Internationalism¶
Core Argument¶
This chapter opens by identifying a glaring omission from the conference agenda: the question of international relations, which the author insists is a deliberate evasion by the leadership. The core argument is that the fate of the British working class, the European revolution, and the global proletariat hinges on this issue. The chapter grounds its analysis in elementary Marxism, asserting that both the Second International (betrayer of the workers) and the Third International (degenerated into an instrument of Stalinist foreign policy) are bankrupt. Together, they are held responsible for the debacle of the workers’ movement and the advance of fascism in Europe. The only logical conclusion, the author contends, is the construction of a new International, irreconcilably opposed to reformist and Stalinist distortions, and founded on the tested principles of Marx and Lenin. This is the conception that led to the founding of the Fourth International.
The chapter’s polemical thrust is directed squarely at Fenner Brockway, a leading figure in the ILP. The author quotes Brockway’s article in the New Leader (March 13, 1943), where Brockway argues that a new international will arise spontaneously from the socialist revolution in Europe, and that there is little value in formulating its programme in advance. The author denounces this as “centrism” and a compendium of blunders. Brockway, it is argued, has not understood the real basis of reformism and Stalinism. The revolution by itself solves nothing. The author invokes the defeat of the Spanish Revolution, blaming the POUM (the ILP’s sister party) for its inability to face up to the Stalinists, with the ILP’s approval and support compounding the disaster. This historical example is used to demonstrate that revolutions do not automatically create correct programmes.
The chapter draws heavily on the theoretical context of Bolshevism. It poses a stark analogy: a general staff that refuses to study strategy and tactics, expecting war to create its own organisation, would be unfit to command. So it is in politics. Marxism is the science of socialism; without its broad principles laid down in advance, the writings of the great teachers and the lessons of the past century are in vain. The author’s key claim is that revolutions will succeed only on the tested theories of Bolshevism, or they will fail. The Fourth International is not a product of mere dislike for the Second and Third Internationals, but a preservation of the precious historical heritage of Marx and Lenin, the granite foundation that led to the successful Russian Revolution. The chapter thus argues for the necessity of a revolutionary programme and international organisation prepared in advance, against the passive, spontaneous conception of revolution advocated by Brockway and the centrist current he represents.