Goldman Archive | Trotskyist Writers Index | ETOL Main Page
From The Militant, Vol. VI No. 55, 16 December 1933, p. 3.
Transcribed & marked up by Einde O’Callaghan for the Encyclopaedia of Trotskyism On-Line (ETOL).
As far as the Left Opposition is concerned the necessity for a new Communist party has been accepted and has passed the stage ot discussion. Though the idea of a new party came as a surprise to many members of the L.O., its advisability and necessity became so clear as the discussion developed that practically not a single voice was raised in opposition.
But, having accepted the idea of the necessity of a new party, we are immediately faced with the question: with whom and how to build the party. This question of course was partly involved in the discussion on the necessity of a new party but only incidentally. At present some more or less clear and definite answer must be given. Otherwise there is danger of our wasting valuable effort and energy without achieving any noticeable results.
If we answer the first part of the question – namely, with whom – the answer to the second part – how – will readily follow.
The temptation is to take the easiest road. We want to organize a new party. There are several groups with strong leanings towards Communist principles. Why not enter into a discussion with such groups, win over as many of them as possible to our viewpoint and form the new party? Such a solution has a certain plausibility and, moreover, the path suggested by it presents no serious difficulties
But to depend upon discussion with and winning over of those who claim to be Communists or those who are traveling in that direction for the formation of a new party is to invite sad disappointments.
In the first place, the membership of the various Communist or near-Communist groups in this country is insignificant. So that, even if we should succeed in convincing a good; proportion of that membership of the correctness of our ideas, we would not be much better off than we are at present.
In the second place, the existing Communist and near-Communist groups have definite viewpoints of their own, viewpoints which they have clung to for quite a long time.
It is folly to expect that because we change our position from that of considering ourselves a fraction of the official Communist party to that of a Communist group anxious to build a new party, we should thereby almost immediately succeed in winning these groups over to our point of view. Not so easy as all that.
The only possible method of organizing a new party in the near future on the basis of the existing Communist and near-Communist groups is to permit all groups joining in the formation of a new party to lead a more or less independent life in the new party. This of course is out of the question. Whatever it might be it would not be a Communist party. It may be that some kind of a federation of Communist groups would be advisable as a step towards the formation of a new Communist party. This is exceedingly doubtful but not by any means ruled out altogether. At any rate, it would not be a party. Does it follow then that we should cease discussing questions of principles, and tactics with other groups for the purpose of ironing out differences and winning these groups or some of their members to our viewpoint? Decidedly not! We must merely recognize the limitations involved in such a method and recognizing these limitations emphasize another method which is more difficult but will in the long run yield far greater results.
The turn to a new party means a turn to mass work for the immediate purpose of gathering revolutionary workers for the building of a new party. Needless to say recruiting workers for the building of a new party cannot be successfully accomplished merely by explaining to them the correctness of the theory of permanent revolution in contradistinction to socialism in one country. Winning over workers to our side means participation in the workers’ struggles. It means not only struggle but struggle on a correct basis with correct slogans. It means the gaining of the confidence of the workers in our ability to lead.
The superiority and correctness of our theories can be convincing to the workers through our successful activities in mass work. By this time this proportion should require no argument. A logical presentation of the incorrectness of the theory of socialism in one country, if not accompanied with practical revolutionary work in the trade unions, amongst the unorganized or amongst the unemployed will be met by a mere shrug of the shoulder. Effective work amongst the employed and unemployed workers will make them very sympathetic to the idea of building a new party.
To use comrade Trotsky’s phrase of the two levers, one can say that here are two levers which we must use in preparing the groundwork for the new party. One is the short lever of discussion with those who have already accepted most of the fundamental principles of Communism and with those who are traveling away from the social-democracy towards Communism. The other is the long and more important lever of organizing employed and unemployed workers, participating and leading in their struggles and by such activities winning over new forces with which to build the new party.
A turn to real mass work will be a very valuable training for our members. It will mean that they will no longer confine themselves to the study and discussion of what might be termed purely Communist and international questions. Our members confronted with the task of talking to workers will learn a new language and will concern themselves, in addition to questions of Communist theory, with questions affecting the everyday life of the worker. Our members will learn the intimate connection between international and highly theoretical questions on the one hand and the more immediate problems of the working class.
Goldman Archive | Trotskyist Writers Index | ETOL Main Page
Last updated: 3 January 2016