Scottish Debate | Home | News | Donate | Join 

The Scottish debate

Party, Programme, Reformism and the International

[Next]

The reply states that "...comrades have asked us to describe democratic centralism in a kind of ten easy-to-remember points". This is false - when and where has this question been posed? Democratic centralism is not a set of ready-made formulas of "easy-to-remember-points".

The legitimate concern of the International Socialist Movement minority, expressed in the 'Scottish Socialist Party Conference Review and Conclusions', is just ignored. The minority comrades warn that:

 "There is a real danger in a situation where our leading comrades are no longer accountable to the Committee for a Workers' International membership in Scotland - even if they are in leading positions in the Scottish Socialist Party as well. 

If this goes unchecked the ideological and political pressures of operating in a broad, non-revolutionary party and pressures of parliamentary work will affect all of us, including the leadership. Democratic centralism is vital for a serious Marxist force ensuring a powerful anchor that can act as a counter to these very real dangers".

The International Socialist Movement PC document quotes Trotsky's 1937 article "On Democratic Centralism, A few words about the Party Regime". This excellent article is partly a response to "individual comrades who asked me to give a clear and exact formula on democratic centralism". 

However, as Trotsky answered "... no one can give such a formula that once-and-for-all would eliminate misunderstandings and false interpretations". But nothing in Trotsky's article gives ammunition to the position put forward by the International Socialist Movement PC document.

The PC reply does not clarify the attitude of the majority on democratic centralism, something which is not simply a question of organisational structures and measures.

In 1998 the Committee for a Workers' International was assured that "...the Scottish section of the Committee for a Workers' International will be organised as a Marxist tendency with the methods of 'democratic unity' (democratic centralism), and will also serve to ensure accountability of the leadership" ("Proposals for Progress On the New Scottish Turn", Scottish Militant Labour EC 27 May 1998). This undertaking has never been implemented.

In fact the International Socialist Movement leadership no longer supports this idea. This is not an accident. It flows from the political arguments put forward to justify why International Socialist Movement should not act, at least in this period, as a distinct revolutionary organisation. Organisation flows from policy, perspective and programme.

The principle of "Bolshevik organisation, 'democratic centralism', is assured by complete freedom of criticism and of groupings, together with steel discipline in action...", wrote Trotsky in 1935 ("The Crisis of the French Section". page 47). Even before the birth of Bolshevism the norms and the spirit of democratic centralism started to guide the independent organisations of the working class. Instinctively, the working class realises that unity in action is a prerequisite in the struggle against capitalist oppression and a centralised state apparatus.

The rise of Stalinism and the degeneration of the Communist Parties and the Communist International transformed democratic centralism into its opposite - bureaucratic centralism. The Stalinists then created the myth that Bolshevism was equal to a monolithic party and the leadership's 'iron grip'.

This sharply diverges from the real history of Bolshevism during Lenin's leadership. This was characterised by Lenin's struggle to uphold and defend the revolutionary programme of the party. This would not have been possible without discussions, sharp debates and the formation of temporary groupings or factions, even splits, amongst the Bolsheviks. 

The essence of Bolshevism was that democratic centralism was grounded in the revolutionary Marxist programme of the party. 

"Yet rather than attempting to secure his own 'iron grip' over the organisation, Lenin sought to establish ever more securely the principle of democratic centralism, grounded in the revolutionary programme. 

He seemed convinced that only this could ensure the health and growth of an effective revolutionary organisation that would be best able to utilise his own remarkable abilities and those of his comrades. Democratic centralism meant majority rule, freedom of discussion, unity in action" (Paul Le Blanc, "Lenin and the revolutionary party", page 140-141).

Of course, democratic centralism means more than this. The fundamental issue is that the way the party operates, its internal life, the level of activity, the authority of the leadership, etc, has to be put in a wider political context. 

Democratic centralism is a method that allows the party to function on a democratic basis, giving the members the right to hold the leadership to account and subject to recall. Without freedom of discussion, comradely debates, then a common understanding of the situation today, and clarity on the demands and programme required, a genuine agreement and understanding of how to intervene in the class struggle is not possible.

Trotsky explained that "Only a correct policy can guarantee a healthy party regime" and that "the formula of democratic centralism must inevitably find a different expression in the parties of different countries and at different stages of development of one and the same party". ('On Democratic Centralism'. Writings of Leon Trotsky 1937-38, page 90)

At the same time, only a correct policy and a healthy internal structure and procedure can prevent temporary groupings, a loyal opposition, becoming a permanent faction. And it is impossible to reverse such a situation, of course, by simply banning the faction or by proclaiming a moratorium on the debate!

What we are debating is not the specific application of democratic centralism but the principle. It has become clear that the International Socialist Movement is not acting as a collective political force. Reading from the document it becomes even clearer that the majority do not even desire that this should be the case. 

The thread running through it is that our political dominance inside the Scottish Socialist Party is largely unchallenged by anyone - with the possible exception of the ultra-left Revolutionary Communist Network. Therefore, it is neither necessary nor desirable to act on the basis of democratic centralism. This is what the comrades mean when they state "... it is unnecessary to operate as a tightly knit caucus" (paragraph 98). The document states that "neither are we in favour of caucusing before every Scottish Socialist Party branch meeting" (paragraph 103). The document says caucuses would mean that Scottish Socialist Party meetings would become "…rubber stamps for decisions taken elsewhere".

In the broader workers' movement we have always organised caucuses in order to bring our comrades together on a regular basis. This is a means of preparing our interventions at bigger events. It is also to discuss and evaluate the state of the movement, our own demands, slogans, campaign initiatives, proposals for actions, etc.

International Socialist Movement policy should be discussed and decided upon by its members, within the established structures of the section. After democratic discussion the agreed policy should be supported by Committee for a Workers' International members in Scottish Socialist Party meetings, conferences, etc. 

That is the norm in a Marxist organisation. It ensures that the membership is fully involved in formulating the policy of the International Socialist Movement and also holds the leadership to account. This does not exclude that occasionally some members of International Socialist Movement may argue and even vote against each other at some Scottish Socialist Party events. 

However, this should be the exception not the rule. If this method is not applied, then it will inevitably result in the policy of the International Socialist Movement being decided by unaccountable "leaders" with little or no involvement of the members.

At the beginning of paragraph 100 the document states: "We obviously expect all International Socialist Movement comrades to defend the basic ideas and principles of Marxism. We are in favour of discussing and where possible reaching agreement within the International Socialist Movement on key issues that will be of major importance to the party". 

However, the comrades totally ignore the fundamental issue that it is not possible to maintain and develop the ideas of Marxism without a revolutionary organisation. It provides a framework for discussion, education and the training of cadres. Moreover, the majority has always stressed that the monthly branch meeting of the International Socialist Movement should become a debating forum. 

Therefore, they would not give the members an opportunity of evaluating and testing our ideas in relation to other political trends in the Scottish Socialist Party. Neither would they allow the members an opportunity to discuss all aspects of the work.

The International Socialist Movement PC majority opposes describing the International Socialist Movement as a "party". Even internally they strenuously oppose defining the International Socialist Movement as a party. 

No one has urged that the comrades should state bluntly in public that the International Socialist Movement is a party. The issue is not one of presentation but of the character of the International Socialist Movement and its aims. The entrist period compelled us to deny in public that we existed as an organisation, let alone a party. Comrades referred to themselves as a "Tendency" an ideological and political current that produced a newspaper. 

We popularised the term "tendency" which became part of the political vocabulary in Britain. When conducting 'entry' work we educated and consolidated our members on the basis of a revolutionary programme, method and organisation. We made clear that entrism was a tactic adopted in order to build the revolutionary party and workers' International.

The PC's reply contains many references to the past, but it is difficult to understand what the comrades are trying to say. Sometimes the text is extremely confused. For example, we read: "Comrades were not free to stand up at Labour Party meetings if they disagreed with the strategy and declare that we were an organisation as this would have led to reprisals. This is not the situation within the Scottish Socialist Party where we are the leadership"(paragraph 93.)

The hypothetical example given is an absurdity. We do not know what "agreed strategy" the document has in mind. If someone who joined us in the past suddenly went over to the side of the bureaucracy, then that person has obviously left the very same organisation or party that she or he joined. This happened more than once in the 1970s and 1980s. Defectors from our ranks, who no longer agreed with us, went over to the bureaucracy. They told them everything about the organisation.

Working in the Scottish Socialist Party today cannot be compared with yesterdays entry work. It is also true that the "emphasis has to be on openness, transparency and democracy". But what does that mean? Truth is concrete. 

It is ironic that the majority emphasise, "openness, transparency and democracy" in the functioning of the International Socialist Movement in the Scottish Socialist Party while in the International Socialist Movement they have declared a "moratorium on debate on the core issues until the run up to next conference in the 2001"! (Resolution 2, adopted by the International Socialist Movement all members meeting 21 May 2000). 

This decision set an incorrect norm and tone inside the section. Moreover, it will be unworkable. If there is no agreement, the "core issues" will inevitably be discussed. Time needs to be set aside and agreements reached between the majority and the minority on how to proceed.

The Socialist Workers Party is now proposing to enter the Scottish Socialist Party in the autumn. This will have to be discussed within International Socialist Movement, and such a discussion will inevitably raise many of the "core issues" which have been under debate.

[Continue...]

Scottish Debate | Home | News | Donate | Join