A Letter to James P. Cannon [1]¶
Core Argument¶
In this letter of 27 February 1940, Trotsky addresses James P. Cannon on the eve of an anticipated split within the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) in the United States. The core argument is a strategic one: Cannon and the Majority faction must exhaust every visible possibility for unity before proceeding with a split, not merely for tactical advantage within the national party, but to secure the political and moral authority of the international movement. Trotsky accepts Cannon’s premise that the Minority is preparing a split and that no further conversions are likely. However, he insists that the Majority must first make an “energetic gesture of peace” before the Cleveland convention, precisely because the Minority’s inevitable refusal will then serve as an objective, undeniable fact—not merely a subjective judgement—justifying the break.
Trotsky draws on the chronology of events to make his case. The Minority convention took place on 24-25 February, while the party convention is not until early April. This interval, he argues, provides ample time for three sequential steps: a peace proposal, a public denunciation of the Minority’s refusal, and the publication of a preparatory issue of the New International. The purpose is to convince the other sections of the Fourth International that the Majority exhausted all possibilities for unity. Trotsky reveals that he and two others have already made this proposition to the International Executive Committee, underscoring the need to test every member of that body.
The letter contains a notable polemic, directed not at the Minority but at impatience within the Majority itself. Trotsky warns that this impatience is “not infrequently connected with theoretical indifference.” He rebukes the notion that subjective correctness is sufficient; action must be grounded in “objective facts available to everyone.” The stakes are international: the SWP’s internal crisis has “great international importance,” and the Majority must act in a manner that preserves the credibility of the Fourth International as a whole. The letter thus functions as a disciplined intervention, insisting that revolutionary organisation demands not only correct analysis but also the strategic presentation of that correctness to the wider movement.