Scottish Debate | Home | News | Donate | Join 

The Scottish debate

Party, Programme, Reformism and the International

[Next]

An important issue in this debate is how illusions in reformist, left reformist and centrist ideas will develop in the working class.

Reformism in its broadest forms seeks to find a way of ameliorating the conditions of the working class within the confines of capitalism or to gradually change capitalism into socialism. The exact form reformist and centrist organisations take can differ in different historic and objective circumstances.

Right-wing reformism in the period of the post 1950's boom dominated the Western European Labour movements in countries like Britain and Sweden. Reforms were conceded to the working class in order to buy social peace. These concessions were given either as a result of workers' struggles or under the threat of struggles.

State expenditure was increased as part of the attempt to boost the economy. Right-wing reformist leaders used to relegate discussion on socialism to the far-oft future or for speeches on May Day. Substantial concessions could be afforded by capitalism at the time. Right-wing reformism turned to vicious counter-reform following the 1973 economic crisis under the pressure of the ruling class. Globalisation, the failure of the left and the effects of the collapse of Stalinism resulted in the bourgeoisification of the former workers' parties.

Left reformism is generally characterised by the fact that its leadership reflects the pressure from the working class to take radical measures against capitalism. In the past, left reformist trends in Britain demanded the nationalisation of the top 25 companies as part of the "Alternative Economic Strategy" in the 1980s. However, left reformism always evaded the issue of how to deal with the capitalist state.

Centrism describes formations which waver between reform and revolution. The rank-and-file workers involved in these organisation are attempting to find a revolutionary socialist alternative. The leadership of such parties, although using Marxist or revolutionary phraseology, ultimately act as reformists in deeds. Centrism is marked by amorphous lack of precision in thought, programme and action. 

These parties are inherently unstable and move rapidly towards either the left or the right. They normally arise in an extreme crisis in society, in either a revolutionary or a pre-revolutionary situation. Centrist formations developed particularly in the inter-war periods as Left split-offs from Social Democracy and in and around the Communist Parties. In analysing centrist organisations it is important to determine if they are moving to the right or the left.

Despite their 'revolutionary' phraseology and programmatic demands, centrist or left centrist leaders have consistently failed to take decisive action when the time for revolution was ripe. They have played a fatal role in the historic struggles of the working class. What is the prospect for the re-emergence of reformist and centrist ideas and parties? This perspective is linked to our general appraisal of the international economic, social and political developments that will unfold.

During the 1990's, the collapse of the Stalinist regimes, together with the uneven growth in the world economy, allowed the ruling class to launch a massive ideological offensive against the ideas of socialism. These factors, and the bourgeoisification of the former traditional workers' parties, reduced the layer of politically conscious and active workers and threw back the general level of political and socialist consciousness. Today it is necessary to re-establish the idea of socialism as an alternative to capitalism.

The Committee for a Workers' International has explained that the consequences of the effects of globalisation, economic crisis and social instability would begin to provoke a reaction against the 'triumphalism of the market' and the speculative character of the present cyclical upturn. The most advanced layer of the youth, in particular, is already prepared to draw far-reaching conclusions and is increasingly open to a socialist alternative. But as far as the broad masses are concerned, the process will probably take the form of widespread opposition to the effects of the market and global capitalism and later of seeking an alternative to capitalism and embracing socialist ideas.

The experience of neo-liberal policies has already created a reaction internationally against the effects of the market amongst sections of workers and young people. There have been the first signs of a turn towards an anti-capitalist mood as well as the search for an ideological alternative by a more politically conscious layer. This was reflected on anti-WTO [World Trade Organisation] and anti-IMF demonstrations in Seattle in 1999 and Washington DC in April of this year. These movements, and others, indicate the first steps towards a political radicalisation. These have developed before the onset of global economic recession. A global economic recession will politically radicalise still further a wider layer of workers and youth.

These movements and others are the first necessary steps in re-conquering the idea of socialism as an alternative to capitalism amongst the working class. The Committee for a Workers' International has a critical role to play in this process and in convincing that layer of the need for a revolutionary socialist programme. However, the mass, and even the politically advanced workers and youth, will not draw these conclusions immediately or automatically.

The history of the workers' movement has shown repeatedly that the consciousness of the masses lags behind objective processes. The mass of the working class only takes the most difficult road - that of revolution - after exhausting all other possibilities. This means that even advanced layers of the working class will develop illusions in reformism and centrism. These illusions will develop not only because of the existence of reformist organisations and leaders in the workers' movement but also because of the level of consciousness amongst the working class.

The International Socialist Movement majority, however, relegates reformism to a stage in history that came about purely because of specific national and economic factors. One example of this is when they say: 

"Such ideas [reformist ideas - International Secretariat] developed in the 25 years before the First World War (earlier in Britain, see Engels' writings on the question). They flowed from the strength and wealth of first of all British capitalism and then other imperialisms, which enabled them to grant concessions to the working class" (paragraph 141). 

Earlier the International Socialist Movement majority comment: "Reformist ideas, like any other ideas, have material roots" (paragraph 140).

This is a mechanical approach. As Engels explained, "...Now if someone distorts this by declaring the economic to be the only determining factor, he changes that proposition into a meaningless, abstract, ridiculous piece of jargon ... Of these, the economic are ultimately decisive. But the political, etc., and even the traditions still lingering in people's minds, play some, if not a decisive, role..." (Letter to Joseph Bloch, 21 September 1890).

The comrades view the development of reformist ideas in the post Second World War economic boom as purely a product of the economic boom of capitalism. "The conditions for reformist illusions existed during the post-war boom, but since the mid-1970s we are operating in a dramatically different climate which involves capitalism red in tooth and claw waging war against the working class and its organisations" (paragraph 147).

However, reformism continued to dominate the workers' movement in Europe for a significant period after the mid-1970s and even the I 980s. This was despite the attacks launched by the ruling class. It included the emergence of powerful left reformist and centrist trends and parties in Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy and other countries. As the International Socialist Movement majority leadership knows, one of the high points of the battle between the Bennite left reformist wing of the British Labour Party and the right wing occurred in 1981-2.

In other words, reformist ideas remained as part of the labour movement after the end of the economic upswing after the ruling class was forced to move from reform to vicious counter-reform. This demonstrates that the existence of reformism as an organised force does not only relate to whether a material basis for its ideas exists or not.

The International Socialist Movement majority are one-sided when they state "in a context of economic crisis and big class struggles various political forces will undertake to propose reformist solutions in order to defend the system" (paragraph 148).

This gives the impression that reformist ideas will develop purely as a result of the actions of reformist leaders and parties. The reality is much more complex than this. Reformist ideas and parties do not fall from the sky. Individual leaders and workers' organisations do not exist in isolation from the rest of society. While workers' organisations generally consist of more conscious layers of the working class, they also reflect illusions that exist in wider society.

At different stages in the history of the workers' movement, reformist ideas have been consciously imposed on the workers' movement by its 'leaders'. 

These leaders, because of their integration with the ruling class, have abandoned the struggle for socialism and have become absorbed into capitalist society. They act as agents of capitalism (consciously or unconsciously) in the workers' organisations. Bernstein and the majority of the leadership of the German SPD, at the beginning of the twentieth century, are one example of this. The 'reformism' of the leadership represents a conscious betrayal of the working class by its leadership.

. However, the reformist illusions of ordinary workers and youth represent a different process. This represents a stage in the development of working-class consciousness and a desire for change.

The depth of reformist illusions, how long they exist for and what organisational form they take will depend only partially on objective conditions. It will also be determined by subjective factors such as the recent and historical experiences of the working class and the level of political consciousness. A decisive factor is the strength, cohesion and clarity of a revolutionary party.

In their reply, the International Socialist Movement majority state "Reformism, which has many variants, can be defined as the idea that socialism can be achieved via an accumulation of reforms, usually through the conquest of a parliamentary majority" (paragraph 141). The comrades are mainly referring to how the mass Social Democratic parties developed, especially after 1914. However, this is a rather narrow definition of reformism.

Reformism has "many variants" as we have already explained. In the Russian Revolution the ideological basis of Menshevism was essentially reformist and centrist. In Western Europe, following World War II, the role of the Communist Party leaders was reformist. While they used the banner of the Russian Revolution and of the Soviet Union (prior to 1989), their role has been to hold back and betray movements of the working class.

Today, some radical young Israelis have big illusions in the ideas of setting up communes and using alternative currencies. These illusions do not have a material base in society but need to be combated politically. They represent a barrier to the future development of the consciousness of workers and youth.

One of the most contradictory paragraphs in the International Socialist Movement majority reply (paragraph 146) on reformism opens with the statement "The working class does of course pass through periods when its consciousness is reformist". One sentence later the comrades write "We should avoid like the plague trying to impose preconceived 'stages' on to a living and volatile reality"

The 1990's saw the development of the PRC (Party of Communist Refoundation - Italy). The PRC, a new working class formation, was formed by a split from the Communist Party in Italy but managed to attract new layers of workers and youth who were moving into struggle then. The PRC has left reformist and centrist ideas predominant within the party. 

Is the International Socialist Movement majority suggesting that these trends do not exist in reality? Do the comrades think they are merely a "preconceived stage" invented by the Committee for a Workers' International or the International Socialist Movement minority? On the other hand, the International Socialist Movement majority state "The working class does of course pass through periods when its consciousness is reformist" (paragraph 146). Which is the position of the International Socialist Movement majority?

The International Socialist Movement Majority's passing references to the future development of reformist illusions demonstrates that they regard this perspective as very limited or inconsequential, particularly in the Scottish context.

Perspectives for Reformism

The Committee for a Workers' International has never claimed that left or right-wing reformism will re-emerge in the same relatively stable form that existed during the post-war boom. Why does the International Socialist Movement PC majority continue to emphasise this point? The boom undoubtedly strengthened and relatively stabilised the basis for reformist ideas. 

This was re-enforced by the strengthening of Stalinism at the end of World War Two. However, material conditions were not the only explanation for the existence of reformist ideas. It represented an organisational form of the way in which working class consciousness generally develops.

Although new left reformist and centrist formations may be unstable, at a certain stage they will form an important barrier to the revolution. Only a revolutionary party, with an understanding of the historic role of centrism and reformism and of how new parties will arise, can combat them.

The development of consist currents - as the example of the POUM in the Spanish Ro solution demonstrates - can play a fatal role in derailing the revolution. Historically, centrist parties lasted a relatively short period of time. However, their role during a critical period (a pre-revolutionary or revolutionary situation), meant they acted as gatekeepers for the counter-revolution - despite the dedication and revolutionary aspirations of their rank and file.

The International Socialist Movement PC majority are so unconcerned by the perspective of the future development of powerful centrist trends and formations they do not even mention such a possibility. They have a blinkered vision on this issue historically. The PC's document states: "Reformism was much weaker in the inter-war period, when capitalism was unable to grant concessions and on the contrary had to savagely attack the working class" (paragraph 142).

As a broad statement, this has a grain of truth in it. However, the comrades end their analysis where it should begin! An important subjective difficulty facing the working class in the inter-war period was the existence of powerful left-reformist and centrist illusions and parties. This was the case to varying degrees in Germany (USPD), Britain (ILP), Spain (POUM), Italy, and France (PSOP and elements of the SFIO and CP).

In the case of both the USPD and the SFIO, the majority were won to the Comintern following a determined struggle within these parties. It is significant that the International Socialist Movement PC does not see their task as conducting a similar struggle in the Scottish Socialist Party or of following the example of the Celonese (Sri Lanka) pioneers who won the LScottish Socialist Party (Lanka Sama Samaja Party) to Trotskyism.

The International Socialist Movement PC's explanation for reformism being much weaker in the inter-war period is because of one objective process (the economic crisis of capitalism). This one-sided statement completely ignores the impact of the Russian Revolution and the development of mass Communist Parties in the inter-war period. It also ignores the development of important centrist formations in the 1930s, initially to the left of the Comintern, and following its Stalinist degeneration.

Inter-war period

In their analysis of the CPs in the inter-war period the International Socialist Movement PC majority makes no reference to the consciousness of different layers of the working class and in which direction they were developing.

The Communist Parties, in the wake of the Stalinist degeneration, increasingly played a counter-revolutionary role in the inter-war period and afterwards. Trotsky explained this in his 1940 pamphlet "The class, the party and the leadership". This was a polemic against a publication in France that was attempting to explain the reasons for the defeat of the Spanish Revolution, basically arguing that the working class followed a false policy because of the immaturity in their consciousness.

In the International Socialist Movement PC majority reply, the comrades state:

"...because the workers saw them [the CPs] as revolutionary parties, [they] followed them as revolutionary parties and accepted their explanation that the time was not yet ripe for revolution" (paragraph 144). Reality was far more complicated than this. Trotsky explained in a reference to the make up of the working class: "..the classes themselves are comprised of different and in part antagonistic layers which will fall under different leadership" (Leon Trotsky, 'The class, the party and the leadership', in 'The Spanish Revolution' page 357)

Sections of the working class moved to support the Spanish Communist Party (PCE) whilst others clung to their previous parties and leaders. Trotsky explained that "The workers who were previously connected with specific organisations continued to cling to them while they observed and checked. The new and fresh masses naturally turned to the Comintern as the party which had accomplished the only victorious proletarian revolution and which, it was hoped, was capable of assuring arms to Spain. 

Furthermore, the Comintern was the most zealous champion of the idea of the People's Front: this inspired confidence amongst the inexperienced layers of workers. Within the People's Front, the Comintern was the most zealous champion of the bourgeois character of the revolution: this inspired the confidence of the petty, and in part, the middle bourgeoisie. That is why the masses 'rallied to the banner of the Communist Party' (same source).

Why did sections of the masses followed the Communist Party? It was mainly a question of consciousness and illusions in the reformist policies of the CP leaders amongst less developed sections of the working class.

As Trotsky explained 

"Only gradually, only on the basis of their own experience through several stages can the broad layers of the masses become convinced that a new leadership is firmer, more reliable, more loyal than the old. To be sure, during a revolutionary process, a weak party can explode into a powerful force provided it understands the course of the revolution and possesses steeled cadres. But such a party must be available prior to the revolution inasmuch as the process of educating cadres requires a considerable period of time and the revolution does not afford this time" (same source).

France 1968

The International Socialist Movement majority use the example of 1968 to try to justify the idea that reformist illusions are either not inevitable or not particularly important. They state "The working class does of course pass through periods when its consciousness is reformist. It also passes through stages when it is ready to take to the road of revolution and the passage from one to the other can take place with lightening speed, as in France in 1968" (paragraph 146).

This is exactly the point. The masses do pass through 'stages' in their consciousness as the comrades themselves admit. However, it is one thing for a revolutionary situation to unfold and the masses to enter the road of revolution. It is entirely a different question - as France 1968 demonstrated - for the masses to seize and maintain power. To achieve this objective the existence of a revolutionary party is necessary.

The support for the French CP in 1968 represented a stage of reformist illusions amongst sections of the working class. The International Socialist Movement majority have demagogically tried to ridicule this idea by quoting from "France 1968 - Month of Revolution" by Clare Doyle.

Alan McCombes has argued (at the all-members' meeting in Scotland on 21st May 2000) that the position of the International Secretariat is similar to that of the CP leaders in 1968 - who argued that the French working class did not understand the tasks posed by the revolution or the ideas of socialism. However, the book explains 

"What every worker was searching for was how to forge a socialist programme, whether or not they would give if a name. The Communist Party leaders, the only ones in a position to put the pieces of the puzzle together in the form of a concrete programme, abdicated their responsibility completely. Then, true to past form, they blamed the workers themselves. 

Rene Andrieu, editor of the Communist Party paper, stated to the Morning Star (8 June 1968): 'It is not enough that the main forces of the nation should be in movement - which was the case. It is also necessary to win them to the ideas of socialist revolution. This was not the case for all the ten million workers on strike - even less so for the middle sections particularly the peasants'. 

Here is a finished expression of the Communist Party leaders' pedantry and bureaucratic contempt for the masses who refuse to act according to the proscriptions of these leaders" (p50-51).

If there were no illusions amongst the French working class in the CP leaders, why was their advice listened to by the workers and youth? The main lesson drawn from the book was the absence of the decisive role of a mass revolutionary party.

The Scottish Socialist Party - Reformism and Dialectics.

The International Socialist Movement minority is accused of a metaphysical approach in its analysis of the political make-up of the Scottish Socialist Party. That is to say, the minority view the Scottish Socialist Party membership in a fixed, unchanging way that sees only the part and not the whole connected process.

They say: "Dialectical analysis is a much more sophisticated method of thought which goes beyond the simple labelling of things into rigidly defined categories. Especially when it comes to analysing complex political processes, simply pigeon-holing people into crude categories is not good enough" (paragraph 130). This is supposed to appear a profound statement. However, in reality, they use the term "dialectics" to avoid adopting a clear position, and as they are not applying the real method of materialist dialectics.

Political consciousness in a new party is a complex process and it can change. However, it is possible and necessary to define it at a particular stage. After extolling the virtues of dialectics, the International Socialist Movement majority provides no analysis of the changing process of political consciousness in the Scottish Socialist Party. 

All they have to say on the subject is "People's ideas change and develop, especially when they begin to become active in politics" (paragraph 130). In paragraph 131 they go on to suggest that these changes will, in the longer term, take place only as a result of objective factors.

Yet, characterising the political make-up of the Scottish Socialist Party membership is a vital issue. It will determine what the immediate and medium term tasks are for Committee for a Workers' International members in the Scottish Socialist Party. It will also indicate the prospects for the growth of reformist trends in the Scottish Socialist Party. 

The PC's document avoids giving a precise characterisation of the Scottish Socialist Party because to do so would lead to one conclusion: that there are serious reformist illusions or trends within it. This would confirm the analysis and conclusions of the situation made by the Committee for a Workers' International during the discussion.

The PC has two techniques for characterising the ideological make-up of the membership of the Scottish Socialist Party. The first is to minimise the existence of reformist ideas amongst the Scottish Socialist Party members. The second is to undertake the road of written contortions in an attempt to evade any political characterisation of the Scottish Socialist Party membership whatsoever.

They suggest that this will be clarified by objective processes over a whole historical period. They state, "In the long term, how individuals, organisations and parties develop will be determined by events" (paragraph 131). This reduces the role of the revolutionary organisation to that of a bystander. There is in fact an inter-action between objective factors, including the development of class consciousness, and the intervention of the revolutionary party. 

The PC make one concession about the role of the International Socialist Movement, stating "But in the short-to-medium term the conscious intervention of Marxist forces in a party like the Scottish Socialist Party can be decisive in shaping people's political outlook." (paragraph 131)

It is unclear what the comrades actually mean by this comment. However, in practice they make no conscious, organised intervention. History demonstrates that left to objective developments alone, without the conscious intervention of a mass revolutionary party, the working class will not be able to consolidate power and begin to build socialism internationally.

[Continue...]

Scottish Debate | Home | News | Donate | Join