Socialist First Phase of Communism

Opposing Dualistic Factionalism

*
TIME TO STEP RIGHT BACK TO TAKE ONE NEW STEP FORWARD
*
FOR A NEW INTERNATIONALISM
against
THE INTERNATIONALS OF YESTERDAY

REVOLUTIONARY SOCIAL DEMOCRACY TODAY
for the
Unity of Politically Advanced Workers
in a
United State of Britain

THE PRESENT PERIOD
for a
UNITED STATE OF BRITAIN

Revolutionary Social Democratic
Comsocialist of Britain
comsocialist.com
Development of Revolutionary Social Democracy

Revolutionary Social Democratic
Comsocialist Forums
comsocialistunitedbritain.com
Laying Foundations for the Organisation of Politically Advanced Workers

Revolutionary Social Democratic
Comsocialist Manifesto Debates
comsocialistcomment.com
Developing Ideological Fundamentals for a Party of the Future

THE NEXT PERIOD
for a
REVOLUTIONARY SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC
UNITED STATE OF BRITAIN

Revolutionary Social Democratic
Comsocialist Party of Britain
comsocialistparty.com
Developing Organisation for the Formation of a Party

Revolutionary Social Democratic
Comsocialist United Europe
comsocialisteu.com
Beginning with the Imperialist States
of the
United Kingdom - France – Germany – Italy – Belgium – Netherlands

.
Revolutionary Social Democratic
Comsocialist International Convention
comsocialistinter.com
Beginning with the Imperialist States
of the
United States – United Kingdom - France – Germany – Italy – Belgium – Netherlands

For Revolutionary Social Democracy, the struggle for socialism beyond capitalism
may be mostly national but its vision must always be global.

For Evolutionary Social Democracy, the struggle for socialism within capitalism
can only be chauvinist and its global vision that way also.

*
Comsocialist of Britain
c o m s o c i a l i s t . c o m
*
To comment on Revolutionary Social Democratic Strategy Today, please go to
Page 01
.

.
for the
Unity of Politically Advanced Workers

Reflecting the vision of communist socialist democracy beyond capitalism in 1848,
Revolutionary Social Democracy
has now become the most necessary unifying principle
for the organisation of politically advanced workers in the twenty first century.

Politically and organisationally, Revolutionary Social Democracy functions on the basis of a democratic interrelationship between the higher and the lower.

It is therefore opposed to the tradition of factional democratic centralism which,
in stimulating dualistic factional struggle for the vantage point of a central committee,
makes that committee the central arena for decision making from the top which,
constantly reduces political self reliance and finally results in a, objectively counter revolutionary, impasse of competing factions that ultimately leads to disintegration.

MULTANIMOUS DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM THROUGH CONGRESS
for the
Party of Politically Advanced Workers

CONGRESS CENTRE

Constitutionally and solely empowered, through the elected delegates of the membership, to formulate the policy elements to be incorporated into a general programme of the organisation and necessary decisions on constitution, democratic conduct, political education, and action.

ACTION COMMITTEE

To constitutionally prevent the formation of a authoritarian faction within the Action Committee, it is not entitled to formulate its own general programme for presentation to the Congress Centre.

On the basis of Congress Centre decisions, it administrates, produces publications for the party and leads the party in action.

It is empowered to exercise a casting vote on policies that have not been fully resolved by the Congress Centre.

It is responsible for ensuring the discipline and security of the party and, if necessary and in accordance with adverse objective conditions that may arise, it is required to act as the authority of the Congress Centre.

*
Without multanimous democracy, the advanced workers will not be able to offer revolutionary leadership to the whole of the working class.
Global capitalism will remain free to continue digging its own grave and, environmentally quite possibly, that of humanity too.

To comment on Dualistic Factionalism or Multanimious Democracy, please go to
Page 02
.

Conservative/Labour governmental accord
of the
Imperialist United Kingdom

The national struggle for socialism beyond capitalism in one’s own country is, at the same time, a particular, distinctive part of the international struggle for global socialism beyond capitalism against Inter-Imperialist Globalism

In every state of capitalism, revolutionary social democrats must therefore, first and foremost, settle accounts with the counter-revolutionism of the reformists that are embedded in the labour movement of their state.

In the opening years of the last century, the empires of the modern states of capitalism were in a general crisis and very close to war. At that time, the Social Democratic movement for socialism, in the main, consisted of two antagonistic strategies for socialism – the evolutionary, which was constrained to a socialism within capitalism and, the revolutionary, which was ideologically committed to a socialism beyond capitalism and imperialism.

The organisational demarcation of this antagonism was finally prompted by the decisions of the evolutionary socialists to support their respective states in the 1914-18 inter-imperialist war, with the revolutionaries responding by adopting the title communist in the formation of their own organisations.

However, this clarification of the demarcation, which may have been necessary in the existing circumstances, also allowed the evolutionaries to claim the title of Social Democracy.

Today, with the support of what we now generally refer to as Reformist Social Democracy, the imperialist states are weathering the present general crisis of capitalism through their Inter-Imperialist Globalism which is barely being challenged by a declining, revolutionary socialist movement which has reached a state of disintegration.

In the objective conditions of today, the myriad of sectarian, ‘revolutionary’ internationals collectively create a counter revolutionary confusion that constantly impedes the development of revolutionary social democratic unity in the nation states of capitalism and, in particular, the imperialist states of capitalism.

In Britain, our first task is to expose the ideological character of the Trade Unions UK and their Labour Party UK which, in the first half of the last century supported Inter-Imperialist War as a minority element in Parliament.

And from 1945, the Labour Party UK supported Inter- Imperialist Union, taking a leading role in founding the military wing of NATO which, on the threshold of Africa, might as well be described as the North Atlantic Terrorist Occupations. Its terrorist occupation of the Mediterranean sea and coast was crucially launched by the Labour Party UK leader and prime minister Clement Attlee, when he betrayed the workers and people of Palestine by handing their country over for occupation by ‘Zionists’ at the behest of the United States .

We need, therefore, to stand against the general, anti-imperialism stance of opportunists who seek to divert attention away from the specific responsibility of the Labour Party UK in the crimes of UK imperialism.

Our primary focus must be the national struggle against UK imperialism as a particular, distinctive part of the international struggle against Inter-Imperialist Globalisation.

To comment on Imperialism and Reformism please go to
Page 03

Evolutionary Social Democratic Ideology
of the
The Labour Party of the Imperialist United Kingdom

*
1914

Labour UK lends its ideological support of
INTER-IMPERIALIST WAR
firstly with
Labour Secretary Ramsay MacDonald

(1914 - through the armistice period to 1939-1945}

1920 to 1945
Communist Party of Great Britain

In accordance with the Third International, advances the international ideology of
Revolutionary Social Democracy as Marxism-Leninism and supporting in that the
Left Revisionism of the Stalinist Faction
opposing the
Left Revisionism of the Trotskyist Faction.

*
1945

Labour UK leads in ideological support of
INTER-IMPERIALIST UNION
firstly with
Prime Minister Clement Attlee

(1945 - through anti-soviet cold war period to 1976)

1945 to 1976
‘Stalinists’ and ‘Trotskyists’

To gain popularity within the organised labour movement, certain ‘Stalinists’and ‘Trotskyists’, significantly, inflated the movement’s strength by
claiming that public ownership and welfare, ceded to the working class by the
capitalist state, was mainly due to the struggle of the industrial workers.

*
1976

Labour UK leads in ideological support of
INTER-IMPERIALIST GLOBALISATION
firstly with
Prime Minister James Callaghan

(1976 - Callaghan - Thatcher – Major - Blair - 20o7)
Conservative Government – 18 years. Labour Government – 14 years.

*
PILLARS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM

When the Conservative pillar of our UK political establishment ousted its rival Labour pillar, at the last election to form the Government of the day, one could almost hear the sigh of relief coming from the newly formed Labour Opposition.

With the return of the traditional ‘arch enemy of the working class’ to Government, Left Parliamentary Labour and its allies seem to imagine that this presents yet another opportunity for a ‘business as usual’ fight back for ‘socialism’ in the Trade Unions UK and their Labour Party UK which will, of course, succeed this time round. However, in response to the collapse of ‘revolutionary socialism’ and the general confusion in the labour movement, the Tories are continuing to lose no time in inflicting the maximum damage on what is left of the cohesion and organisation of the working class.

By the time of the forming of the Labour left’s Socialist Campaign Group in 1982, following years of slow growth leading to the stagnation of the Soviet economy in the early 70′s, Inter-Imperialist Globalisation had already been adopted by the leaders of Labour UK and the SCG pathetically responded with a relaunching of the Labour Representation Committee in 2004.

By 1997, Inter-Imperialist Globalisation, which to date totalled around one third of Labour’s 100 year old history of Evolutionary Social Democracy in the UK, was being sold by Tony Blair as New Labour although he was merely following in the footsteps of Callaghan, Thatcher and Major.

However, his egotistical self-belief, his spinning of lies and his war crime excesses, as well as the effects of Inter-Imperialist Globalisation popping the credit bubble, had tarnished Labour’s newfound image but opportunist labourists still persist in denying the history of Globalism by referring to New Labour as a unfortunate abberation on the part of Blair and contrast it to Old Labour from 1945 when Labour UK ousted the Liberals UK from their position as the ‘progressive‘ pillar of the UK political establishment.

The 20th Century of Reformist Social Democracy of the Trade Unions UK and Its Labour Party UK had finally won the day with Blairism.

In this, it is the NHS and the Welfare State that the Labourist Left focus upon, not to Attlee’s leadership in founding NATO and his surrendering of Palestine to Israeli ethnic cleansing, not to Nye Bevan’s support for nuclear proliferation, not to Wilson’s Royal Prerogative to ethnically cleanse Diego Garcia of its indigenous population to make room for a US war base and not to Blair’s terror bombing of Yugoslavia.

After more than 100 years of the Labour Party UK being regarded as the mass party of the working class and and after some 70 years of its sponsors the Trade Unions UK supposedly ‘leading from the front’, the wider unions can and will, necessarily, continue to act in the interests of their members. However, the evolutionary development of the Labour Party UK is such that it cannot go back to the reformist, comfort period of the capitalist welfare state and it cannot go forward on the basis of it’s traditional, social democracy – it can only function like the Liberal party before it or, like its counterpart in the US, the Democratic Party.

(The theoretical concept of the revolutionary potential of the working class for socialism beyond capitalism, for the transitional, lower phase of communism, was brought to it from the outside and, in the latter part of the 19th century was being introduced into it by politically advanced workers of revolutionary social democracy, against opposition from both anarchists and evolutionary social democrats.)

Those who launched the People’s Assembly Against Austerity in the capitalist Guardian are clearly seeking an extension of the 100 year old, reformist leadership in their call for support for the September 2012 TUC Congress resolution, that:
“the trade union movement must continue leading from the front against this uncaring government with a coalition of resistance”.

Unfortunately, with the dualistic, factional disintegration of the revolutionary socialist movement, there is no united revolutionary leadership that can combat the objectively reformist, Coalition of Resistance.

*
To comment on Labour Party 1914 – 1007, please go to
Page 04
.

To fully understand the coalitions in the Britain of today, it is firstly necessary to distinguish between the governmental coalitions or accords that give the two party, capitalist state its permanence and the Party coalitions that are formed to ensure the necessary majority government and minority opposition.

The two party, political system of capitalist democracy is dependent on both of the contending parties being ideologically committed to the exploitation of the working class by the capitalist class. Such a system has no place in the socialism of a working class which has the potential to bring an end to class society in a transition to the classless society of communism.

Historically in Britain, the two party, political system arose from the need for the new ruling class to accommodate the old, exploiting feudal class within its developing capitalist revolution and, from the beginning of the last century, this governmental coalition or accord was Conservative/Liberal,

However, from 1945, along with a measure of agreement by both parties on the need for the refurbishment of industry through a public ownership serving capitalism and a welfare state underpinned by imperialist exploitation that was relatively secure for some 35 years, the Governmental Accord of the British state was Conservative/Labour. This Accord continued, albeit latterly in a neo-liberal form right up to the present day or, perhaps more precisely since 2009, it has continued as the ConLib/Labour, Governmental Accord. Either way, we are most definitely not back to an update of the Conservative/Liberal, Governmental Accord of the pre-war years.

There is a need to recognise this because opportunists in various guises, spread across the Communist, Labour and Socialist movements, are now hard at work struggling to lift the Labour Party UK off its three decade, Inter-Imperialist Globalisation hook.

These oppportunists are putting everything nasty down to the Party coalition of the Conservative and Liberal Party which, being the Government of the day, is destined to try and bring free market globalisation, with all the reforms that favour our ruling, capitalist class over the working class, to a successful conclusion. Well, at least for a while, before those that rule over us create yet another political and economic crisis in order to further exploit those who actually create the wealth from which they profit.

Judging by its actions both before and particularly over the past thirty years odd of Inter-Imperialist Globalisation, if the Labour Party UK had won the last election, it too would have continued to press a free market, globalisation programme upon us although, likely as not, in a time honoured, ‘progressive’ way.

What is more important to remember however, is that governmental accords are the political and organisational form for the exercise of dualistic, government/opposition, bourgeois democracy whether it be of the neo-feudal variety, as with the United Kingdom, or the republican variety, as with the United States. And the capitalist, free press and free television, with its compliant commentators and journalists, persistently peddle the notion that, without an ‘opposition’, there can be no democracy.

Of course, our rulers are only too well aware that in those states where the capitalist class has been overthrown, where the building of some form of socialism can only be, for them, the first national, faltering step in the transition to full internationalism and then a communist society, an ‘opposition’ as such cannot be anything other than a counter revolutionary ‘opposition’ for the return of capitalism.

That is why the battle for socialist, multanimous democracy must begin in the here and now as the central, ideological issue in the development of socialist transition and, in beginning to address this long standing issue, particular attention must surely be given to the role played by the Labour Party UK, the so-called, mass party of the working class in the Governmental Accord of the United Kingdom for almost 70 years now.

To comment on Coalitions and Accords of the United Kingdom please go to
Page 05

Gramsci and the Factions of Today

Gramsci was a leading member of the Communist Party of Italy – a section of the revolutionary social democratic, Third International – which had emerged from the splits of 1921 following a period of ideological struggle inherited from the previous century, firstly, against the reformist ideology of evolutionary social democracy and, secondly, against the revolutionary ideology of anarchism which sought to go directly to communist society.

Gramsci wrote on the need to counterpose the ‘traditional’ distinction of intellectuals as a collective of academic intelligentsia, supposedly neutral, but actually propagating the dominance of capitalist ideology within the capitalist state as a whole, by the education and advancement of working class intellectuals to propagate socialist ideology.

He emphasised the importance of recognising that the differing intellect of individuals is realised, or not, according to differing, objective circumstances and therefore argued for the winning over of ‘traditional’ intellectuals to the working class but, at the same time, to bring forward ‘organic’ intellectuals from the ranks of the politically advanced workers. They would be intellectuals in action, breaking with the tendency towards the separatist elitism of the ‘traditional’ intellectuals. Lenin touched upon this when he insisted that all such differences within a Communist Party should be effaced.

Gramsci began to develop his theories concerning the ‘organic’ intellectual of the working class within the context of the Communist Party of Italy in objective conditions and circumstances that were vastly different from that of today. The mentor of the Russian revolutionary social democratic Party, Lenin, was still it’s leader and the mentors-in-waiting, Stalin and Trotsky, were members of the same Party which, following the success of the revolution, had become accepted as the leading party of the Third International.

However, instead of instituting a political and organisational principal of multanimous democracy that could stimulate the exchange of ideas which was at the heart of Gramsci’s educational thinking, the parties of the Third International – as distinct from the necessarily extreme, level of centralism adopted by the Soviet Union in its struggle to build socialism in one country - clung to Lenin’s formulation for a democratic centralism that banned factions in response to particular circumstances.

Without ensuring the free exchange of ideas, these parties continued with the obscured form of organisational practice in which a ruling faction ensconced within a Central Committee could effectively usurp the role of the Party Congress resulting in yet further overt and covert activities of factions seeking to take over that same vantage point including revisionist factions of both the right and the left.

By the late 30’s, the Stalin faction had introduced a left revisionist, constitutional concept for building not just socialism but communism in one country, while the left revisionist, Trotsky faction had established their Fourth International in opposition to the Third. This was followed much later, in the 50’s, by the legacy of the Stalin faction’s left revisionism being continued through Kruschev and subsequent leaders until it finally gave way to the right revisionism of Gorbachev riding the neoliberal wave of Inter-Imperialist Globalisation.

Gramsci’s observations on the ‘traditional’ intellectuals were very much pertinent to his time. Beginning in the 1970’s, the influx of students from a working class background into an expanding higher education system has dramatically narrowed intellectual differences, so much so that our ruling class seem to have placed the restoration of its ‘traditional’ academia at the centre of its programme for education.

Above all, there is a massive contradiction in considering the work of Gramsci in respect to the working class as a whole, as well as the work of other Marxist thinkers for that matter, inasmuch as Gramsci put forward his thoughts for consideration on the assumption of there being just one legitimate, international leadership of Communist Parties, which included his own Party.

Today, with many ‘communist’ claimants to the leadership of the working class, the work of Gramsci simply cannot be considered in any relevant context, a number of conditions have to be met before such considerations can become a regular educational practice.

In Britain, and this is also applicable to other nation states, a united communist organisation of politically advanced workers needs to be built as the alternative to the present, objectively counter-revolutionary collective of dualistic factions.

And, it will need to be politically organised on the basis of multanimous democracy exercised through circles at both national and community level, to the exclusion of all dualistic factions.

For Multanimous Democracy against Factional Autocracy

For Circles against Factions

*
To comment on Gramsci and the Factions of Today, please go to
Page 06