Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
ALB mentioned Socialist Resistance and them being part of one of the Fourth International, I thought I’d check which one as it is a bit confusing.
Here is a list of Fourth Internationals. Makes you wonder if there are more Fourth Internationals than there are Trotskyists. Here’s the list:
Fourth International (USFI)
International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI)
International Committee of the Fourth International (Workers Revolutionary Party)
International Communist League (Fourth Internationalist) (ICL-FI), previously the International Spartacist Tendency
League for the Fourth International (LFI), split from ICL-FI
League for the Fifth International (L5I)
International Workers League – Fourth International (IWL-FI)
Trotskyist Fraction – Fourth International (TF-FI)
International Socialist Tendency (IST), post-trotskyist
Committee for a Workers’ International (CWI) – claims to be refoundation of Committee for a Workers’ International (1974)
International Socialist Alternative, claims to be successor to Committee for a Workers’ International (1974)
International Marxist Tendency (IMT), previously the Committee for a Marxist International, split from CWI
International Revolutionary Left (IRL), split from CWI
Committee for Revolutionary International Regroupment (CRIR
International Socialist League (ISL-LIS)
Internationalist Communist Union (ICU)
International Trotskyist Committee for the Political Regeneration of the Fourth International (ITC)
International Workers’ Unity – Fourth International (IWU-FI)
League for the Revolutionary Party – Communist Organization for the Fourth International
International Bolshevik Tendency
Bolshevik Tendency
Permanent Revolution Collective
International Leninist Trotskyist Fraction
Tendency for the Reconstruction of the Fourth International
Internationalist Trotskyist Nucleus-Fourth International
Organising Committee for the Reconstitution of the Fourth International (OCRFI), split from Fourth International (ICR) in 2016
Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT)
Internationalist Standpoint (IS)
International Leninist Trotskyist Tendency
International Trotskyist Opposition (reconstituted)
Liaison Committee for the Reconstruction of the Fourth International (CERCI)Historic “Internationals”
Committee for a Workers’ International (CWI), 1974–2019 – split into Committee for a Workers’ International (Refounded) and International Socialist Alternative
Coordinating Committee for the Refoundation of the Fourth International (CRFI)
International League for the Reconstruction of the Fourth International (ILRFI), 1976–1995
Pathfinder Tendency
Fourth International Posadist
Workers International to Rebuild the Fourth International (WIRFI)
Liaison Committee for the Fourth International
International Revolutionary Marxist Tendency (TMRI), 1965–1992 – rejoined the Fourth International (post-reunification)
Permanent Revolution
Revolutionary Workers Ferment (Fomento Obrero Revolucionario, FOR)
Trotskyist International Liaison Committee, 1979–1984
Tendencia Cuartainternacionalista
Fourth International (ICR), also called FI (La Verité) or FI (International Secretariat) 1981-2015
Socialist Network (Post-Trotskyist, split from IMT)I also disagree with your thoughts about Alonso. Needs a few years before he’d cope at Liverpool, it’s a big jump from Leverkusen.
But going back to what I was saying, rather than write another article about Lenin, I think we should let the old conspirator to rot without comment.
“Further, ONE of those links seems to be a sharing of Lenin’s method of attacking the man, not the ball, in political and philosophical debates.
Or, was that a trait of both Engels AND Marx themselves? If so, is it a good practice to continue? Does it further comradely discussions between democratic socialists?”
I think the point here is a good one. Marx, Engels and Lenin all had a tendency to go for the man not the ball. To be fair (taking the analogy a bit further) you have never been one to be shy to put the odd “reducer” in now and again, I have the broken shin pads to show! It may also be that I got my “retaliation in first” as well. That said, perhaps all of us could follow your advice (you included, my friend)
And whilst I can understand that people of my (and I assume) your generation, have a bit of an obsession about Lenin, considering the amount if time we have spent countering Leninist organisations over the years, my perception of things is that large sections of the radical working class have in practical ways moved beyond Lenin and his thoughts. I also think that one of the major changes is that classical Democratic (sic) Centralism and the Leader obsession has been massively challenged by modern organisational processes, especially by the rise of the internet.
To put it into context, I was talking to a work colleague who was active in the Labour movement in Liverpool during the rise of Militant. We discussed the way in which Militant continually manipulated and intimidated people as well as all of the cloak and dagger, behind closed doors deals within deals that Militant pulled off (including deals in Liverpool that were very financially lucrative for some of the leading Liverpool Militants!).
Now I’m not saying that this kind of skulduggery is not possible, but the whole process of caucusing small groups and corralling members to go the way the leader desires (which the Militant and their ilk are specialists at) is far more difficult than it used to be. Witness the difficulties the SWP are having in trying to lead “broad left” sheep into the slaughterhouse of Trotskyism across the Trades Union movement.
The spontaneous movements of resistance that the working class have been throwing up in recent years such as Just stop Oil, the Anti Capitalist Movement, Extinction Rebellion, etc. (regardless of the criticisms we could make about them) are far less leader obsessed than the Leninist/Trots. Because of this the Leninists are struggling to make any real entry points into these movements as they don’t generally rely on a leadership clique to make decisions. Let’s face it who is going to want to move from a generally open democratic movement to a conspiratorial clandestine grouping that denies your own ability to make decisions.
My view is that this is a clear vindication of Marx’s view that the working class will move toward genuinely democratic movements as a vehicle for social change and also that the ends that that social change aims to generate are absolutely linked to the means by which that is achieved.
Taking it a bit further, the question was posited about what the influence of Marx and Lenin would have been, should the Bolshevik coup have been thwarted. I have put my view forward about what Marx’s legacy would possibly have been in previous postings.
As to Lenin, my would guess is , is that he would be talked about about as often as Derek Hatton is discussed by under 35 year olds in Liverpool today. A sad footnote in the history books.
As to the rest of the Bolshevik old guard, I think, just like the Peter Taffes, Ted Grants, Dave Nellists, etc. they would have all fallen out with each other and ending up using the pitiful tactic of having to self publish their own memoirs. Just like them, Stalin, Trotsky, Bukharin would look like Third Division Footballers trying to relive their moments of glory to people who had largely forgotten them!
Hi L Bird, glad to hear that you’re still about, hope all is well with you and yours, commiserations re Klopp’s departure.
Re Baltrop’s quip, I think this over states the influence that Lenin had on the growth of interest in the ideas of Marx since his death and understates just how much influence Marx’s ideas had become influential.
If no successful Bolshevik coup took place, it would not stop the spread of the ideas of the Left Mensheviks and some of the SRs, who were heavily influenced by Marx.
Similarly, a Bolshevik failure would not have stopped the ideas of Rosa Luxembourg, Karl Liebknecht, the USPD and the Spartacus League being influential in Germany.
What would have happened to the left leaning organisations in the UK, would the failure of the 2nd International led to more of them taking heed of the SPGB, etc?
On an academic side, the influence of Marx was growing in areas such as Economics and Sociology and the depth and range of Marx’s work in comparison with the likes of Lassalle, Duhring or Proudhon. The influence of Marx’s work in the SPD was such that Weber included Marxist and quasi Marxist arguments prior to 1917. Durkheim died in 1917, but clearly was familiar with Marx’s ideas. So the idea that no Lenin would mean no discussion of Marx, would mean there was no discussion of Weber.
All of this is counterfactual history, obviously. But my guess is that if the Bolshevik coup had failed, Marx would continue to be an influential figure, perhaps less well known than present, but perhaps more accurately portrayed. As to Lenin, without a successful Bolshevik coup, his work probably wouldn’t have ended up in the “dustbin of history”, but he might be seen as a romantic failure. I am pretty sure that no one would be ploughing through the collected works of Lenin, if in fact they had ever been collected, which I doubt.
Labour MP suspended for making link to genocide in Gaza.
Am I the only one that thinks the whole genocide debate is a little ridiculous. Is the slaughter of millions of people in the trenches of World War One somehow less dreadful than the dreadful slaughter in the Nazi death camps. Is it ok to kill and maim as long as there is no racial motivation?
I’m not sure that the citizens of Coventry and Dresden will be thinking, “my family and friends were incinerated by weapons of war, but at least I have the comfort that they weren’t part of a genocide”.
Is domicide somehow better than genocide?
I understand the fact that the possibility of a nuclear holocaust creates fear and stress, TM, and I wouldn’t want to trivialise that in any way, however it is also important to look at things from as close to our understanding of reality as we can.
In terms of nuclear bunkers, ask yourself if you had squillions to spend would you consider buying a nuclear bunker? It might at least something that you considered, you might not go for that option, but if you did, it would not mean that you thought the holocaust was about to arrive, you might just think it might be better to have the choice.
In terms of lead up to a nuclear war, I can’t imagine that there would ever be a full scale nuclear war without notice. The most likely scenario would be that small scale regional wars which grow and escalate, before any possibility of nuclear strike. If that was being considered the likelihood of mass protest and other action would probably precipitate changes in government, changes in approach.
In any event I would think it unlikely that the chain of command would follow orders to destroy themselves, their family, etc.
There have been lots of examples of this including von Choltitz refusal to destroy Paris
Personally I think the war in Ukraine has led some parts of the various state machines of some countries to start to think that because the Ukrainian war has been fought in a conventional way and that there has been no resort to Nuclear weapons, perhaps smaller scale conventional European wars are a threat, option, possibility or more worryingly an opportunity.
That is to say that if perhaps the Russians and their allies are starting to think there is a possibility that non nuclear war is possible where the scale is relatively small and that there may be some advantages gained (gaining the Donbas, perhaps even getting parts of Moldova, reuniting with Kaliningrad etc.) and it might be worth a go. Let’s face it that is what the Western block have been doing over decades (Kosovo, etc.)
On the other side the Western block may well be starting to think that perhaps the greatly feared Russian army is not as fearsome as they thought, seeing that it has been bogged down and in some cases pushed back by the Ukrainians (all be it with Western arms), and perhaps there may be gains to be had in the East or at least to neutralise the threat there.
The worry is that they both seem to be making the assumption that neither side will get to the point where they decide enough is enough and press the button.
I think that generally the Party takes too logical view about war and that was is fought for specific gains. The reality is that war is fought for possible gains. The German state took a gamble in 1939, the Japanese state took a gamble in 1941, neither state gained what they thought they might gain, but there was a chance.If capitalists were always wise about the outcomes of their gambles there would be no business failures, no need for bankruptcy laws, no need for limited liability companies, etc. etc. The whole culture of capitalism promotes risk taking. Sadly those who take the risks get all of the gains, whilst those who suffer when the risk taking goes wrong are the Working Class.
Going back to the original post therefore, perhaps the super rich setting up elaborate Nuclear Bunkers are the equivalent of them putting some of their wealth into Limited Liability Companies. They don’t want their companies or their war mongering to go tits up, but if it does don’t worry the Proles will pay the cost.
Doesn’t seem like a large portion of the German Capitalist class suffered too much following the failure of their gamble in 1938:https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/may/18/nazi-billionaires-book-hitler-bmw-porsche
I went to the Stop the War meeting at the Tyneside Irish Centre last night, if that’s the opposition to it, it is rather dismal.
I think in total maybe 20 people there in total. A few Morning Star old timers who I recognised as ex CPers from yesteryear, and the usual group of displaced Trots (ex SWPers, expelled Militants, even an ex 1980s RCP bloke who hadn’t joined the neocons).
Most of them seemed to be looking for a leader to act as their new Lenin/Trotsky and to help them re enact the October Revolution (with them playing a prominent part)
At the entrance there was a bloke from Counterfire. I’ve got to be honest I had no idea who they were (to be fair when I gave him an older copy of the Standard and our leaflet, he didn’t know who we were either).
Using my legendary skills of wit and repartee, I found out that they were the ex SWP rump of Trots who still thought that the SWPs “turn to Islam” was the correct call.
As I said, I did a swap for his one page news sheet for a copy of the Standard, but I have a feeling that I was robbed.
As it happened, at the same time as the Stop the War meeting there was also a leaving do for an old time union convenor going on at the same time at the Irish Centre as well, which I didn’t know about.
Coincidentally I knew a couple of the people who were going to the leaving party and was having a bit of a laugh and crack with them, as well as a couple of other people I knew ‘cos I’ve been a member at the Irish centre for years.
At this point Lindsey German walked in with all her acolytes and disciples and seemed to think we were the welcoming committee for the The Stop the War meeting, with her taking the role of the new Lenin (or maybe Rosa Luxemburg).
She seemed genuinely disappointed that nobody knew who the feck she was. (I recognised her but said nowt) and swept upstairs to the pre booked meeting room.
Positive out of the negative was that I managed to sell two copies of the Standard from the Union leaving do and gave a half dozen of our leaflets to them.
I also distributed about another half dozen leaflets who came to the Stop the War meeting as well.
I’ve got to be honest and say that I didn’t have the heart to listen to the usual bollocks that the sub SWPers from the Stop the War mob were likely to come out with.
Obviously the working class need to oppose all capitalist wars, but the manipulative group of egocentric Lenin wannabes at the top of the Stop the War movement are not going to be part of the end to those wars.
So rather than that I went down to the main bar and had a couple of pints with an old fellow I know there.
He thinks that Kerry are going to win the All Ireland Football Championship. He might be right, but surely it’s got to be be Mayo’s turn, finally!
Always decent pint of Guinness at the Irish Club!
Here’s one which, to me, clearly spells out class antagonism.
I used to live in a street which clearly had a dividing line between one side of the street and the other.
One side 8 bedroomed leafy toryville and the other side a typical Tyneside terrace. Guess side I lived on.
The guy opposite me was a self entitled arsehole (is it politically correct to describe someone as a stuck up ponce, these days, if so that is what he was/is.)
On rememberence day he used to put on his fucking RAF uniform and put a bleeding Union Jack on his garage, what a twat.
Anyway, I used to blast this through the open window on a Sunday afternoon just to cause him discomfort. Might not have been particularly politically constructive, but it cheered me up.
The happy ending is that his wife ran off with the gardener, took the kids and screwed him for his pension. Happy days.
