Stockwe outside No insl Miac ro eran Sad LDHAM: SC sold every Saturda utside Yorkshire Bank. Hign Sir PATES for Winh ettes per wood or £4 por col Incn 0-30 Patent in ne: noon SPARE BOKSI Any books you don t BoPkshop, 328 Upper St, London N BADGES MADE: Glasgow SC LABOUR COMMITTEE ON PALESTINE Saturday November 20th Lambeth Town Hail Delegates from affiliated bodies -eriners (membership available at door f5. unwaged It ano ooservers Conference fee: £2 (unwaged 50p) ere ac ules a anacle DISCUSS the 'Degenerated Revolution'. " cav or ceoate ana olscussion about the new book Workers Power/Irish workers uroup. vebater on: Is Russia Workers State?, The Cuban RevoluПO1. ana castrolsm. 1 ne Theory Structural Assimilation. Sat Nov, Digbeth Civic Hall, Birm119 32m. ICkers ta waged 50p unwaged. IN THE LAST issue of this series we saw how Marx outlined the basis for united action between revolutionaries and the working class in terms of united action. He was prepared to engage in common action for goals. working class even with forces that in their general character were absolutely reactionary. For example, and the Turkish empire when it was a question of blocking This policy of judging the necessity of united action by deeds, and not by the character of the forces involved, was followed by Teve u enes aHLel Marx.
Trotsky showed that it was necessary during the 1930s and the second side the mass murderer and dictator China, Chiang Kai-Shek, against the Japanese invasion of the country.
Recently was necessary to fight on the same sıde øt a war as the Argentinian military dictatorship the Malvinas from British imwclalslll This the revolutionary position of unity action which comes directly from Marx himself.
Russia in 1903 however a quite different iype of criteria for unity in action was introduced. in OG: vision iook place =m0*2 Russiar Marsists Marx posed the need for such a united front he sided with capitalist forces Russian expansion in into Bolsheviks (who remained revolutionaries), and Mensheviks (who late! became reformists and abandoned Marxism).
A Menshevik resolution adopted at the Russian Congress of that year proposed determine unutco acuon HOL nte basis of definite deeds, recardiess of who was car. rying them out, but on the of the basis capitalist forces into two different groups United The first capitalist group were declared to be progressive bourgeois forces with whom united action were considered reactonary and united action with them was deciared impermissible bosition' ci ihe This Mensheviks was t: necome ramous tale cerausc u. LEenin wi MaTty analysis which divided capitalist forces into 'progressive' and reactionary' groupings became the policy of the Communist Parties from Stalin to the present day.
More precisely the Menshevik resolution 1903 declared that united action could be entered into with bourgeois forces that, "clearly and unambiguously declare that in their struggle against the autocr ale governmen they will resolutely side with the Kussiar Icvoll tionaries,' thạt did not, 'include in their programmes any demands running counter to the interests of the working class or the democracy generally, obscuring their political consciousness, and which supported, 'universal, equal, secret suffrage. United action was stated to be correct these progressive bourgeois forces but was rejected with others.
Lenin violently attacked this 1903 resolution and stated that the Menshevik resoimiiuli, questions: 1) The posure of the revolutionary and proletarian' features of all liberal-democratic trends. ana ine neca lo combat these features and 2) the conditions for temporary and partial agreements with any of these trends.' Lenin denounced the resolution because he said, It does not gıve wnal l should •.• all analysis of liberalism.' The resolution the class ColLel of used vague classless terms such as 'democratic' and therefore, 'It does define the class content of Russian liberalism.
This way of posing the question of relations with the bourgeoisie created ll lusions in the capitalist and miseducated thei haracter. Les in said the working class that it was ridiculous to believe that sections of the bourgeoisie resoluteiy side with the revolutionaries even if the That is absurd, and spokesmen ot such a trenc were to 'declare it clearly anambiguous'y the party the preletariat, would be obliged to believe their declarations To be liberal and resolutely side with the revolutionaries -the excludes the other.' As Lenin put it, 'there never have been, nor can there be, liberal-democratic trends which include in programme demands running culle! the terests of the working class and obscuring its (the proletariat's) class consciousness.
Lenin argued like Marx that united action could be entered into with any secuo or une bourecos c lol a definite concrete action aldisu Tsarism. He CI C jected anything which obscured the capitalist class content of 'liberal' or 'democratic" bourgeois forces.
In these differences lay the the «OUROdOR. division between the Bolsheviks Mensheviks in Russia. It later anlu Dolarle nic revolútionaries and reformists on a world scale.
1 In 1903 the Marxists were KUVVE Because bemnocrals wora nas now taken on a different meaning • have replaced it with in ail the quorations Lar:1 s quotes ara ali tron Step orata e Steps Back'.
NEXT Monday, 15 November,
----- pull-quotes -----
i Vites. Tel. 061-682 5130./ local ac- Whats left
ondon NI 2X (Clasgow), PO endu fast.
NATIONAL CONFERENCE
Salery Boksop Dra ge Tera Ce YORK: Community Books, Walm
Same side tos the mihse same
and direc