[p. 129]
### *The Building of Genuine Mass Marxist Revolutionary Parties to Assure the Victory of the World Socialist Revolution*
The tactic defined by the Third World Congress and later by the Tenth Plenum of the IEC is based in the first instance *on the appreciation of the profoundly revolutionary character of the period and the evolution of the relationship of international forces fundamentally favorable to the revolution.* This is the case despite the orientation and the concrete march of imperialism toward war.
[p. 130]
This orientation and march to war can no longer occur on the basis of the relationship of forces favorable to imperialism because of a series of defeats inflicted on the proletariat and the colonial masses (as was the case before the Second World War).
For this reason the Third World Congress deemed that even the outbreak of war could not now signify a decisive and lasting setback to the class struggle, an act of even temporary strengthening of imperialism, but quite the contrary it would signify its impotence to cope with the rising forces of the world socialist revolution in any other way. The war would carry the class struggle to its paroxysm.
If, despite these conditions and perspectives unfavorable for imperialism, it continues nevertheless its orientation and its march toward war, this is due to its organic inability to deal with its difficulties in any other way; it is due to the historic impasse of imperialism. It is also due to the fact that its essential power resides in American imperialism which, unlike all other imperialist powers, still retains exceptional economic and social vigor (although it is being undermined by more explosive contradictions than ever within a relatively brief period). This strength is quite exceptional from the relative as well as the absolute point of view (in relation to the entire past of capitalism).
Under these conditions of a fundamentally revolutionary period, with the relationship of forces evolving fundamentally in a favorable way for the revolution, despite the orientation and the concrete march of imperialism toward war, the Third World Congress and afterward the Tenth Plenum of the IEC outlined a tactic of *penetration and as total and deep-going an action as possible inside the real mass movement of each country.*
In defining this tactic we have taken account of supplementary considerations which flow at one and the same time from the character of the period, the relationship of forces, the orientation and the march of imperialism toward war and from the effects of this situation on the international working-class movement and upon our subjective forces.
While our strategy, as the only revolutionary Marxist tendency, is the conquest of power by the proletariat and the triumph of the socialist revolution on a world scale, our tactic must take into account the concrete objective and subjective conditions so as to create the most timely and the most effective possible regroupment of conscious revolutionary forces larger than our own, and to form in the fusion with them big Marxist revolutionary parties.
In the final analysis our tactic is aimed at the creation of such revolutionary parties which are indispensable for the rapid and complete victory of the world socialist revolution.
But we envisage their creation concretely as part of the process of the movement of the class itself in each country, in the course of its maturing politically through its concrete experience, which will be assisted on the one side by the favorable objective conditions of the period, and on the other side by our own participation in the real class movement, with the aid of our program, ideas and our activity.
We neither can nor do we wish to leap over the stages, which are fixed for each working class partly by the specific characteristics of capitalism of the country (its concrete economic, social and political physiognomy) and the political and organizational traditions of the proletariat, as well as by the character of the period.
We neither can nor do we desire to conquer the political confidence of the class and of its vanguard by in any way remaining outside its mass formations which, regardless of their level of development, express its actual political movement, or by the exclusive means of counterposing to them from the outside our program and our activity (as mere models).
We wish to do more, *we want to fuse in action with the class movement at its present level.* We repeat: *In action* and not *in program.*
On the contrary, in the sphere of program, ideas, political line, this work of the Trotskyists among the masses, among their movements and their many formations, should be more clearly defined and strictly demarcated than ever, should be free of all confusion, of any alteration arising from reformist, centrist or Stalinist pressures.
The present mass work of the Trotskyists (the only work which genuinely deserves this name) would have no meaning if the Trotskyists who are now organized on a world scale in a single international party, the Fourth International, and in separate organizations as national sections of the Fourth International in each country, did not preserve to the highest degree their theoretical and political principles, did not constantly develop their Marxist revolutionary line and did not find the means, regardless of the mass work they are carrying on, to express and to openly defend through their organs and appropriate publications, the complete program and line of revolutionary Marxism, of Trotskyism, of the Fourth International.
The principal difficulty in the past of the workers' movement, including that of the Leninist beginnings of the Third International, consisted in rooting out the doctrinaire sectarianism among truly revolutionary Marxist tendencies which opposed or in any way resisted complete and unreserved participation in the real mass movement.
But in general, the principal difficulty in the history of the workers' movement on the plane of tactics has proved to be that of finding a healthy balance between the necessary and absolutely justified rigor in program and the genuinely Marxist revolutionary line of the vanguard on the one side, and its activity among the masses which should be free of all sectarianism as well as all recourse to bureaucratic command on the other.
The most difficult but also the most necessary rule to carry out for the existence, the development and the final triumph of the revolutionary Marxist tendency is that of acting completely within the class, completely with the class, by constantly and at every stage of this close connection giving expression as the vanguard to the general, historic and conscious interests of the class as a whole.
It is no exaggeration to declare that with the tactic we have worked out at the Third World Congress and which we are now applying that our movement is in the process of applying this rule with a comprehension never before equaled in the history of the entire working-class movement.
We take the class as it is in each country, with its peculiarities, we study its natural movements, we discern in them the progressive features, and we adopt our tactic accordingly.
[p. 131]
The form matters little to us; the class content often deformed, concealed, latent or even potential, is, however, of decisive importance. But to discover this requires a high level of political maturity of which our movement has generally given proof.
Thus we are, for example, the only ones who have been able to correctly analyze the character of the numerous movements of the exploited masses in the colonial and semi-colonial countries through which their political maturity necessarily develops; and far from ignoring or condemning them, we have accorded them all the importance they deserve, and, if such should be the case, integrating our forces within them and following from within the development of the masses to a higher level (this is the case whether we are dealing with the progressive content of Peronism insofar as it is an anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist movement of the masses, of the Bolivian MNR, of Ibanism in Chile, or of the Vietminh Resistance Movement, etc.).
We also are the only ones who have understood and deliberately chosen as our principal sphere of work in the class, the movement and the formations influenced either by a reformist leadership, or by a Stalinist leadership, in those countries where the principal movement of the class is now under such influence.
As regards these above-mentioned types of work, our corresponding tactic toward them was determined not only by the mass character of these movements and formations, but above all by the consideration that these movements and formations under reformist or Stalinist influence would not be able to escape from this influence in the present conjuncture, in the absence of any perspective for a general and lasting compromise, and as long as the "cold war" would continue and the perspective of an early war would remain valid.
The chronic crisis of these movements and formations, which has its roots in the fundamental contradictions between the radical, even revolutionary aspirations of the masses, and the opportunist, treacherous policy of their leadership, far from being overcome, will tend to become more acute. But it will remain an internal crisis since in the opinion of the masses it is necessary to face the perspective of a general and decisive and relatively early showdown united in the ranks of the big traditional organizations.
Moreover, we said, that the reformist or Stalinist leaderships of the important mass movements and formations would be obliged to avoid moving clearly or fundamentally against the prevailing current, to relatively radicalize their policy (in relation to their previous course) in this objective atmosphere. This factor will contribute to preventing the crisis from taking a centrifugal organizational form that would lead to important splits and give rise to important regroupments outside these movements and formations.
All of this has been amply confirmed by the development of all mass organizations, reformist as well as Stalinist. We cite among the most striking examples in this connection, those of the Labor Party and Bevanism, and that of the French Communist Party, in the light of the crisis that was caused by the Marty-Tillon affair which occurred without any organizational breaks and with the CP regaining its broad influence. Are there any reasons to believe that the recent evolution of the international situation will in any considerable way alter these considerations and these perspectives? None whatever.
The inter-imperialist differences, stirred up by the difficulties which imperialism as a whole is meeting in preparing its counter-revolutionary war, by the fears it feels, as well as by the diplomatic maneuvers of the anti-capitalist states ("Peace" offensives) can hinder, complicate, impede the war plans and affect the time-intervals and the means of unleashing the war, but cannot result in a genuine easing of the situation, in a relatively prolonged "co-existence," in a general and lasting compromise.
The objective basis for that is lacking. For the anti-capitalist states, which are still influenced by the Soviet bureaucracy, the basis of such a compromise consists in "co-existence" on the foundation of the present division of the world. For imperialism — and particularly for the decisive imperialism of the United States — it consists, as a beginning, in the reintroduction of the capitalist system in the colonial revolution as well as in the European "People's Democracies." Thus the climate of the "cold war" will be transformed either into a hot war pure and simple which will become general, or into the isolation and, in the final analysis, the certain defeat of American imperialism by the revolution at home without its recourse to a major international war.
Of these two foreseeable variants resulting from the "cold war" in the next few years, the one that is by far the most probable in practice, and upon which it is still necessary to count, is the unleashing of the counter-revolutionary imperialist war. As of now, this variant becomes *possible* since imperialism, being seriously rearmed, runs the risk of getting caught in a complete economic and social crisis as well as of finding itself faced with a definitively unfavorable relationship of international forces should it hesitate in the next few years to plunge into war.
For this reason, our tactic especially toward mass movements and organizations under reformist or Stalinist influence still remains perfectly valid and necessary.
Following the broad outline of what has been written since the Third World Congress on our tactics, we present in broad form these guiding ideas so as to help in their thorough assimilation by the whole of our movement:
1. The tactic of the International for penetrating the real mass movements is developing in three directions —
a. Independent.
b. Entry into the movements and formations under reformist influence.
c. Entry of a special type into the movements and formations under Stalinist influence.
2. In each case it is only *essentially* such (independent, entrist or entrism of a special type), that is to say, it is the main orientation directed toward the main sphere of work according to the peculiarities of the workers' movement in each country.
The choice of a principal sphere forms an essential part of the conception of our tactics because we are concerned not with putting all possible spheres of work on the same plane and of carrying out our work eclectically, but of *deliberately* choosing a main sphere and of concentrating our maximum forces in it.
Having said that, it is not excluded that minor forces be placed in secondary spheres of work or even in spheres which at a given moment may lead occasionally to rapid and relatively important gains for us (in relation to our present forces).
[p. 132]
3. The tactic consists not only in selecting or being able to choose an essential sphere of work but of elaborating a line of conduct there conforming to the peculiarities of this milieu and corresponding to the numerical and political level of our forces. The tactic should aim at linking us with the masses of this milieu; attempting first of all to establish ourselves as the best militants of this milieu; making ourselves then known as the extreme left-wing elements who are trying to acquire a distinct political physiognomy, little by little, in accord with favorable opportunities and possibilities; and thus *in the long run* making ourselves known as the left tendency par excellence of these circles. If it would be an error to jump prematurely, to act impatiently, in a rigid doctrinaire manner and without tactical finesse, it would be no less dangerous in the long run to become imprisoned in an attitude that fails to distinguish us from the political features of the average political physiognomy of these circles or even of their extreme left-centrist tendencies.
4. Our tactic nowhere aims at transforming the traditional reformist or Stalinist movements and formations as a whole, or as such, into revolutionary Marxist parties.
We continue to consider this eventuality as extremely improbable and we have to guard against sowing any illusions on this subject, even indirectly.
We consider all these movements and formations as *a sphere of work,* as channels through which the majority political movement of the class is now passing, as places that we utilize to make contacts with the class in the present stage of its organization and political consciousness, and nothing more.
We work there in order to activate the politicalization of the class, in order to link ourselves to its most advanced elements, in order to break loose the revolutionary forces (which in any case could only emerge from these circles) which (in accord with still unforeseen tempos and forms) will build the genuine revolutionary Marxist parties of tomorrow.
5. In all those cases where we are active mainly within reformist or Stalinist movements and formations, it is imperative, if not at the beginning at least after a first stage of integration, to envisage and to realize the publication of a genuinely revolutionary, Marxist, Trotskyist periodical which openly defends the full line and program of the Fourth International. Such a periodical should not be confused with periodicals which are not completely Trotskyist which we already publish or which we are attempting to publish particularly within reformist or Stalinist movements and formations. We refer here to the issuance of completely or essentially independent periodicals that we will try to publish and keep alive by our own means (or if possible with the assistance of others who are sufficiently close to a revolutionary Marxist point of view, and are not hostile to Trotskyism).
From the same point of view, the work of thoroughgoing revolutionary, Marxist, Trotskyist education should be considered as a permanent central task of our sections along with the publication of the largest quantity possible of Trotskyist literature (works of Leon Trotsky, pamphlets and books applying our complete line on timely political questions).
6. Our entire tactic acquires its most profound meaning because it is situated within the framework of our revolutionary perspective. We proceed from the appraisal that we are living in a profoundly revolutionary period characterized by a relationship of forces which is developing fundamentally in favor of the revolution and which is moving toward a decisive and final struggle in a relatively brief period (without any practical possibilities of decisive retreat or of a prolonged stand-still) with all the consequences this connotes, which have already been analyzed, on the state of mind of the masses now organized in large formations under reformist or Stalinist influence as well as on the policies of these leaderships. For these reasons we give priority to our concern with and our efforts at rapid and total integration wherever the masses are, together with all the reservations required for our completely independent action where we act as completely independent groups.
If the character of the period, and its consequences within the present working-class movement and its perspectives of development were different, our activity within mass movements and formations under reformist influence and even more within movements and formations under Stalinist influence would not have the same character as we give it today.
For in reality entrist work, or entrism of a special type, acquires its full meaning only when placed within present conditions and perspectives which are such that the masses continue to remain organized in these movements and formations, and within their midst essentially develop their inevitable and speeded-up radicalization and through which they will conduct the first stages of their decisive struggles of tomorrow.
7. The International cannot and does not pretend to indicate in its documents and resolutions all the tactical forms to be followed in every country. This is the work of each national leadership which should be capable of providing a concrete content to the general lines of policy and tactic outlined by the International.
No general indication by the International exempts national leaderships from making the necessary effort to grasp the peculiarities of their own national situation at a given stage and to adjust their tactics accordingly.
* * *
On the basis of all these considerations and after the experiences of the various sections with the tactic outlined by the Third World Congress and the Tenth Plenum, we have now come to a point where it is possible to derive a number of lessons; to better set forth certain features; to single out certain tendencies which, should they fully develop, could prove erroneous in the future; and to get a better view of the future evolution and perspectives of our tactic.
First of all there is the independent work, that is in countries and cases where reformism and Stalinism do not constitute important political forces in the working-class movement and consequently, are not major obstacles to the formation and the development of revolutionary Marxist parties. This category embraces organizations in *Latin America* generally and notably *Bolivia,* the *African colonies, Switzerland, Greece, the United States,* and *Ceylon.* In *Switzerland,* however, a more intense work toward the socialist movement and formations should be seriously contemplated. In *Greece* the present complete illegality as well as the organizational dislocation of the movement under Stalinist influence, determines that the Trotskyists undertake a kind of eclectic independent activity toward any legal or semi-legal formation around which important mass currents are polarized.
[p. 133]
For a number of these organizations essentially independent work does not mean that they can act from now on in a straight line without temporary tactical detours precisely as though they were genuine revolutionary mass parties. Rather, it signifies an orientation toward this end which could be realized without major detours of entrist work in a reformist or centrist organization built up in the meantime. Under certain conditions of development this perspective appears to us as most probable at the present stage and in order to maintain these conditions we throw the very decisive weight of our own action in this direction.
But on the other hand there is little likelihood that, even where reformism and Stalinism do not now constitute major political obstacles, the movement of the political maturing of the masses will develop in a direct line towards its polarization around our present nuclei.
A more or less prolonged activity is necessary which revolves essentially around this or that milieu which at the present stage polarizes the mass movement, regardless of its level.
This applies, for example, to the Peronist movement in *Argentina,* or the Ibanez movement in *Chile,* as well as to other movements of a special type, often still led by the petty bourgeoisie, under a confused revolutionary national democratic program, which at the present stage attract the masses in such countries as *Columbia, Venezuela, Brazil,* several countries of the Middle East and the African colonies.
On the other hand the perspective in the United States that the first wave of mass politicalization may be concretized in the formation of a labor party based on the trade unions naturally still remains essential. In such a case an entrist tactic within this organization by the Trotskyists would be called for.
However in all these cases, the tactic of essentially independent work at the present stage is expressed by the distinct independent existence of the Trotskyist organization with its independent press and its direct political appeals to the masses.
The manner of acting practically as the revolutionary Marxist party of the masses depends on the concrete conditions in each country, on the precise political conjuncture, and naturally on the forces available.
In each concrete case it is necessary to establish a healthy, reasonable balance between objective and subjective possibilities and, in the final analysis, between agitation and propaganda.
So far as Bolivia especially is concerned, where the experience and possibilities of independent work were pushed further than elsewhere with such remarkable and promising success, the main thing to be noted is the following: In all cases where our organizations are called upon by revolutionary developments in their respective countries to actually play from now on their role as genuine mass revolutionary parties, they will only be able to successfully carry out this task to the degree that they succeed in forging a solid organization in struggle which is profoundly rooted among the working class and the poor peasantry.
The conquest of the masses for the revolution cannot be made simply around program and ideas, regardless of how broad the influence of the party is, but through the organization and day-to-day mobilization of the masses by members of the party recruited from their ranks and living in their midst. Strengthening, proletarianizing the party, training new cadres, transforming the entire organization into an instrument of struggle, becomes an essential task in all cases where the quality and the role of the party becomes at a certain moment the condition of victory.
These comments are also valid for the Ceylonese organization and which must knit together its organizational structure, temper itself, proletarianize and politicalize itself.
In the *United States* the Trotskyist organization is now subjected to the effects of an economic situation favorable to the bourgeoisie and from a reactionary political atmosphere, accentuated by the victory of the Republican Administration. This is in sharp and striking contrast with the rest of the world. Its essential task consists in coping with the present difficult stage with the greatest tactical ingenuity while in no way sacrificing its future possibilities. This means that while all possibilities for activity and recruitment should be ingeniously exploited, so as to break out of isolation and stagnation, no matter on how modest a scale (according to conditions of time and place), it should maintain and strengthen its presence within the big trade union organizations, the CIO in particular, in whose crucible there is still being forged the political destiny of the great American masses, and of exploiting therein to the maximum every chance, every possibility of trade union activity, of agitation and of mobilization of the masses even for their most elementary demands or for the extension of trade union organization or of its better functioning.
A healthy, reasonable relationship should be maintained between propagandist and direct agitational activity, work in the trade unions and work in any milieu offering opportunities or contact with advanced elements, and of immediate recruitment. Herein is the test of the ingenuity, the flexibility and the capacities of its leadership.
In regard to the perspectives of development in the United States, if uncertainty can still remain for some time concerning a change in the economic and social conjuncture, which is now favorable to the bourgeoisie that benefits from it, the impasse toward which this bourgeoisie is moving internationally can no longer be placed in a remote future. If the difficulties which American imperialism is now encountering internationally impede its war plans and cause it to hesitate and postpone the unleashing of the war for a period, then economic and social crisis threatens to break out in the United States.
If on the other hand these difficulties plunge Washington into war, the international relationship of forces which is so unfavorable to imperialism will quickly make itself felt with the same results so far as the domestic situation in the United States is concerned: a social crisis of an even more acute character.
[p. 134]
This means that in any case the perspective of impasse toward which American imperialism is now inevitably moving within a relatively brief time interval, as well as the consequences which flow from this, should constantly clarify the orientation of the American organization.
The "These on the American Revolution," adopted by the organization at the end of 1946 have not been invalidated, although they have still to be realized. They constitute an essential document in the programmatic arsenal of the American organization. There should not be the slightest decrease in the unshakeable confidence which all members of the SWP should have in the capacity of the Trotskyist-Bolshevik nucleus, patiently created through long effort in that country, to serve as the basic nucleus of the revolutionary Marxist mass party of tomorrow and to block the road to any centrist non-revolutionary-Marxist, provisional leadership of the masses.
* * *
Regarding work toward movements and formations under reformist influence:
A number of our organizations, among them those in *England, Germany, India, Japan, Canada, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Holland* (and, in perspective, for all our organizations and groups in Scandinavia) have plunged into this work seriously and with remarkable success.
Without succumbing to mere activism or opportunism they are carrying it out on the whole, intelligently and with flexibility.
However, as the first phase of integration in these movements and organizations has been more or less accomplished, it is necessary in all these cases in a general way to soon publish and assure the existence of a completely Trotskyist theoretical organ, that is, one which fully develops our line and which seeks every occasion to mention the name and work of Leon Trotsky, the name, the existence and the program of the Fourth International, and to draw attention to them. Naturally such a publication should not be confused with periodicals which are not fully Trotskyist and are published or will be published inside these movements and in order to promote the work within these movements.
Parallel to this task the publication programs of all these organizations should be developed with the aim of publishing works of our Trotskyist literature in the language of their countries as well as the writings of our national leaders on the problems of the working class movements of their country.
In addition the revolutionary Marxist and Trotskyist education especially of their cadres and members in general should be conceived of as an essential, permanent task which should be carried out by means of classes, schools, seminars, systematic and organized lecture series.
The question of recruitment poses a problem for almost all of these organizations. If this question had to be subordinated at the first stage for the primary task of integration and security, it is also obvious that later on the expansion of work necessitates a larger membership; in any case it cannot be projected, maintained and carried out without augmenting the Trotskyist fraction as such.
The idea of being able to influence and even lead a broad mass movement without a relative increase of the Trotskyist fraction will prove totally inoperative and can give rise to a false conception of entrist work as a whole.
The attention of certain organizations should be drawn to the following special recommendations:
In *England,* the task of our organization is to organize around a lively, timely and completely revolutionary Marxist organ all elements who are now moving actually or potentially from reformism, centrism, Stalinism, toward full revolutionary Marxist positions.
The understanding of these conceptions is being greatly facilitated, and will be even more so in the future by the entire development of the English workers' movement itself which is immersed in the more and more markedly favorable international revolutionary situation.
In *Germany,* the organization should resolve as quickly as possible two important questions: The building of an effective leadership team whose nucleus will be responsible for daily activity, an improved circulation and self-financing (to an increasing degree) of the magazine, the principal medium of Trotskyism in Germany.
In *India* the problem is to put life into the Socialist Party, to root it among the working masses of the country, particularly the organized masses, as well as among the peasant masses by imbuing in it a combative spirit, arming it with a clear line on all important foreign and domestic questions. This will open the real possibility, even an unhoped-for chance, to channelize through it the rising revolutionary mass movement of the country and to block the road to any subsequent progress of the CP or the PSP. "S.A." can contribute enormously to these tasks by taking shape not so much as a discussion organ on eclectic themes but as an instrument for party building centered around the urgent problems of the working-class and peasant movement of the country, and of the problems of the coming Indian revolution.
Regarding work towards movements and mass formations influenced by Stalinism:
We are going through a new experience in this sphere in which the most noteworthy results have been obtained up to now in *France, Italy* and *Vietnam.*
Although work in this sphere began relatively late, with limited forces (especially in France as a result of the split), without sufficient preparation and especially without previous experience in this new field of work, the results obtained up to now have been conclusive and satisfactory.
As was expected, it has already been proved that this work is possible, that it permits a rapid integration of our elements who were previously isolated, into the movement and formations which, in all these countries, polarize by far the majority of the active masses and for the first time permits their transformation into leaders of working-class sectors which are incomparably more important and more promising than any of those in the past.
It is now also proved that the principal difficulties in this sphere of work do not arise so much from obstacles put in the way of our integration by the Stalinist leadership (at least for all our elements who were not known nationally as being among the outstanding Trotskyist leaders). The principal difficulties have rather arisen from the youth of many of our members and especially from inexperience in how to conduct themselves tactically in this new field as well as in real mass work.
[p. 135]
Despite these obstacles, which are primarily of a subjective kind, a large number of our members in these countries have already been able to integrate themselves, to carry out the responsibilities of leadership on different levels, to adjust themselves in their individual conduct. This has also already led to a very perceptible transformation of the general internal atmosphere of our organizations in these countries.
Particularly interesting are the results obtained in trade union work and in the activity of our members in factores; the new tactic permitted them to effectively break out of isolation, to link themselves to broader masses of workers influenced by the Stalinists and to be designated to various trade union posts.
In *Vietnam* our members have easily been able to find their way toward integration into more and more responsible posts within the broad movement of the masses struggling for their national and social liberation.
It was almost inevitable that in the first stage, which aimed at the integration of our members and in their proving themselves the most capable and active members, the activity of the independent sector should have been slowed down.
But everything that has been said pertaining to entrist work within mass movements and formations under reformist influence is even more valid for entrist work of a special type.
Entrist work proper cannot acquire its full significance unless it is constantly clarified by the work of the independent sector. Consequently, the question of establishing a healthy and reasonable relationship between the two sectors is very important and should be constantly reviewed by the leaderships. In particular, publication activity of our organizations carried out through the most frequent possible issuance of their fully Trotskyist papers and magazines, through the publication of Trotskyist books and pamphlets, as well as their broadest distribution possible is a task which cannot be slowed down in any way whatever. On the contrary, it should be consolidated and further developed. Only the outbreak of war would cause a change of such a relationship between the independent and entrist sectors which would be much more marked in the favor of the latter.
In addition, to the degree that entrist work develops and roots our members more deeply in circles influenced by the Stalinists and brings them to positions of higher leadership, they will feel a growing pressure at the same time from these circles which has to be fought by constantly raising the theoretical and political level of our members, and in reality by their transformation into genuine Trotskyist cadres who are completely trained in the programmatic principles, line and perspectives of the International.
Only such a training, only such a transformation of our organizations carrying on entrist work into real cadre organizations can immunize our militants from any corrupting reformist or Stalinist influence.
* * *
The International as a whole is now experiencing the most important progress since its birth. It is in the process almost everywhere of marching along with the real movement of the masses, of distinguishing itself from this movement only as a conscious vanguard, as its revolutionary Marxist conscience.
By persevering on this road the International is preparing within the framework of our precise revolutionary perspectives its definitive triumph.
We reply as follows to those who object that our tactic dissolves us into the various movements and blurs if not effaces the perspectives of the International as such:
The Fourth International was launched after the historic events, culminating in the defeat of the German working class without a struggle before Hitler (1928-33), demonstrated that it was then absolutely illusory to conceive of a revolutionary Marxist theoretical regeneration of the Third International dominated by Stalinism, that is by the ideology of the Soviet bureaucracy.
The launching of the Fourth International was not an arbitrary act, but a necessity which flowed from the logic of the events, which corresponded to the new needs. It represented the clear formulation and the practical defense by fractions of conscious revolutionary Marxist militants on five continents of the program of revolutionary Marxism, which had been betrayed and abandoned by the Stalinists.
This program, moreover, has not remained static, elaborated for all time. On the basis of a number of principles of revolutionary Marxism formulated by Marx and Lenin and then by Trotsky, it is being constantly elaborated, it is developing, it is being enriched by the new revolutionary experiences of the masses and of new world developments. But if it is to remain as such, that is to say, if it is to remain alive, constantly incorporating new elements, it has to exist not only as an intangible text elaborated by this person or that but as a collective theoretical and political activity of a world proletarian revolutionary vanguard effectively participating in the movement and in the real struggles of the masses.
Hence the necessity of the Fourth International is conceived not only as a program but also as an organized vanguard of the international proletariat without which the program runs the risk of remaining a dead-letter and ossifying.
Moreover, the usefulness and the effectiveness in action of limited groups of revolutionary militants should not be minimized even at the present time when they still represent small minorities of the class and of its political formations.
The Fourth International has acted not only as a program, as a living force capable of continuing to elaborate the program of revolutionary Marxism, but also as a political force acting at the present time, spreading correct ideas, catalyzing the revolutionary energies of the class in specific spheres where the entire class can be enlisted, facilitating progress toward genuine revolutionary Marxism on the part of still confused centrist elements in the entire proletarian vanguard.
It suffices to view the daily activity of the sections of the Fourth International throughout the world in the past to perceive the perfect correctness of this appraisal of the role of the Fourth International. We have disseminated correct ideas, we have contributed toward catalyzing the revolutionary energy of the masses at a given stage, in a given country, in given factories, in given trade unions; we have contributed toward facilitating the evolution of confused centrist elements of the vanguard toward revolutionary Marxism (as for example in the results of past entrist work).
[p. 136]
But the role of the Fourth International is not even limited to that. To the degree that the world revolutionary upsurge continues to spread and moves toward the world victory of the proletarian revolution and of socialism, *the program and organization of the International will be validated.*
The world victory of the proletarian revolution and of socialism cannot be conceived as the arithmetical sum of partial victories obtained through *centrist* programs and formations. It will be *the victory of full revolutionary Marxism.*
The objective revolutionary process, the extreme aggravation of the crisis of capitalism, a kind of self-decomposition, can here or there facilitate the seizure of power, the victory even of a centrist party. But the world victory of socialism cannot be conceived of as the effect of partial, conjunctural, exceptional victories of such a type.
In reality the quality of the program, of the ideas, of the leadership of the revolution have to change, have to draw closer to a revolutionary Marxist program and leadership so that the revolution, encompassing more culturally and economically developed regions and masses, can triumph and consolidate itself.
In this sense the evolution toward the world victory of the revolution and of socialism is drawing closer to the Fourth International. It is drawing closer first of all in the sphere of program and ideas. For the program and the ideas of the Fourth International are none other than *those of revolutionary Marxism applied to our epoch.*
Despite empirical waverings and errors, anyone who seriously takes part in the revolution is obliged to more or less come over to this program and these ideas. The development of the colonial revolution and the victory in China in particular is a masterful demonstration of the correctness of the Trotskyist revolutionary Marxist theory of the Permanent Revolution. Thus the Chinese CP has found itself and is now obliged to bend its policy in practice in a manner which approximates the fundamental positions of Trotskyism.
The recent developments in the USSR and the buffer zone since Stalin's death are another masterful illustration of the program and of the ideas of the Fourth International regarding the USSR, the Soviet bureaucracy, the nature and the future of Stalinism.
*We can say that the logic of the international situation, of its development, is Trotskyist, Fourth Internationalist.*
At a higher stage of the world revolution, now inevitable, the conversion of still-confused centrist programs and ideas into genuine revolutionary Marxism, that is to say, into complete Trotskyism, will appear still more clearly. In this sense the inevitable victory of the program and the ideas of the Fourth International is inseparable from the world victory of the revolution.
But what is to be said of the Fourth International as an organization?
Naturally the world victory of the revolution will not be the exclusive work of the present national nuclei of the Fourth International but of their close fusion with broader revolutionary forces. From this fusion there will arise new revolutionary mass parties of tomorrow, as well as a new form of the world party, of the International.
In this organic process, our contribution is simultaneously that of *program, ideas and cadres.* Despite their limited number, the Trotskyist cadres constitute important nuclei, in some places already even decisive ones for the formation of mass revolutionary parties. And this is not only because of their ideas but also and perhaps even more because of their already serious integration into the real mass movement of each country.
Wherever the mass movement is in some way independent, where neither Stalinism nor reformism constitute a major obstacle, the Trotskyists should play and already play (as in Bolivia, in Latin America in general, in Ceylon, etc.) the role of the real revolutionary mass party upon which the victory of the revolution in these countries depends in the next years.
Elsewhere they operate within the real movement of the masses influenced by the reformists or the Stalinists as conscious elements catalyzing both the revolutionary energy of the broad masses and the molecular processes which are at work in the consciousness of the most advanced elements.
Therefore we can say in summary that the role of the Fourth International consists now as in the past in maintaining alive, in constant development, the program and the ideas of revolutionary Marxism, in catalyzing the revolutionary activity of at least certain sectors of the class through the daily activity of its members rooted in the real movement of the masses in each country, in aiding the ideological progress of other and still confused elements of the vanguard so as to bring out from them the broadest revolutionary forces for the building of mass revolutionary Marxist parties in these countries, of leading the struggle from today on in certain countries at the head of the masses for the conquest of power and the victory of the revolution.
Therefore the Fourth International on the plane of program as well as of action appears as the most conscious organized force which will the most effectively contribute to the complete world victory of the revolution and of socialism.
This victory, on the other hand, as it is realized, will identify itself with the victory of the Fourth International.
June 1953