really have to rethink my understanding of the transition between Lenin's death and Stalinization.

[North Star]

Okay from my research it seems Trotsky definitely did it. Something his followers should consider when they rant about party discipline! At the same time though, I'm not a Trotskyist, but he did stand up against Stalin and was proven right in his fears of him. A bit of a dilemma. Do what's right or submit to party discipline?

[Die Neue Zeit]

The Italian CP leader (and left-com) Bordiga, though expelled eventually through Comintern machinations, at least submitted to party unity in action. He didn't organize this kind of stunt.

[Dumb]

Okay from my research it seems Trotsky definitely did it. Something his followers should consider when they rant about party discipline! At the same time though, I'm not a Trotskyist, but he did stand up against Stalin and was proven right in his fears of him. A bit of a dilemma. Do what's right or submit to party discipline?

Do what's right and discipline the party. The party, after all, is only a tool of the revolution, and not vice-versa.

[pranabjyoti]

Do what's right and discipline the party. The party, after all, is only a tool of the revolution, and not vice-versa.
Correction: Add class dictatorship too.

[Zanthorus]

First, the British Marxist Mike Macnair said in a video on Trotskyism that Trotsky was expelled from the Party because he organized protest action against Party resolutions and stubbornly refused to apologize for it, going against even the most libertarian interpretations of "democratic centralism."


The Italian CP leader (and left-com) Bordiga, though expelled eventually through Comintern machinations, at least submitted to party unity in action. He didn't organize this kind of stunt.

You cannot be serious here in using Bordiga to defend your denunciation of Trotsky on the grounds that he broke the formal organisational principles of 'Democratic Centralism'.


The issue should instead be approached with a dialectical and historical method; a «principle», either centralist or democratic, to be used as a fundamental reference point to start from compulsorily in order to solve the problem, would be a nonsense for us Marxists... It is... obvious that the principle of discipline for discipline is, in given situations, utilised by the counterrevolutionaries to hinder the development leading to the formation of the true class revolutionary party.- Bordiga, Communist Organisation and Discipline

[Die Neue Zeit]

Written words vs. deeds... Anyway, then at least Trotsky should have had the guts to resign from the party.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Why the fuck should Trot organisations that have pretty much no material links to the once-alive Lev Bronstein apologise for him?

What sort of joke is this, DNZ?

And why would any Socialist want unity with any Gennady Zyuganov organisation? The man's politics are horrific.

[Red Future]

Why the fuck should Trot organisations that have pretty much no material links to the once-alive Lev Bronstein apologise for him?

What sort of joke is this, DNZ?

And why would any Socialist want unity with any Gennady Zyuganov organisation? The man's politics are horrific.

The RCWP-RPC Isnt Zyuganovite as far as I know.

[North Star]

Nah the RCWP--RPC hasn't gone down the road of the CPRF. It is quasi-Stalinist but unlike the CPRF it has an international perspective. If anyone knows their politics better I'd like to learn more. The All Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) are definitely Stalinist. Not sure about Vanguard of Red Youth, very black bloc-ish but they use pics of Stalin. I totally support all the forces to the left of the CPRF uniting though. As far as the CPRF goes consider these things beyond just their nationalism. They've been allowed to operate when many other parties have not. They were not the only party claiming to be the successors of the CPSU in Russia, but they are the one that the Kremlin tolerated and so are seen as the "legitimate" Communists by the foreign press.

[DaringMehring]

The call for some kind of "apologetic tone" re: actions of 1920s that have little to nothing to do with why Trotsky remains demonized in the USSR (the Moscow frame-ups and the decades long slander campaign, not because he 'violated Party discipline') in order to try to unite various Parties despite their political differences is irrelevant and a distraction.

As for the events in the 20s, it should be noted, that the demonstrations were not "against the Party" but rather had independent, non-approved slogans and that was why they were supposedly "against the Party" although they were done by Party members and oriented toward the Party and did not challenge the Party as the leader of the USSR. And, they came after the Party leadership (Stalin-Bukharin) had betrayed the "truce" whereby the Opposition leaders had submitted in writing to Party discipline. Those actions are hardly worth revival as a historically important issue.

I think DNZ is a sophisticated troll. He is a master of his art.

[Jose Gracchus]

What the fuck is your point, man? :rolleyes:

[Die Neue Zeit]

What the fuck is your point, man? :rolleyes:

There have been "Marxist-Leninist" overtures towards Trotsky and Trotskyist tendencies. If there is to be unity in action, tendencies guilty of violating this in the past need to step up to the plate and acknowledge responsibility. Like Neo-Bolshevik said, "Something his followers should consider when they rant about party discipline!"


The call for some kind of "apologetic tone" re: actions of 1920s that have little to nothing to do with why Trotsky remains demonized in the USSR (the Moscow frame-ups and the decades long slander campaign, not because he 'violated Party discipline') in order to try to unite various Parties despite their political differences is irrelevant and a distraction.

The "Marxist-Leninists" mentioned in the OP article have more or less apologized, dismissing the Moscow frame-ups and all that slander.


As for the events in the 20s, it should be noted, that the demonstrations were not "against the Party" but rather had independent, non-approved slogans and that was why they were supposedly "against the Party" although they were done by Party members and oriented toward the Party and did not challenge the Party as the leader of the USSR. And, they came after the Party leadership (Stalin-Bukharin) had betrayed the "truce" whereby the Opposition leaders had submitted in writing to Party discipline. Those actions are hardly worth revival as a historically important issue.

As I implied above to comrade Zanthorus, written words are still written words, not deeds, let alone unapologetic deeds. What if the Party had already decided to have just one set of demonstrations across the country?

[RedSunRising]

The "Marxist-Leninists" mentioned in the OP article have more or less apologized, dismissing the Moscow frame-ups and all that slander.

Really?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Yes, really:


Malinkovich concedes, however, that Trotsky’s ideas had a delayed effect – today, they are once more in demand.

“Of course we understand that he was not a German agent, and we can give a more balanced assessment now. Trotskyism as a label is a very dangerous thing,” he said, urging rank-and-file communists to stop throwing the name around like an insult.

Among left-minded activists, could it be springtime for Trotsky? Could Soviet Russia’s most reviled traitor enjoy a revival?

The Russian Communist Youth – possibly the largest internationalist-leaning organisation in the country – has certain reservations, but is ready for a posthumous reconciliation between Trotsky and Stalin.

“It is my dream to once see a memorial in a quiet part of Moscow, depicting Trotsky and Stalin sitting across from each other,” Darya Mitina, one of the leaders of the Russian Communist Youth and a former State Duma deputy, told The Moscow News.

“Trotsky was unlucky twice – first from 1924, when he was defeated, then killed and subsequently damned by Stalin’s supporters. And then once again now, because we live in a capitalist state.”

(Communists of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region, Russian Communist Youth, etc.)