Friday, September 07, 2012

From The Pens Of Karl Marx And Friedrich Engels-Their Struggles To Build Communist Organizations-The Early Days- The Communist League-Report by the Central Authority to the League (1847)



Click on the headline to link to the Marx-Engels Internet Archives for an online copy of the article mentioned in the headline.

Markin comment:

The foundation article by Marx or Engels listed in the headline goes along with the propaganda points in the fight for our communist future mentioned in other posts in this space. Just below is a thumbnail sketch of the first tentative proceedings to form a communist organization that would become a way-station on the road to building a Bolshevik-type organization in order fight for the socialist revolution we so desperately need and have since Marx and Engels first put pen to ink.
*************
Marx/Engels Internet Archive-The Communist League

A congress of the League of the Just opened in London on June 2, 1847. Engels was in attendance as delegate for the League's Paris communities. (Marx couldn't attend for financial reasons.)

Engels had a significant impact throughout the congress -- which, as it turned out, was really the "inaugural Congress" of what became known as the Communist League. This organization stands as the first international proletarian organization. With the influence of Marx and Engels anti-utopian socialism, the League's motto changed from "All Men are Brothers" to "Working Men of All Countries, Unite!"

Engels: "In the summer of 1847, the first league congress took place in London, at which W. Wolff represented the Brussels and I the Paris communities. At this congress the reorganization of the League was carried through first of all. ...the League now consisted of communities, circles, leading circles, a central committee and a congress, and henceforth called itself the 'Communist League'."

The Rules were drawn up with the participation of Marx and Engels, examined at the First Congress of the Communist League, and approved at the League's Second Congress in December 1847.

Article 1 of the Rules of the Communist League: "The aim of the league is the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, the rule of the proletariat, the abolition of the old bourgeois society which rests on the antagonism of classes, and the foundation of a new society without classes and without private property."

The first draft of the Communist League Programme was styled as a catechism -- in the form of questions and answers. Essentially, the draft was authored by Engels. The original manuscript is in Engels's hand.

The League's official paper was to be the Kommunistische Zeitschrift, but the only issue produced was in September 1847 by a resolution of the League's First Congress. It was First Congress prepared by the Central Authority of the Communist League based in London. Karl Schapper was its editor.

The Second Congress of the Communist League was held at the end of November 1847 at London's Red Lion Hotel. Marx attended as delegate of the Brussels Circle. He went to London in the company of Victor Tedesco, member of the Communist League and also a delegate to the Second Congress. Engels again represented the Paris communities. Schapper was elected chairman of the congress, and Engels its secretary.

Friedrich Lessner: "I was working in London then and was a member of the communist Workers' Educational Society at 191 Drury Lane. There, at the end of November and the beginning of December 1847, members of the Central Committee of the Communist League held a congress. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels came there from Brussels to present their views on modern communism and to speak about the Communists' attitude to the political and workers' movement. The meetings, which, naturally, were held in the evenings, were attended by delegates only... Soon we learned that after long debates, the congress had unanimously backed the principles of Marx and Engels..."

The Rules were officially adopted December 8, 1847.

Engels: "All contradiction and doubt were finally set at rest, the new basic principles were unanimously adopted, and Marx and I were commissioned to draw up the Manifesto." This would, of course, become the Communist Manifesto.
************
Markin comment on this series:

No question that today at least the figures of 19th century communist revolutionaries, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, are honored more for their “academic” work than their efforts to build political organizations to fight for democratic and socialist revolutions, respectively, as part of their new worldview. Titles like Communist Manifesto, Das Kapital, The Peasants Wars In Germany, and the like are more likely to be linked to their names than Cologne Communist League or Workingmen’s International (First International). While the theoretical and historical materialist works have their honored place in the pantheon of revolutionary literature it would be wrong to neglect that hard fact that both Marx and Engels for most of their lives were not “arm chair" revolutionaries or, in Engels case, smitten by fox hunts. These men were revolutionary politicians who worked at revolution in high times and low. Those of us who follow their traditions can, or should, understand that sometimes, a frustratingly long sometimes, the objective circumstances do not allow for fruitful revolutionary work. We push on as we can. Part of that pushing on is to become immersed in the work of our predecessors and in this series the work of Marx and Engels to create a new form of revolutionary organization to fight the fights of their time, the time from about the Revolutions of 1848 to the founding of various socialist parties in Europe in the latter part of the 19th century.
**************
The Communist League-Report by the Central Authority to the League [346]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Written: September 14 1847;
Source: MECW Volume 6, p. 602;
First published: Gründungsdokumente des Bundes der Kommunisten (Juni bis September 1847), Hamburg, 1969;


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brothers: Working Men of All Countries, Unite!
Three months have now passed since the Congress was held and its Circular was dispatched to you; we therefore now send you another report on our activity since then, and give you a summary of the present state of the League.

We regret that we are unable to send you very encouraging news, but we have resolved to tell you the plain truth, be it encouraging or disheartening. Some of you may well think that emphasis should always be placed on the bright side of the situation so that people should not lose heart; we on the contrary are of the opinion that all should know the enormous and diverse difficulties with which we have to contend. Real men will not he deterred by this, but on the contrary spurred on to new activity.

As long as our League is not strongly and firmly established, as long as it fails to intervene effectively in the course of events, our influence will be insignificant. Admittedly we now have a new basis, and in some places people seem to work with new enthusiasm but on the whole we are still far from the position we should have reached long ago. When the Congress Circular was dispatched we hoped we would receive favourable and definite replies to it from all quarters. The Central Authority had enclosed with it an accompanying letter calling attention once more to the points requiring a response and requesting prompt and definite replies.[347]

So far we have only received a definite reply from the Brussels [yesterday we received a letter from Leipzig, for details see below] circle, other places have only acknowledged receipt of the Circular, thanked us for our efforts, made some general comments, and no more.

What is the cause of this negligence and where is it going to lead us? Many German proletarians are anxious to liberate themselves, but, if they do not set about the task more energetically than they have done so far, they will indeed not make much progress. We can’t wait for things to fall into our lap. Many people are hindered in their activity by their mental sluggishness; others talk a great deal but when money contributions are requested they pull long faces, make all manner of excuses and give nothing; others again possess a large share of bourgeois cowardice, see policemen and gendarmes at every turn and never believe it is time to act. It gives one the gripes to see all the goings-on. The majority of the proletarians, and the most active at that — those in Silesia, Saxony, Rhenish Prussia, Westphalia and Hesse have poor or indeed no leadership, at least no communist one.

We therefore call upon all members of our League once more to rise up at last out of their sleep and set to work, and we demand that first of all definite replies to the Congress Circular be sent in so that we can at least know whom we can count upon.

After the Congress was over we sent the Congress Circular, the new Rules a the Communist . Credo’ and an accompanying letter from the Central Authority to ten towns in Switzerland, France, Belgium, Germany and Sweden where we have communities. In addition we sent out from London two authorised emissaries to America, one to Norway, one to Germany and one to Holland. All promised the Central Authority to work to the best of their ability and to set up new communities in the places in which they settled and to put them in touch with us.

In accordance with the resolution adopted at the Congress the League’s new newspaper [Kommunistische Zeitschrift] should have begun to appear in August... and we had been promised articles and also financial support for it; all League members were moreover requested to give all the help they could. Unfortunately here again most promises have been confined to words alone. Apart from the Brussels circle, which for the time being made a monthly allocation of one pound sterling for printing expenses and five francs for propaganda and Brother Heide [Wilhelm Wolff] who sent us an article, we have received nothing so far. The editorial commission, which from one week to the next was being promised the necessary articles, was finally compelled to do everything itself, so as at least to be able to get the specimen issue out. If we do not receive better support in the future than we have received so far, we shall not make any progress here either. In order to set up our printing-press properly, so that besides the League newspaper we can also print leaflets and small pamphlets, we still need another 600 francs. We are not in a position to raise this sum in London alone.

Since the Congress Circular was sent out we have received news from the following places.

Sweden. We received a letter dated Upsala, May 23 from our emissary who travelled to Sweden via Helsingör, crossing the whole country on foot. Here in London, having nothing else, he had filled his kitbag with communist leaflets which he successfully took over the border into Sweden. He writes that in all towns where there are German workers, he called on them in their workshops, distributed our leaflets among them and found their response to our ideas most enthusiastic. Unfortunately, since he did not find any work he was unable to stay in any one place long enough to set up a community. In Stockholm he transmitted to the local community (our communist outpost in the North) the first two circulars from the Central Authority,[349] and his news lent the Brothers there new heart. From Stockholm he went to Upsala, from there on to Gävle, where he worked for a time, and is now on the way to Umei and Tornea. A communist emissary among the Lapps!

A member of the League who arrived in London from Karlskrona informed us: Brother C., who was previously working in Paris and London, has set up communities in W. and there are already over a hundred League members there now. The Brother from Karlskrona gave us C.’s address and we shall be sending him this Circular together with the New Rules and a special appeal for the League members there. From Stockholm we have received a letter dated July 8 saying that our Brothers there are most zealous supporters of our principles. A public attack on communism made by a local priest was countered by a League member, Brother Forsell, in a pamphlet written in Swedish in which he expounded our principles to the people as well a Sweden’s biggest newspaper, the Aftonbladet, also defends communism against the clerics. We were also told in the letter: “The educational society here in Stockholm, which we were formerly able to regard as a gateway to communism has now unfortunately landed in the clutches of the philistines. On the other hand the democratic element within the local Scandinavian society, [350] of which we are all members and which has one of us as President, is pure and unsullied and it is from this society that we recruit our members:” Immediately on receiving this letter we made handwritten copies of the Congress Circular, the Communist Credo and the Rules in Latin characters (since most Swedes cannot read German letters) and then sent them everything by post. We are now waiting for their reply to this dispatch.

Germany. Approximately six weeks ago an emissary from here went to Berlin taking with him letters from us for the Brothers there, and, in order to put new heart into them, exhorting them to be steadfast. He was to spend only about a week there and then travel to Leipzig, from where he was to send us a report. We are expecting news shortly.

The Brothers in Br. acknowledged receipt of our letters and promised to send us a detailed reply in the immediate future, which they have not yet done.

The Brothers in Hamburg acknowledge receipt of our letters and express their regret that the name League of the just has been changed and wish the former name restored: they also inform us that it is not at all to their liking when the supporters of W. Weitling and Grün are exposed to such hostile criticism, as was the case in the Congress Circular. They call for moderation and unity and write: “Whether someone stands one rung higher or lower as regards the main principle, that is no reason for us to persecute him and cause a split, for how do you think we can make an impact if we take such a one-sided approach. We attract all forces who wish for progress and then seek to win them over to our ideas gradually by persuasion.”

We must reply to the Brothers in Hamburg that the reasons for the change in the name notified in the Congress Circular are significant ones and that if no important counter-arguments are put forward, the Central Authority will defend the retention of the name Communist League at the next Congress. This latter name says clearly what we are and what we want, which the previous one did not. League of the just says everything and nothing, but we must be definite. The Hamburg Brothers would do well to read the reasons given in the Congress Circular once more — if they can refute those arguments then we shall agree with them — we have no right to take mere emotions into consideration.

As regards the second point we stress that we are in no way persecuting Weitling’s and Grün’s supporters, but purely and simply representing them in their true colours. It is time we came to our senses and therefore we can no longer waste time on dreamers and system-mongers who have no energy for action — we will drag no corpse along behind us. Grün’s supporters are people who chatter a great deal about equality without knowing what the word means, who criticise everything except themselves, in other words, opinionated men who talk a great deal, but do nothing. We are no elegant bourgeois and therefore do not beat about the bush but say what we think, i. e., call things by their names.

For over ten years moderation, forbearance and unity have been preached in the League and with all this preaching, with all this brotherly love we have accomplished virtually nothing, and last year the League almost collapsed entirely. We must put an end to this; it’ Is wrong to demand that we should spend our whole life on trifles and idle dreams. Our opinion is that 100 active members are better than 1,000 of whom half are indecisive and lukewarm. Instead of looking back and helping the lame to catch up, we march boldly forward, which will probably get others to their feet somewhat more nimbly as well. The Brothers in Hamburg incidentally do not seem to have got very far with their moderation, for they make no allusion to the dispatch of money for propaganda and printing, and as for the League’s newspaper they declare that they are only in a position to take a few copies in view of growing unemployment.

We must make it clear here that every member of the League is bound to take a copy of the newspaper; if he is not able to pay for it, then the community he belongs to must do so for him.

Once more, Brothers, let us not allow all our strength to be undermined through untimely moderation, through lumping together opposing forces and thus become a laughing-stock for the other parties. We can make a powerful impact, if we only have the will, and if we do have the will there is only one thing we need courage! courage! and once again courage! If people are unable or unwilling to go as far as we do — all well and good; if their intentions are honest, we shall not cease to respect them, but when we are called upon to step backwards in order to join up with such people, then we reply: Never!

Not long ago our Brothers in Leipzig wrote that several members who had been intimidated by the somewhat stark terms of the Central Authority’s circular had withdrawn their membership. The others promised to remain loyally united and work to the best of their ability. We can only congratulate the Brothers in Leipzig on having rid themselves of people who lacked the courage to behave as men. The letter which we received from Leipzig yesterday was already written in a quite different and more forceful style than previous letters, which shows that the community there is no longer dogged by indecisiveness.

First of all the community in Leipzig believes that it was necessary to phrase the Credo in terms more scientific and more suitable for all social classes. They suggest an almost complete recast and give their reasons for this. We shall put the suggested changes before the next Congress for discussion. The Central Authority agrees with the majority of the points listed in their letter. The community states further that apart from copies of our newspaper for all the members, they wish to take an extra 12 for distribution. If all communities were to follow the example provided in Leipzig, the League’s newspaper could appear weekly and at half the price. We request that all contributions for propaganda and printing that have been collected should be sent in as soon as possible. We hope that a second community can soon be set up in Leipzig; if this does not however take place this community could adhere to those in Berlin"'; we shall take the necessary steps for this.

From Mn we have received no news, nor do we know any address there, for our correspondent in that town is supposed to have left for Paris. We shall try to restore contact with the communities there as soon as possible.

We were unable to send the Congress Circular to Mainz by post. It was not until four weeks ago that a member from here left for that destination with whom we dispatched everything. Thus we could not have received an answer from there yet. In a letter which we received from the Mainz members some time back we were informed that a second community was about to be set up, which means a circle will be formed. Our Brothers in Mainz are being constantly subjected to police harassment, but this only serves to spur them on to work all the more energetically for our cause. Credit is due to the gallant proletarians in Mainz; if people were as active as that all over Germany, our prospects would be brilliant.

Holland. In Amsterdam an educational society has been set up which is in touch with us and has competent men. Three weeks ago we sent an authorised emissary there to set up a community.[352]

America. The emissary who this spring set out for New York from here paints us a sad picture of the state of the League in the New World. In New York the League had already made remarkable progress when Weitling arrived. and sowed discord there. The meetings were soon the scene of violent disputes and the result was that the whole set-up collapsed. The communities in New York had earlier always been urging us to be moderate and begging us most earnestly to be reconciled with Weitling. After they themselves, a fortnight after Weitling’s arrival, entered into a bitter conflict with him, our correspondents there lost heart to such an extent that they no longer wished to write to us any more so as not to have to reveal the sad state of the League there. This is what the emissary sent to New York writes; in this situation he himself was unable to do anything in New York and has now left for the state of Wisconsin, where he promises to promote our cause to the best of his ability.

In Philadelphia there are still several League members whom we have earnestly begged to set up communities there again. We have instructed the two emissaries who left from here for New York and Philadelphia to do their utmost so that the League may be restored in the above-mentioned places, in accordance with the improved Rules.

France. In Marseilles things are as before. A number of members from Lyons have gone there, promising to do their very best to inject new life into the League.

From Lyons we have received word that the League members are sparing no effort in our work and are discussing the Credo. The Lyons circle endorses the new Rules with the exception of Section VII, concerning conditions of memberships The Lyons members believe it to be unnecessary to demand that new members take an oath for there are countless cases of people taking all manner of oaths and not keeping any of them; attention should be paid mainly to conduct. We call the Lyons members’ attention to the fact that no oath is demanded, but only the new member’s, word of honour. The Lyons members also write:

“Since now in September we are again in a critical position, we beg you to ask the Parisians if they could not spare a few competent members, who would be ready to make a sacrifice for the common cause and settle in Lyons for a time. The old members all want to leave here and we are therefore short of people who can take over the leadership.

“So try to prevent the possibility of this community breaking up.

“As for the newspaper which you will be putting out, we cannot yet stipulate how many copies we can take, because everything will change.

Not a word about money for printing and propaganda.

We urgently request our Brothers in Paris to send a few competent members to Lyons as soon as possible.

From Paris we have been informed that the Rules have been unanimously endorsed there, that the Credo is being discussed in the various communities and that the membership has increased considerably. We have not yet heard anything about the results of their discussions or any news as to whether money is being collected for printing and propaganda. But it must be said to the credit of the Parisians that they recently made significant money contributions by sending a delegate to the Congress.’ and an emissary to Switzerland.’ It unfortunately emerges from a private letter written by a Parisian League member. and handed to the Central Authority, that there are still many people in the Paris communities who have not yet shaken themselves free of Grün’s nonsense and Proudhon’s most strange ideas. Oddly enough, these people, who are members of the Communist League, seem to reject communism; they want equality and nothing else. This inner split also seems to be the reason why we so seldom receive any news from Paris. Proudhon has become such a truly German philosopher that he no longer knows himself what he wants; Grün has made Proudhon’s ideas still more obscure, [353] so it is now clearly impossible to demand that the people who follow these two really know where they are going. We urge Proudhon’s and Grün’s supporters to read Marx’s Misère de la philosophie, which we have heard has already been translated into German.[354] Then they will see that their state where all are equal and which they demand with a great deal of talk and fuss is no different from that of today. This leads people round and round in circles, chasing false ideas, only to end up where they started.

We call upon the Communists in Paris to stand firm together and to work to rid their communities of these false ideas. If Grün’s and Proudhon’s supporters insist on their principles, then, if they wish to remain men of honour, they should leave the League and start working on their own. There is only room for Communists in our League. As long as there are followers of Grün in our communities, neither they nor we can conduct effective propaganda; our forces will be divided and our young people low in spirits; so separation is better than an internal split.[355]

Weitling’s expelled supporters have again sent us a long letter in which they inveigh against us and the Paris communities maintaining that it is they who are the real Communists. At the end of their letter they ask for a reliable address for they have further instructions for us. Yet they make no reference to the fact that they, although in the minority, appropriated the whole Paris League’s treasury which one of them had in his keeping. Such behaviour most certainly accords with their leader’s theory on theft.

We wrote to them in very polite terms saying that we had acted in accordance with our duty and convictions and would also insist on what we considered to be right. Their abuse could not therefore hurt us. We sent them the address they asked for but have not heard anything more from them since.

Switzerland. The Central Authority informed the Brothers in La Chaux-de-Fonds of the imminent arrival of an emissary’ and urged them to work with all their might towards a reorganisation of the League in Switzerland.

The Berne community has of late appeared in a somewhat dubious light. We were informed that they were planning to bring out a communist newspaper, Der Wanderer and our support was requested.

We sent off 25 francs and a remittance for 50 francs to Lausanne and La Chaux-de-Fonds. However, this money was used by the Berne members to print leaflets by Karl Heinzen, who even then had already shown himself to be the bitterest enemy of the Communists. On June 29 we received another letter from Berne which informed us that the Young Germany[356] group were making use of all possible means to work against the Communists in Switzerland and urged us to found a press organ as soon as possible. At the same time they sent us a small leaflet entitled Der deutsche Hunger und die debts Fürsten and asked for voluntary contributions so that the “Kriegsartikel”, “Vorbereitung”, etc., might be more widely distributed. It was stated: “Certain members of the republican party may well have noble intentions, our worthy Heinzen for example, but his hands are tied; he is not the soul of the German republican movement but its right hand for the moment, etc.”

Heinzen attacks the Communists most violently; yet, the Berne community is printing and circulating his pamphlets and seems to be in close touch with him. This appeared to us suspicious and indeed still does so. We do not want to let ourselves be led by the nose; every honest man must hold up his banner for all to see today. So we wrote a serious letter to the Berne community asking for a prompt explanation, but as yet have received no reply.

Our emissary writes from Geneva that our affairs are progressing in a most heartening way there. Two League members succeeded in setting up a community in Geneva this spring. While the emissary was there a second came into being and a third was planned. In addition there is a public society there which is being “ed to train efficient Communists. In Geneva our party seems once again to have found a firm footing, and if our Brothers there continue to work as hard as before, then the Communists in Switzerland will soon be stronger than ever. Weitling’s expelled supporters, our emissary writes, have already sent to La Chaux-de-Fonds several letters full of the most shameful personal insults to several League members and calling upon the local members to join them. However the communities in La Chaux-de-Fonds have not complied With those people’s solicitation and are waiting till our emissary arrives before giving them a final answer. From Geneva the emissary contacted Petersen in Lausanne who still enjoys quite significant influence among the Communists in Switzerland. We hope the former will succeed in winning him over for our movement’.

Weitling’s followers in Paris have sent a certain Hornschuh as their emissary to Switzerland with the money stolen from our League, in order to bring the communities there over to their side. This Hornschuh is at present in Lausanne. Before that he was in London; we therefore know precisely what he is and can assure you that he is quite incapable of any kind of propaganda work. He is a horribly tedious windbag and in other respects worth precious little as well. When he left London he asked his community for a small advance for the journey promising to pay the money back in the very near future. The community granted him 25 francs. Two years have passed since then and Hornschuh, despite frequent reminders, has not paid anything back yet. It is really sad that people like Hornschuh, whose sole purpose is to indulge their laziness and self-conceit, still find opportunities to squander away the proletarians’ hard earned money.

Our emissary is now touring the towns on Lake Geneva and will then visit La Chaux-de-Fonds, etc. He asked us for additional funds to be able to make this journey and we immediately sent him 50 francs, which we were obliged to borrow however, since our resources are exhausted.

Belgium. In Belgium our prospects are good. Since the Congress two circles have been set up in that country; we have not yet established direct contact with the one based in Liège but are expecting letters from them any day.

The Brussels circle is in touch with the Rhenish Prussia people [357] and working most energetically. It has already set up a singing and an educational society[358]; both are led by League members and serve as a preparatory school for the League.

The Rules were adopted in Brussels; however two alterations were proposed for discussion at the next Congress. The first concerns letter (e), Article 3, section 1 and the second — Article 21, Section V.

The Brussels members write: “We hold it for unpolitic to forbid League members to belong to any political or national organisation, since by doing so we deprive ourselves of all opportunities for influencing such organisations.” Further on in connection with Article 21, they add: “If the present period were a more revolutionary one, the whole activity of the Congress would be hindered by this restriction. We recall that in 1794 the aristocrats put the same demand before the Convention, in order to paralyse all action."[359]

We request the communities to consider these proposals more closely and to give their delegates to the next Congress appropriate instructions.

As regards the Communist Credo a good number of important alterations were suggested, which we shall put before the Congress for discussion.

As was mentioned above the Brussels circle allocated 25 francs for printing and has agreed to send 5 francs for propaganda work each month. We call upon the other circles to follow this example as soon as possible.

London. The new Rules were unanimously adopted in London and lively discussion of the Credo is in progress in all communities. The local circle authority will be sending us all suggestions for amendments and additions as soon as the discussions are over. During the last two months a large number of League members have left London but we shall have filled the resulting gaps soon. The educational societies provide us with preparatory schools, whose great benefit makes itself felt more and more with each passing day.

In the London circle a remarkable sense of unity reigns and members are keen to devote all their energies to our cause. In the last six months we have spent here over 1,000 francs for pamphlets, etc., for the journal a postage and printing costs, Congress expenses, emissaries, etc. In addition, each member has to pay threepence a week into the educational society[360] fund and, besides, hardly a meeting goes by without private collections being made for the needy. Over half our members are out of work and in dire straits, which means it is becoming impossible for us to bear all these expenses alone as we have done hitherto. We are therefore forced to request all circles and communities most earnestly to contribute as much as they can and as soon as possible to the complete installation of the League printing-press, continued publication of our paper and propaganda work: at the present moment our resources are completely . exhausted. In the past we always used to send out money as soon as it was requested and so we believe we can rely on you not to leave us in the lurch now.

The specimen number of our League newspaper sells well in London and arouses great interest among the foreigners living here. We have displayed it for sale in several bookshops and newsstands. We have sent copies to all our regular addresses and have another 1,000 still available, so that we shall be able to send off copies wherever they are required.

With this we come to the end of our report on the state of the League and our work; you can judge now for yourselves how things stand and whether the Central Authority has done its duty as the executive body of the League over the last three months.

You will appreciate that although active work is being carried on here and there, as we noted at the beginning of this letter, in general we are still far from the point we should have reached long since. We therefore hope, Brothers, that you will now muster all your strength so that we shall make rapid steps forward and that in the next report we shall be able to give you more encouraging news than has been the case so far.

However, before closing this letter we must ask you to pay particular attention to the following points. We earnestly request that:

1) All circles and independent communities, if it is at all possible, must elect a delegate to the next congress and see to it that he will be able to come to London on November 29 of this year. You know that we were unable to adopt any definitive decisions at the First Congress[361] and that it was thus considered necessary to hold a second one this year. The Second Congress will be most important because it has not only to formulate the Communist Credo but also to determine the final organisation of the League and its press organ and the future pattern of our propaganda work. It is therefore absolutely essential that as many delegates as possible attend this Congress. Brothers! — We hope that you will not shrink from any sacrifices which the fulfilment of your duty may require;

2) All circles and communities, which have not yet made any collections for printing and propaganda work must do so without delay. If everyone contributes something, then we shall be in a position to engage in forceful action. Without money we cannot carry on any propaganda work. Those circles and communities which have already made collections should dispatch the same to us as soon as possible;

3) All circles and communities, which have not yet sent in definite replies to the Congress Circular should do so without delay;

4) All circles and communities, which have not yet informed us how many copies of our newspaper they wish to take should do so at once. In addition they should inform us of the best and most reliable ways of dispatching the paper to their respective localities;

5) All circles and communities should inform us whether communist propaganda is being carried on in their particular region and if so what form it takes;

6) All members of the League should send to the editorial office essays and poems. Several members promised essays for the first issue, as observed earlier, but these promises have not been kept: we can only attribute this to negligence, which definitely ought not to be prevalent in our organisation.

Hoping to receive favourable and definite news from you soon, we greet you in the name and on behalf of the Central Authority.

Karl Schapper, Henry Bauer, Joseph Moll

London, September 14, 1847

P.S. just as this letter was to be printed, letters arrived from our the case so far. emissaries in Germany and Switzerland.

From Germany it was reported that the enthusiasm of our Brothers in Berlin is extraordinary, particularly since the important events there.[362] The government has indeed played straight into our hands. Our principles were made public through the uproar about the Communists, and the people, instead of being scared away by these principles, became enthusiastic for them. The emissary concludes his letter with the words: “Brothers, we can look to the future with confidence-there are efficient men on every side who are championing the just cause.”

The news from Switzerland also sounds highly favourable. The League is organised there and now established in more than ten different localities. Petersen has been won over. The emissary writes: “In La Chaux-de-Fonds and Le Locle I believe we have the best and most devoted members of our League. Their courage is unshakeable.” Bravo, Brothers-forward! Weitling’s expelled followers have been turned away wherever they went. The misunderstanding with the Berne community has been clarified. We now declare that we were unjust towards the Brothers there. They adhere firmly to our principles. We are extremely happy to be able to announce this.

More details will be supplied in the next report.

The Central Authority
Karl Schapper, Henry Bauer, Joseph Moll

London, September 14, 1847

Labor's Untold Story- Bread And Roses- The Heroic Lawrence Textile Strike Of 1912.

Click on title to link to Lucy Parsons Project site for a pro-IWW analysis of the famous Lawrence (Massachusetts) textile strike of 1912. Where the expression "bread and roses" came from. There are other sources with different perspective on this strike so Google on.

Every Month Is Labor History Month

This Commentary is part of a series under the following general title: Labor’s Untold Story- Reclaiming Our Labor History In Order To Fight Another Day-And Win!

As a first run through, and in some cases until I can get enough other sources in order to make a decent presentation, I will start with short entries on each topic that I will eventually go into greater detail about. Or, better yet, take my suggested topic and run with it yourself.

Poem and Song lyrics-"Bread and Roses"

Poem

As we come marching, marching in the beauty of the day,
A million darkened kitchens, a thousand mill lofts gray,
Are touched with all the radiance that a sudden sun discloses,
For the people hear us singing: "Bread and roses! Bread and roses!"
As we come marching, marching, we battle too for men,
For they are women's children, and we mother them again.
Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;
Hearts starve as well as bodies; give us bread, but give us roses!
As we come marching, marching, unnumbered women dead
Go crying through our singing their ancient cry for bread.
Small art and love and beauty their drudging spirits knew.
Yes, it is bread we fight for -- but we fight for roses, too!
As we come marching, marching, we bring the greater days.
The rising of the women means the rising of the race.
No more the drudge and idler -- ten that toil where one reposes,
But a sharing of life's glories: Bread and roses! Bread and roses! Song Lyrics


Song

As we go marching, marching, in the beauty of the day,
A million darkened kitchens, a thousand mill lofts gray,
Are touched with all the radiance that a sudden sun discloses,
For the people hear us singing: Bread and Roses! Bread and Roses!
As we go marching, marching, we battle too for men,
For they are women's children, and we mother them again.
Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;
Hearts starve as well as bodies; give us bread, but give us roses.
As we go marching, marching, unnumbered women dead
Go crying through our singing their ancient call for bread.
Small art and love and beauty their drudging spirits knew.
Yes, it is bread we fight for, but we fight for roses too.
As we go marching, marching, we bring the greater days,
The rising of the women means the rising of the race.
No more the drudge and idler, ten that toil where one reposes,
But a sharing of life's glories: Bread and roses, bread and roses.
Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;
Hearts starve as well as bodies; bread and roses, bread and roses

Thursday, September 06, 2012

One Year Since Occupy Shook the World-How to Win a Better Future for the 99%- U/Mass Boston Event

One Year Since Occupy Shook the World-How to Win a Better Future for the 99%


Tuesday Sept. 11th lpm-3pm Campus Center Rm 2545
-labor donated-

In 2011, movements of ordinary people made a massive impact, from Egypt to Greece to Occupy Wall Street. Come to this discussion to celebrate the achieve­ments of these movements and talk about the way forward for the struggle against the system of the 1%.
socialists

SOCIALIST ALTERNATIVE

Anyone requiring disability-related accommodations, including daietary ac­commodations, should visit www.ada.umb.edu two weeks prior to the event.
For more information call 323 213-7426 or email boston@socialistalternative.org

RALLY IN SUPPORT OF ALLEGED WIKILEAKS WHISTLEBLOWER PRIVATE BRADLEY MANNING AT THE DOWNTOWN BOSTON OBAMA HDQTRS.-Remarks From The Pardon Bradley Manning Rally At Downtown Boston Obama Headquarters-September 6, 2012


RALLY IN SUPPORT OF ALLEGED WIKILEAKS WHISTLEBLOWER PRIVATE BRADLEY MANNING AT THE DOWNTOWN BOSTON OBAMA HDQTRS.

DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6, 2012

TIME: STARTING AT 3:00 PM (People will be leafleting downtown from about 11:00 AM and we will stay until about 5:00 PM so join us anytime you can to show your solidarity.)

PLACE: DOWNTOWN BOSTON OBAMA HEADQUARTERS AT 77 SUMMER STREET (NEAR THE DOWNTOWN CROSSING STOP ON THE RED AND ORANGE LINES)

The Boston Smedley Butler Brigade and the North Shore Samantha Smith Chapter- Veterans for Peace, the Boston Bradley Manning Support Network , Bradley Manning Square Committte of Somerville, Socialist Alternative and other social activists and concerned citizens support the call by the National Bradley Manning Support Network and others to rally nationwide at local Obama headquarters on Thursday September 6, 2012, the day President Obama is scheduled to accept the Democratic Party nomination of president, to call for freedom for alleged WikiLeaks whistleblower, Army Private First Class Bradley Manning. We also will be calling on the president to use his constitutional authority to pardon Private Manning now.

Contact: Al Johnson-Event Coordinator -alfredjohnson34@comcast.net
or Pat Scanlon (VN 69’)-Coordinator, VFP Chapter 9, Smedley Butler Brigade patscanlonmusic@yahoo.com

FREE BRADLEY MANNING-PRESIDENT OBAMA PARDON BRADLEY MANNING NOW!

Check our Facebook event page –Downtown Boston Bradley Manning Support
Rally-September 6th- http://www.facebook.com/events/439879979398064/
**********
Remarks From The Pardon Bradley Manning Rally At Downtown Boston Obama Headquarters-September 6, 2012

Welcome one and all and I am glad you could be here for this important struggle.

The Smedley Butler Brigade of Veterans for Peace proudly stands in solidarity with, and defense of, Private Bradley Manning and his fight for freedom from his jailers, the American military.

Now usually when I get before a mic or am on a march I am shouting to high heaven about some injustice. Recently I was called strident by someone and when it comes to the struggle against this country’s wars, the struggle for social and economic equality, and for freedom for our political prisoners I am indeed strident.

But I am looking for something today something personally important to me and so I will try to lower my temperature a bit- I want, like you, for President Obama to pardon Bradley Manning so I will be nice, or try to be.

Bradley Manning is in a sense the poster person for all of us who have struggled against the wars of the last decade. He stands charged with allegedly leaking information about American war crimes and other matters of public concern to Wikileaks. We, and we are not alone on this, do not see whistleblowing on such activities as a crime but as an elemental humanitarian act and public service.

Private Manning has paid the price for his alleged acts with over 800 days of pre-trial confinement and is now facing life imprisonment for simple acts of humanity. For letting the American people know what they perhaps did not want to know but must know- when soldiers, American soldiers, go to war some awful things can happen and do. He has also suffered torture at the hands of the American government for his brave stand. We have become somewhat inured to foreign national being tortured by the American government at places like Guantanamo and other black hole locales. We have even become somewhat inured to American citizens being tortured and killed by the American government by drones and other methods. But we know, or should know, that when the American government stands accused of torturing an American soldier for not toeing the war line then we private citizens are in serious trouble.



Why does Private Manning need a pardon? Did he give away the order of battle or the table of organization for American military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan? No. Did he give away the design for drones and such weapons? No. He simply blew the whistle on something that is a hard fact of war- war crimes by American soldiers through release of the Collateral Murder tape and what have become known as the Iraq and Afghan War logs. This is what the American government had tried with might and main to cover up. And what needed to be exposed. All talk of bringing democracy, or national building, or having a war to end all wars, and the million other lame excuses for war pale before the hard fact that in the heat of war the real strategy is to kill and burn and let god sort out the innocent from the guilty.

That is what Private Manning exposed. I, and I am sure many other veterans from previous wars who saw or knew of such things and did nothing about it, are glad that such things were exposed. If for no other reason Private First Class Bradley Manning deserves presidential pardon for his service. To insure that event we urge everybody to ramp up their efforts in behalf of Bradley by signing here or online at the Bradley Manning Support Network site the petition to the Secretary of the Army for his release and to call the White House, the telephone number is listed on the flyer we are handing out, and demand that President Obama pardon Private Manning.

Today’s event is the start of our fall campaign of behalf of Private Manning who at this time is expected to go to trial next February. We want to build toward that trial, assuming President Obama (or President Romney) has not pardoned him by then. We have been holding weekly stand-outs in Davis Square in Somerville outside the MBTA Red Line stop Wednesdays from 4:00to 5:00 PM and urge you to join us. Or better yet start a Free Bradley Manning stand-out in your own town square. Thank you

From #Un-Occupied Boston (#Un-Tomemonos Boston)-What Happens When We Do Not Learn The Lessons Of History- The Pre-1848 Socialist Movement-Works of Auguste Blanqui 1866-Manual for an Armed Insurrection

Click on the headline to link to the Occupy Boston General Assembly Minutes website. Occupy Boston started at 6:00 PM, September 30, 2011.

Markin comment:

I will post any updates from that Occupy Boston site if there are any serious discussions of the way forward for the Occupy movement or, more importantly, any analysis of the now atrophied and dysfunctional General Assembly concept. In the meantime I will continue with the “Lessons From History ’’series started in the fall of 2011 with Karl Marx’s The Civil War In France-1871 (The defense of the Paris Commune). Right now this series is focused on the European socialist movement before the Revolutions of 1848.

****
An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend The Occupy Movement And All Occupiers! Drop All Charges Against All Occupy Protesters Everywhere!

********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
A Five-Point Program As Talking Points

*Jobs For All Now!-“30 For 40”- A historic demand of the labor movement. Thirty hours work for forty hours pay to spread the available work around. Organize the unorganized- Organize the South- Organize Wal-Mart- Defend the right for public and private workers to unionize.

* Defend the working classes! No union dues for Democratic (or the stray Republican) candidates. Spent the dough instead on organizing the unorganized and on other labor-specific causes (good example, the November, 2011 anti-union recall referendum in Ohio, bad example the Wisconsin gubernatorial recall race in June 2012).

*End the endless wars!- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S./Allied Troops (And Mercenaries) From Afghanistan! Hands Off Pakistan! Hands Off Iran! U.S. Hands Off The World!

*Fight for a social agenda for working people!. Quality Healthcare For All! Nationalize the colleges and universities under student-teacher-campus worker control! Forgive student debt! Stop housing foreclosures!

*We created the wealth, let’s take it back. Take the struggle for our daily bread off the historic agenda. Build a workers party that fights for a workers government to unite all the oppressed.

Emblazon on our red banner-Labor and the oppressed must rule!

*******************
Works of Auguste Blanqui 1866-Manual for an Armed Insurrection

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: Auguste Blanqui. Instruction pour une prise d'armes. L'Éternité per les astres, hypthèse astronomique et autres textes, Société encyclopédique français, Editions de la Tête de Feuilles. 1972;
Transcribed: for www.marxists.org, by Andy Blunden;
Translated: by Andy Blunden, 2003;
CopyLeft: Creative Commons (Attribute & ShareAlike) marxists.org 2004.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Preliminary
This program is purely military and leaves entirely to the side the political and social question, which this isn’t the place for: besides, it goes without saying, that the revolution must (effectively work against the tyranny of the capital, and) reconstitute society on the basis of justice.

A Parisian insurrection which repeats the old mistakes no longer has any chance of success today.

In 1830, popular fervor alone was enough to bring down a power surprised and terrified by an armed insurrection, an extraordinary event, which had one chance in a thousand.

That was good once. The lesson was learnt by the government, which remained monarchical and counter-revolutionary, although it was the result of a revolution. They began to study street warfare, and the natural superiority of art and discipline over inexperience and confusion was soon re-established.

However, it will be said, in 1848 the people triumphed using the methods of 1830. So be it. But let us not have any illusions! The victory of February [1830] was nothing but a stroke of luck. If Louis-Philippe had seriously defended himself, supremacy would have remained with the uniforms.

The proof is the June days. It is here that one can see how disastrous were the tactics, or rather the absence of tactics of the insurrection. Never had they had such a favourable position: ten chances against one.

On one side, the Government in total anarchy, demoralized troops: on the other, all the workers were solid and almost certain of success. Why did they succumb? Owing to lack of organisation. To account for their defeat, it is enough to analyze their strategy.

The uprising breaks out. At once, in the workers’ districts, the barricades go up here and there, aimlessly, at a multitude of points.

Five, ten, twenty, thirty, fifty men, brought together by chance, the majority without weapons, they start to overturn carriages, dig up paving stones and pile them up to block the roads, sometimes in the middle of a street, more often at intersections. Many of these barriers would present hardly any obstacle to the cavalry.

Sometimes, after the crude beginnings of preparing their defenses, the builders leave to go in the search of rifles and ammunition.

In June, one could count more than sixty barricades; about thirty or so alone carried the burdens of the battle. Of the others, nineteen or twenty did not fire a shot. From there, glorious bulletins made a lot of noise about the removal of fifty barricades, where there was not a soul.

While some are tearing the paving stones from the streets, other small bands are disarming the corps de garde or seizing gunpowder and weapons from the armories. All this is done without coordination or direction, at the mercy of individual imagination.

Little by little, however, a certain number of barricades, higher, stronger, better built, are chosen by defenders, who concentrate there. It is not calculation, but chance which determines the site of these principal fortifications. Just a few, by a kind of military inspiration rather than design, occupy the large intersections.

During this first period of the insurrection, the troops, on their side, gather. The generals receive and study the police reports. They take good care not to let their detachments venture out without unquestionable data, for fear of failure which would demoralize the soldiers. As soon as they have determined the positions of the insurrectionists, they mass the regiments at various points which will constitute from now on the base of their operations.

Both armies are in position. Let us look at their manoeuvres. Here will be laid bare the vice of popular tactics, the undoubted cause of the disaster.

Neither direction nor general command, not even coordination between the combatants. Each barricade has its particular group, more or less numerous, but always isolated. Whether it numbers ten or one hundred men, it does not maintain any communication with the other positions. Often there is not even a leader to direct the defence, and if there is, his influence is next to nil. The fighters do whatever comes into their head. They stay, they leave, they return, according to their good pleasure. In the evening, they go to sleep.

In consequence of these continual comings and goings, the number of citizens remaining at the barricades varies rapidly by a third, a half, sometimes by three quarters. Nobody can count on anybody. From this grows distrust of their capacity to succeed and thus, discouragement.

Nothing is known of what is happening elsewhere and they do not trouble themselves further. Rumors circulate, some black, some rosy. They listen peaceably to the cannons and the gunfire, while drinking at the wine merchants. As for sending relief to the positions under attack, there is not even the thought of it. “Let each defends his post, and all will be well,” say the strongest. This singular reasoning is because the majority of the insurgents fight in their own district, a capital fault which has disastrous consequences, in particular the denunciation by their neighbors, after the defeat.

For with such a system, defeat is certain. It comes at the end in the person of two or three regiments which fall upon the barricade and crush their few remaining defenders. The whole battle is just the monotonous repetition of this invariable maneuver. While the insurrectionists smoke their pipes behind heaps of paving stones, the enemy successively concentrates all his forces against one point, then on to a second, a third, a fourth, and thereby exterminates the insurrection one bit at a time.

The popular fighters do not take care to counter this easy task. Each group awaits its turn philosophically and would not venture to run to the aid of a neighbor in danger. No! “He will defend his post; he cannot give up his post.”

This is how one perishes through absurdity!

When, thanks to such grave faults, the great Parisian revolt of 1848 was shattered like glass by the most pitiful of governments, what catastrophe should we not fear if we begin again with the same stupidity, before a savage militarism, which now has in its service the recent conquests of science and technology: railways, the electric telegraph, rifled cannon, the breech-loading rifles?

For example, something we should not count as one of the new advantages of the enemy is the strategic thoroughfares which now furrow the city in all the directions. They are feared, but wrongly. There is nothing about them to be worried about. Far from having created a danger for the insurrection, as people think, on the contrary they offer a mixture of disadvantages and advantages for the two parties. If the troops circulate with more ease along them, on the other hand they are also heavily exposed and in the open.

Such streets are unusable under gunfire. Moreover, balconies are miniature bastions, providing lines of fire on their flanks, which ordinary windows do not. Lastly, these long straight avenues deserve perfectly the name of boulevard that is given to them. They are indeed true boulevards, which constitute the natural front of a very great strength.

The weapon par excellence in street warfare is the rifle. The cannon makes more noise than effect. Artillery could have serious impact only by the use of incendiaries. But such an atrocity, employed systematically on a large scale, would soon turn against its authors and would be to their loss.

The grenade, which people have the bad habit of calling a bomb, is generally secondary, and subject besides to a mass of disadvantages. It consumes a lot of powder for little effect, is very dangerous to handle, has no range and can only be used from windows. Paving stones do almost as much harm but are not so expensive. The workers do not have money to waste.

For the interior of houses, the revolver and the bayonet, sword, sabre and dagger. In a boarding house, a pike or eight-foot long halberd would triumph over the bayonet.

The army has only two great advantages over the people: the breech-loading rifle and organisation. This last especially is immense, irresistible. Fortunately one can deprive him of this advantage, and in this case ascendancy passes to the side of the insurrection.

In civil disorders, with rare exceptions soldiers march only with loathing, by force and brandy. They would like to be elsewhere and more often look behind than ahead. But an iron hand retains them as slaves and victims of a pitiless discipline; without any affection for authority, they obey only fear and are lacking in any initiative. A detachment which is cut off is a lost detachment. The commanders are not unaware of this, and worry above all to maintain communication between all their forces. This need cancels out a portion of their manpower.

In the popular ranks, there is nothing like this. There one fights for an idea. There only volunteers are found, and what drives them is enthusiasm, not fear. Superior to the adversary in devotion, they are much more still in intelligence. They have the upper hand over him morally and even physically, by conviction, strength, fertility of resources, promptness of body and spirit, they have both the head and the heart. No troop in the world is the equal of these elite men.

So what do they lack in order to vanquish? They lack the unity and coherence which, by having them all contribute to the same goal, fosters all those qualities which isolation renders impotent. They lack organisation. Without it, they haven’t got a chance. Organisation is victory; dispersion is death.

June 1848 put this truth beyond question. What would be the case today? With the old methods, the entire people would succumb should the troops decide to hold out, and they will hold out, so long as they see before them only irregular forces, without direction. On the other hand, the very sight of a Parisian army in good order operating according to tactical regulations would strike the soldiers dumb and make them drop their resistance.

A military organisation, especially when it has to be improvised on the battle field, is no small business for our party. It presupposes a commander-in-chief and, up to a certain point, the usual series of officers of all ranks. Where to find this personnel? Revolutionary and socialist middle-class men are rare and the few that there are fight only the war of the pen. These gentlemen imagine they can turn the world upside down with their books and their newspapers, and for sixteen years they have scribbled as far as the eye can see, without being tired out by their difficulties; with an equine patience, they suffer the bit, the saddle and the riding crop, and never a kick! Damn that! Return the blows? That’s for louts.

These heroes of the inkstand profess the same scorn for the sword as officers for their slices of bread and butter. They do not seem to suspect that force is the only guarantee of freedom; that people are slaves wherever the citizens are ignorant of art of soldiery and give up the privilege to a caste or a corporate body.

In the republics of antiquity, among the Greeks and Romans, everyone knew and practiced the art of war. The professional soldier was an unknown species. Cicero was a general, Caesar a lawyer. By taking off the toga and donning the uniform, they would begin as colonel or captain and would acquit themselves ably. As long as it is not the same in France, we will remain civilians fit to be cut down at mercy of the officer caste.

Thousands of the educated young, working-class and bourgeois tremble under a detested yoke. To break it, do they think of taking up the sword? No! The pen, always the pen, only the pen. Why the one and not the other, as the duty of a republican requires? In times of tyranny, to write is fine, to fight is better, when the enslaved pen remains powerless. Eh bien, no! They publish a pamphlet, then go into prison, but they do not think of opening a manual of military tactics, to learn there in twenty-four hours the trade which constitutes all the power of our oppressors, and which would put in our hands our revenge and their punishment.

But what is the good of these complaints? it is the stupid practice of our time to deplore something instead of doing something about it. Jeremiads are the fashion. Jeremiah poses in all the attitudes, he cries, whips, he dogmatizes, he dominates, he thunders, the plague of all plagues. Let us leave these elegizers, these grave-diggers of freedom! The duty of a revolutionist is the fight, the fight come what may, the fight until death.

Do the cadres lack for the forming of an army? Eh bien! We must improvise them on the ground even, in the course of action. The people of Paris will provide all the elements, former soldiers, ex-national guards. Their scarcity will oblige us to reduce to a minimum the number of officers and NCOs. But no matter. The zeal, the ardor, the intelligence of the volunteers, will make up for this deficit.

The essential thing is to organize. No more of these tumultuous risings, with ten thousand isolated heads, acting at random, in disorder, without any overall design, each in their local area and acting according to their own whim! No more of these ill-conceived and badly made barricades, which waste time, encumber the streets, and block circulation, as necessary to one party as the other. As much as the troops, the Republican must have freedom of his movements.

No useless racing about, hurly-burly, clamoring! Every minute and every step is equally precious. Above all, do not hole up in our own district as the insurrectionists have never failed to do, to their great harm. This mania, after having caused the defeat, facilitates proscriptions. We must cure ourselves of this under penalty of catastrophe.

“Workers of The World Unite, You Have Nothing To Lose But Your Chains”-The Struggle For Trotsky's Fourth (Communist) International -Manifesto of the Fourth International on the Dissolution of the Comintern-June 12, 1943


Markin comment:

Below this general introduction is another addition to the work of creating a new international working class organization-a revolutionary one fit of the the slogan in the headline.

Markin comment (repost from September 2010):

Recently, when the question of an international, a new workers international, a fifth international, was broached by the International Marxist Tendency (IMT), faintly echoing the call by Venezuelan caudillo, Hugo Chavez, I got to thinking a little bit more on the subject. Moreover, it must be something in the air (maybe caused by these global climatic changes) because I have also seen recent commentary on the need to go back to something that looks very much like Karl Marx’s one-size-fits-all First International. Of course, just what the doctor by all means, be my guest, but only if the shades of Proudhon and Bakunin can join. Boys and girls that First International was disbanded in the wake of the demise of the Paris Commune for a reason, okay. Mixing political banners (Marxism and fifty-seven varieties of anarchism) is appropriate to a united front, not a hell-bent revolutionary International fighting, and fighting hard, for our communist future. Forward

The Second International, for those six, no seven, people who might care, is still alive and well (at least for periodic international conferences) as a mail-drop for homeless social democrats who want to maintain a fig leaf of internationalism without having to do much about it. Needless to say, one Joseph Stalin and his cohorts liquidated the Communist (Third) International in 1943, long after it turned from a revolutionary headquarters into an outpost of Soviet foreign policy. By then no revolutionary missed its demise, nor shed a tear goodbye. And of course there are always a million commentaries by groups, cults, leagues, tendencies, etc. claiming to stand in the tradition (although, rarely, the program) of the Leon Trotsky-inspired Fourth International that, logically and programmatically, is the starting point of any discussion of the modern struggle for a new communist international.

With that caveat in mind this month, the September American Labor Day month, but more importantly the month in 1938 that the ill-fated Fourth International was founded I am posting some documents around the history of that formation, and its program, the program known by the shorthand, Transitional Program. If you want to call for a fifth, sixth, seventh, what have you, revolutionary international, and you are serious about it beyond the "mail-drop" potential, then you have to look seriously into that organization's origins, and the world-class Bolshevik revolutionary who inspired it. Forward.
*************
Manifesto of the Fourth International on the Dissolution of the Comintern
June 12, 1943

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adopted: June 12, 1943.
First Published: July 1943
Source:Fourth International, New York, Volume IV, No. 7, July 1943, pages 195-99.
Transcribed/HTML Markup: Daniel Gaido and David Walters, December, 2005
Public Domain: Leon Trotsky Internet Archive 2005. You can freely copy, distribute, display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Marxists Internet Archive as your source, include the address of this work, and note the transcribers & proofreaders above.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Upon the occasion of the burial of the Third International by its murderer Stalin, the Fourth International addresses the workers of the world, and particularly those who have adhered to the Comintern.

Members of the Communist parties! You thought the Comintern was yours, you devoted your lives to it, but you were permitted no voice in deciding its fate. That fact alone should make clear to you that the Comintern was not yours tit all, that you misplaced your devotion, that Stalin and his puppets have betrayed you. On May 22 the Presidium of &e Comintern made public its resolution for dissolution—made it public in order to confront you with the accomplished fact. Less than three weeks later, on June 10, the Presidium announced, in the language of a bankrupt shopkeeper, the appointment of a four-man committee “to wind up the affairs, dissolve the organs and dispose of the staff and property of the Communist International.” By what authority was the Comintern dissolved? Ostensibly, in the few days between May 22 and June 10 a long list of Communist parties had approved the resolution of dissolution. Who really approved it? The so-called Central Committees hand-picked by Stalin and his Presidium, but the membership was not even consulted. Among the parties listed as approving, are those of Germany and occupied Europe. But who could pretend to speak for them within three weeks, except a few degenerate bureaucrats living in Moscow? The bureaucratic method of dissolution showed what the Comintern has really been for nearly two decades— a totalitarian instrument in the hands of a clique alien to the interests of the world proletariat.

The last act of the Comintern, characteristically, was a vicious attack against proletarian internationalism. Every reason given in the resolution for dissolution is reactionary to the core.

Why the Comintern Was Founded

Attempting to conceal the abyss which separates the Comintern of Lenin and Trotsky from the Stalinized Comintern, the resolution is silent on why the International was originally founded. It merely says the International “was founded in 1919 as the result of the political collapse of the overwhelming majority of the old pre-war workers’ parties.” But it dares not recall by a single word what that political collapse actually consisted of: support of the war and of their “own” capitalist governments by the parties of the Second International. The Comintern parties have likewise become supporters of capitalist governments and their war, making necessary the founding of the Fourth International for exactly the same reasons for which the Third International was created. The last Comintern resolution falsifies the origins of the Third International in order to conceal the historical necessity for the Fourth International.

For the same reason the resolution falsifies the aims of the Comintern of Lenin and Trotsky, saying that its “historic role” consisted “in upholding the principles of the working class movement,” helping “vanguard” workers in a “number of” countries to work for “the defense of their economic and political interests and for the struggle against Fascism and war.” In the whole resolution there is not even a mention of socialism, capitalism, or class struggle. Contrast this with the Platform of the Communist International adopted at its Founding Congress in 1919, which stated its purpose as “the conquest of political power” by “the dictatorship of the proletariat” for “the expropriation of the bourgeoisie and die socialization of the means of production.” Likewise the first Article of the Statutes of the Communist International, adopted at its Second World Congress in 1920, read:

"The New International Association of Workers is founded for the purpose of organizing a joint action of the proletariat of different countries, aiming at a single and identical goal, viz, the overthrow of capitalism, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat and of an international republic of soviets which will make it possible completely to abolish classes and bring about socialism, the first stage of communist society.”

All the documents of the first four Congresses of the Communist International—one each year, from 1919 to 1922—are similarly couched in ringing words, for the International under Lenin and Trotsky was in the direct tradition of the Communist Manifesto of Marx and Engels, which proudly proclaimed that “The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims.” Stalin’s resolution of dissolution, like all the Stalinist documents, belongs to an entirely different tradition, alien in spirit and language to everything revolutionary.

In the light of the real origins and internationalist aims of the Comintern of Lenin and Trotsky, one can see clearly how false and reactionary is the claim of the Stalinist resolution that the workers no longer need an International. Already in 1848 Marx and Engels adduced the necessity of the International from the fact that bourgeois society was world-wide in scope and required an international proletarian revolution to overthrow it and replace it by a socialist society. Still more concretely, Lenin and Trotsky declared the necessity of an International which should not be a mere sum of national parties but a single World party with sections everywhere. The unevenness of development of economy and the workers’ movements in the various countries, far from being an argument against internationalism, was one of the main reasons insisted upon by Lenin and Trotsky for the establishment of the Third International. They never tired of stressing the mutual need which the proletariat of advanced capitalist countries and the peoples of the colonies have for each other—the workers of Britain and the masses of India, the U.S. proletariat and the toilers of Latin America, etc.—in their common struggle against the imperialist overlords.

It is against this century-old Marxist principle that the Stalinist resolution declares that “the deep differences in the historical roads of development of each country of the world,” and “the difference in level and rate of their social and political development,” create such “various problems” that their solution “through the medium of some international center would encounter insuperable obstacles.” If these arguments were true, and since the same essential conditions existed in 1919, then the International should never have been founded. But every world is false.

Piling one lie on top of another, the resolution asserts that the International was needed in “the first stages of the working class movement, but it has been outgrown by the growth of this movement” and the dissolution is “taking in-to account the growth and the political maturity of Communist parties and their leading cadres in separate countries.” What a horrible joke! Nobody except the class enemy dreamed of dissolving the International when it was really at its height in 1922, numbering many millions of members in the capitalist world, with great many mass parties in Germany, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Scandinavia, Poland, Yugoslavia, France, etc. Now, when these parties have been destroyed as a result of Stalin’s false policies, when the few parties which still exist have been reduced to marionette impotence with the strings held in the Kremlin, this is called “political maturity"! The cruelest satirist could not have invented a more grotesque formula.

Stalin orders his hireling professors to embellish his crimes with historical precedents from “Marxism.” Even they, however, could not conjure up a “quotation” from Lenin to justify the dissolution. Lenin stood for burying degenerate Internationals by building new ones immediately. Apparently hoping that fewer workers will know the facts about an earlier “precedent,” the resolution adduces “the example of the great Marx” who dissolved the First International “as a result of the matured situation creating mass national working class parties.” The only truthful item in this lie is that the First International was dissolved in 1876. Marx, Engels and its other revolutionary leaders were compelled to dissolve the First International because it had suffered mortal defeat: the objective situation resulting from the crushing of the Paris Commune had paralyzed it, and the internal struggle with anarchists and adventurist elements threatened it with degeneration. It was dissolved, moreover, not in an epoch like the present, when world revolution is on the order of the day, but in the 1870’s, at a time when still-expanding capitalism had before it the perspective of still further development and the socialist movement correspondingly had time for the regrouping of its forces. Nor did the leaders of the First International present its dissolution as a triumph, but honestly called it a defeat. It left the scene beaten but undegenerated, with its banner unsullied and its historical lessons an inspiration to the workers of the world. Far from denying internationalism as Stalin does, Marx and Engels promptly set about gathering the forces to build a new International—a task accomplished within thirteen years by their followers. There is no analogy whatsoever between the clean death of the First International and the tardy burial of the malodorous corpse of the Third International.

The real analogy with Stalin’s action is the shameful death is the Second International in August 1914. As the first imperialist world war was the decisive test of the Second International, so has this war been the acid test of the Comintern. Stalin’s model is not Marx or Lenin but the bankrupt leaders of the Second International, the Kautskys and Plekhanovs. The parallel is inescapable. The “political maturity” claimed for the Comintern is the same kind of political rottenness exhibited by the Second International leaders, whom Lenin called “social-chauvinists’’—socialists in words, chauvinists in deeds. Just as the social-chauvinists pretended to see a basic principled difference between the warring camps in 1914, so the Stalinist resolution of dissolution asserts “a deep dividing line” between the present warring imperialist camps and imposes on the workers in the Anglo-U.S. bloc “the sacred duty” of “national unity’’—that is, the abandonment of the class struggle.

That this treason to the interests of the working class is as black as that of the Second International is obscured, in the eyes of many revolutionary-minded workers, because Stalinism presents it as the way to defend the Soviet Union. These workers, startled into awareness by the dissolution of the Comintern, must now thoughtfully re-examine the basic questions involved.

How to Defend the Soviet Union

The Fourth International stands for the unconditional defense of the Soviet Union. Despite the degeneration wreaked upon it by the Kremlin bureaucracy, the Soviet Union retains as its foundation the nationalized property created by the October revolution. This remaining conquest of the first successful proletarian revolution must be defended by every worker. The real defense of the Soviet Union, however, requires entirely different methods than the false course pursued since 1924 by the Kremlin bureaucracy.

Every serious worker must learn to understand what has happened to the Soviet Union and the Comintern since Lenin’s death. Only then will he grasp completely the fundamental difference between Lenin’s method of defending the Soviet Union and Stalin’s false method which made it possible for Hitler to invade the USSR, lay waste its richest areas, murder the flower of its manhood and, though Hitler should fail, leaves the way open for the “democratic” imperialists to go still further, whether by “peaceful” or war means, toward re-introducing private property.

When the. Second International joined the war-mongers in August 1914, Lenin and his co-workers immediately proclaimed its death as a revolutionary body and the need for a new, Third International. The program of the new International was worked out during the war years, and it was on that program that the October revolution triumphed. This victory, the Bolsheviks understood, was but the first link in the world revolution; without other victorious proletarian revolutions the Soviet Union could not maintain itself indefinitely in capitalist encirclement. Hence the “Declaration of the Rights of the Toiling and Exploited People,” which was the charter of the Soviet Union (until it was replaced in 1936 by the Stalinist “Constitution") established as the “fundamental task” of the new regime “the establishment of a socialist organization of society and the victory of socialism in all countries.” That was Lenin’s method of defending the Soviet Union. The indispensable instrument for that world task was the Third International, officially founded in March 1919.

Irreconcilable struggle against all the capitalists and their reformist agents, their peace and their wars, against their “democracy” and their repressions, for the revolutionary overthrow of all capitalist regimes and their replacement by the dictatorship of the proletariat and the World Federation of Soviet Republics—that, succinctly, was the program of the Third International under Lenin and Trotsky. Its first four Congresses, from 1919 to 1922, gathered together the revolutionary general staff of the entire world. The revolutionary offensive which it led very nearly put an end to the capitalist system in all Europe—that is attested to by the memoirs of the capitalist leaders who have since confessed how nearly they were overwhelmed by the proletarian upsurge. That wave of revolution saved the young Soviet republic.

But by 1923 the revolutionary wave was temporarily thrown back by the capitalists with the aid of the reformists in the labor movement. And before the next wave began, the revolutionary weapon, the Third International, had been blunted beyond use.

The Role of the Stalinist Bureaucracy

It was blunted by a bureaucracy which arose in the Soviet Union. The Soviet bureaucracy was similar to the labor bureaucracies in the capitalist world in its higher standard of living and other special privileges as against the workers, its conservatism, fear and distrust of the workers. Its rise and seizure of power can be attributed in part to the economic and cultural backwardness and poverty of the predominantly agrarian country inherited from Czarism. Above all, however, the bureaucracy was enabled to have its way because of the failure of the European revolution. In the resultant isolation of the first workers’ state in capitalist encirclement, exhausted by years of bloody imperialist and civil war, the Russian workers let the power slip into the hands of a bureaucracy of which Stalin became the spokesman. The bureaucracy entrenched itself by destroying all the democratic instruments—the party, the soviets, the trade unions—leaving only totalitarian caricatures completely in the hands of Stalin and his clique.

The bureaucracy distorted and revised Lenin’s ideas, above all on the international character of the October revolution. In Lenin’s theory socialist construction in Russia and socialist revolution elsewhere formed parts of an organic whole. In its place Stalin advanced the theory of “socialism in one country,” asserting that an isolated socialist society could be built in Russia without the aid of socialist revolutions elsewhere—a theory which is a repudiation of proletarian internationalism.

Fortunately for the future of humanity, Bolshevism did not remain without its defenders. Lenin’s principal co-worker, Trotsky, led the Left Opposition in the Russian Bolshevik Party and the Comintern in struggle against the bureaucracy.

The Left Opposition warned that the Stalinist bureaucracy was transforming the Comintern from an organization of world revolution into a mere instrument of Kremlin foreign policy, a mere border guard of the Soviet Union. Nor would the process stop there. From the bureaucracy’s loss of faith in the ability of the international working class to make the world revolution it was but a step to loss of faith in the ability of the world workers to defend the Soviet Union.

In the light of the dissolution of the Comintern, the workers who have adhered to it should ponder the prophetic words written by Trotsky in 1928 in answer to Stalin’s theory cf “socialism in one country": “If our (Soviet) internal difficulties, obstacles and contradictions, which are fundamentally a reflection of world contradictions, can be settled merely by the ’inner forces of our revolution’ without entering the arena of the world-wide proletarian revolution, then the International is partly a subsidiary and partly a decorative institution, the Congress of which can be convoked once every four years, once every ten years or perhaps not at all.”

The history of the Stalinized Third International is one of uninterrupted catastrophes perpetrated upon the world working class. We can note here only the most terrible landmarks of Stalin’s false policy.

In 1925-1927 came the great Chinese revolution, marching forward to major triumphs over the imperialists and their native puppets. Its real strength came from the workers and peasants who were revolting against all exploiters, both native and imperialist. Stalin desired to weaken imperialism but, with characteristic lack of confidence in the masses, ordered the Chinese Communist Party to subordinate itself to the bourgeois Kuomintang under Chiang Kai-shek. Closer to imperialism than to the Chinese masses or the Soviet Union, Chiang in 1927 reached an agreement with the imperialists and was enabled to carry out a bloody extermination of the militant workers and peasants who had been disarmed By Stalin’s endorsement of Chiang.

In England, Stalin tried to lean on the trade union bureaucrats, with whom he formed the Anglo-Russian Committee of the trade union bureaucracies of the two countries. The British labor bureaucrats were thus enabled to cover themselves with the prestige of the Russian revolution at a time when the British proletariat was rising in a struggle which culminated in the British General Strike of 1926. Using the Anglo-Russian Committee as a shield against the wrath of the workers, the British trade union bureaucrats betrayed the general strike. Even then Stalin insisted upon continuance of the Anglo-Russian Committee. Shortly afterward, when the defeated British working class lapsed into passivity, the British trade union bureaucrats abandoned the Committee which had served their counter-revolutionary purposes.

In Germany, Stalin perpetrated the most terrible defeat of all. Here his lack of confidence in the workers took an “ultra-left” form, beginning in 1929. He launched the theory of “social fascism,” terming the Social Democratic Party and the trade unions it led as the “twin” of fascism, hence “social fascist.” This theory denied the possibility of a united front of the Social Democratic-led workers’ organizations and those of the Communist Party for a common struggle against the rising Nazis. The pseudo-radicalism of this theory, which insisted that all the workers must first submit to the leadership of the Communist Party, actually led to disunity and passivity. The task of the hour, Trotsky warned, was to demand a united anti-Nazi front between the Communist and Social-Democratic parties. Should the Social Democratic leaders refuse, they would be exposed before their own members, who would then turn to the Communist Party. For this advice Trotsky too was dubbed a “social fascist” and the Stalinist leadership persisted on its disastrous course. Only thanks to this false policy was Hitler enabled to take over the country in 1933. The Stalinist leadership capitulated to Hitler, making no attempt, despite six million followers, to strike even such a blow as the socialist workers of Vienna struck against Dolfuss a year later.

The German catastrophe showed that Stalinism bad corrupted the Third International beyond redemption. Until then the Left Opposition led by Trotsky had, though bureaucratically expelled from the Comintern, stood for return to it and reform of it. Now it became imperative to proclaim the need for a new, Fourth International. During the next five years the movement gathered its forces and in 1938 in Paris held the Founding Congress of the Fourth International.

The Comintern Sold to Imperialism

The correctness of the establishment of the Fourth International was demonstrated by the defeats perpetrated by the Stalinist Third International since 1933. Whereas previously Stalin had made opportunist pacts with the Chinese bourgeoisie, the British trade union bureaucracy, etc., now lie sought alliances with the imperialist powers, Stalinism evolved from lack of faith in the ability of the workers into deliberate betrayal of the workers.

One open betrayal after another began with the Stalin-Laval pact of May 1935. Seeking implementation of that pact by direct military collaboration, and similar pacts with Britain and other “democracies,” Stalin wooed them by demonstrating how useful the Comintern could be to the capitalists. In August 1935, after a lapse of seven years, he convened its Seventh (and last) Congress, which ordered the Communist parties to enter Popular Fronts—only the name was new, die policy of class-collaboration and government coalitions was one which revolutionists have always branded as a betrayal of the working class.

The fruits were soon to be seen. In France the Communist Party deputies voted for the capitalist government’s military budget—precisely the act of the German Social Democratic deputies on August 4, 1914 which Lenin had branded as the death-sentence of the Second International. The Stalinist leadership openly joined in breaking the famous sit-down strikes of June 1936—a revolutionary upheaval which should have opened the road to proletarian revolution—with Thorez uttering the classic formula of betrayal: “Comrades, we must know when to call off a strike.” The Stalinists declared the French bourgeois state was a true friend of the Soviet Union, enabling it to crush the workers’ movement precisely because the Stalinists had presented it to the workers as a friend.

In Spain, where the civil war had begun in July 1936, and the workers were fighting back not only on the field of battle but by beginning the social revolution, Stalinism openly showed its counter-revolutionary character. To demonstrate his uses to the “democracies” Stalin constituted himself the guardian of private property in Spain. In return for scanty arms for the Loyalists, Stalin extorted political concessions which enabled the Spanish Communist Party and the GPU to crush the workers’ factory committees, the peasant collectives of Aragon and Catalonia, to assassinate hundreds of Trotskyist, anarchist and socialist militants, and establish a government under Negrin sufficiently “respectable” to meet the approval of the “democracies.” But this process of repression of the Spanish revolution destroyed the morale of the workers and peasants and the Loyalist armies, while winning no arms from the “democracies.” Thus Stalin facilitated the victory of Franco.

Nor did these betrayals gain Stalin his goal. Despite all his groveling, Britain evaded concluding a military alliance. The Stalin-Laval pact was never implemented by military discussions and ended by becoming a dead letter. Thus Stalin’s 1935-1939 policy of wooing the “democracies” collapsed in failure. Now, outraging the anti-fascist sentiments of the workers of the world, Stalin wooed Hitler.

The period of the Stalin-Hitler pact brought the Comintern to new depths of degeneration. Along with grain and oil, its services were sold to Hitler. The Comintern branded its opponents as “imperialists” and “war mongers” while Stalin’s message to Ribbentrop in December 1939 hailed the Hitler-Stalin alliance as “cemented by blood,” presumably the blood shed in their joint partition of Poland. This period or the Comintern is sufficiently characterized by the slogan of the Communist Party of the U.S.A.—’’The Yanks are not coming” —a policy of defeatism without being revolutionary. Blind to the real course of events, the Kremlin bureaucracy flattered the Nazis, Molotov declaring that “A strong Germany is an indispensable condition for a durable peace in Europe.”

This vile policy, in turn, collapsed on June 22, 1941, when Hitler, having completed the conquest of the continent, was able to choose his own moment for invading the USSR. The day before, the Stalinist press was reviling the “war-mongers” who were spreading “rumors” of an impending Nazi invasion.

Overnight the Kremlin’s puppets became again supporters of the “democracies.”

Such is the indisputable record of Stalin and his Comintern. These false policies made possible the plight of the Soviet Union. Bled and impoverished by the Nazi invasion, the USSR, even though Hitler is vanquished, will still be left facing its capitalist “allies,” who are no less opponents of nationalized property than is Hitler.

In the course of its degeneration the Kremlin bureaucracy has hardened into an ossified caste alien to the interests of the Russian and world proletariat. For it there is no turning back to Lenin’s method. The bureaucracy would be one of the first victims of a successful revolution in Europe, for then, freed from the fear of invasion and backed by new workers’ states, the Soviet proletariat would no longer tolerate the totalitarian bureaucracy. The Kremlin will attempt to pursue to the end its policy of wooing and adapting itself to the imperialists.

That is the meaning of the dissolution of the Comintern. It is but the latest episode in the Kremlin’s concessions to the capitalist world. The Communist parties have become the most rabid strikebreakers in England, the United States, Australia, Canada, etc. In India the Stalinists have played openly the role of tool of British imperialism in repressing the revolt of the Indian masses. Stalinist propaganda against Germany, making no distinction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, paves the way for a second and worse Versailles Treaty of imperialist vengeance; and the resolution dissolving the Comintern says not a word in solidarity with the German proletariat. The 20-year Anglo-Soviet pact is predicated on the reconstruction of a capitalist Europe with Stalin’s cooperation. The dissolution of the Comintern is simply another sign by Stalin that he is ready to adapt himself still further to the rule of capitalism.

Like all his previous policies, Stalin’s present “alliance” is a mortal danger to the Soviet Union and leaves the initiative to the irreconcilable imperialist foes of the workers’ state. It enables them to seize the most favorable times for ever-greater demands for economic inroads into the Soviet Union designed to undermine the nationalized property and for a renewed attempt to crush it altogether. Like Stalin’s previous false policies, this one too will collapse under conditions most disadvantageous for the Soviet Union.

What Will Save the Soviet Union?

But neither Stalin’s concessions nor his aid to the imperialist masters can stabilize society in the period which Lenin called the epoch of imperialist wars, colonial revolts and proletarian revolutions. The world is not only ripe but overripe for the transition to socialism. World economy has been ready for the proletarian revolution for thirty years. All the objective conditions indicated by Marx and Lenin exist for the socialist revolution; the only thing that has been lacking is precisely the International which Stalin asserts the workers do not need.

Capitalist society has been in permanent crisis since 1914, having exhausted its potentialities. In its decline capitalism has inflicted upon humanity two world-wide imperialist conflagrations, and in between them innumerable lesser wars and imperialist aggressions against the colonial and semi-colonial peoples. Capitalist degeneration has expressed itself in the scourge of fascism, the most brutal and desperate form of capitalist rule, for the twin purposes of crushing the workers’ organizations at home and launching imperialist adventures abroad.

The terrible fate of Europe, the most civilized of the continents, has shown the price that humanity is paying for the failure to extend the October revolution after the last war. There it is crystal-clear that the continuance of capitalism would inevitably mean a Third World War. Amid the tens of millions of victims, the workers must remember with bitterness the arguments of the Social Democracy and the Popular Front against “bloody” revolution. There is no hope for the physical survival of the peoples except through ending the Balkanization of the continent by establishing the Socialist United States of Europe.

The first wave of revolution in Europe in 1917-1923 aroused the huge populations of the colonial and semi-colonial world—the overwhelming majority of humanity—to enter the political arena and boldly challenge their imperialist enslavers. The coming wave will spread even more quickly to Asia and Africa—the great masses of India are already advancing to meet it.

The events on the other continents will give a decisive impetus to the revolutionary development of the proletai3at in the United States. During the last decade the U. S. proletariat has learned that it is not immune to the evils which afflicted its European brothers. It has witnessed the Europeanization of America—permanent unemployment and hunger in the midst of plenty. The millions of workers who got their first jobs only when war industry mushroomed, and those who survive of the millions who never had jobs before key were put into uniforms, can have no expectations of retuning to anything but a worsened version of the economic crisis since 1929. Stripped of illusions about their own future under capitalism, the American workers in uniform will prove to be no praetorian guard against the European revolution.

These are the revolutionary developments, sure to come, which will save the Soviet Union from capitalist encirclement. It will be saved in spite of Stalinism and against Stalinism.

The Fourth International

The revolutionary wave began in 1917 in spite of the fact that the war had begun with the collapse of the Second International. The war in 1914 only a handful of workers’ leaders had remained true to proletarian internationalism. Their task of digging the workers out from under the ruins of the International and creating a new International may well have seemed insuperable. But history was on the side of this handful.

The collapse of the International caught the workers’ vanguard unawares in 1914. Amid the war they had to begin the new International. This time, however, the revolutionary vanguard was forewarned. On all the continents and in all the principal countries there were established cadres of the Fourth International long before this war began. Everywhere they stood the decisive test of the war and remained firm in their revolutionary internationalism. While the Third International broke its silence during the war only to dissolve itself, and the Second International has given no sign of life, lacking even the energy to bury itself, the Fourth International has spoken out throughout the war, working and preparing for the revolutionary wave that is coming.

As Trotsky correctly predicted at a time when the tiny Fourth International was a subject for jest among the reformist leaders, the critical test of the war has destroyed every International and international grouping except the Fourth International. Nothing and nobody can dissolve this International, the heir of the Communist International of Lenin and Trotsky.

Workers of all lands! Rally to the proud and stainless banner of the Fourth International! We are approaching the fifth year of the second imperialist world war. It is a year certain to outstrip all the others in human slaughter and material devastation. Before it closes, however, the first great battles of the proletarian revolution may already begin. Once again, out of the vast sea of human suffering of war, will arise the unconquerable spirit of the international proletariat determined to complete this time the task begun with the October revolution. The aroused workers will drop like cast-off garments the habits of servitude and dare to make a new world. In struggle the great masses will find in themselves inexhaustible reservoirs of revolutionary fortitude and heroism. In those days, nearer at hand than many of you dream, the cadres of the Fourth International will speedily become transformed into great mass parties leading tens and hundreds of millions in the final conflict. Comrades and fellow workers! Above all else the toiling peoples now need the International to lead them. There is only one International now, the World Party of Socialist Revolution, the Fourth International! Enter its ranks and prepare with it to lead the successful struggle for the world revolution!

The Executive Committee of the World Party of Socialist Revolution (Fourth International)

June 12, 1943

RALLY IN SUPPORT OF ALLEGED WIKILEAKS WHISTLEBLOWER PRIVATE BRADLEY MANNING AT THE DOWNTOWN BOSTON OBAMA HDQTRS. –TODAY SEPTEMBER 6, 2012-2:00 PM


Click on the headline to link to Downtown Boston BM Rally Facebook event page.

RALLY IN SUPPORT OF ALLEGED WIKILEAKS WHISTLEBLOWER PRIVATE BRADLEY MANNING AT THE DOWNTOWN BOSTON OBAMA HDQTRS. –SEPTMEBER 6, 2012-2:00 PM

DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6, 2012

TIME: STARTING AT 2:00 PM (People will be leafleting downtown from about 11:00 AM and we will stay until about 5:00 PM so join us anytime you can to show your solidarity.)

PLACE: DOWNTOWN BOSTON OBAMA HEADQUARTERS AT 77 SUMMER STREET (NEAR THE DOWNTOWN CROSSING STOP ON THE RED AND ORANGE LINES)

The Boston Smedley Butler Brigade and Samantha Smith Chapter- Veterans for Peace, the Boston Bradley Manning Support Network , Bradley Manning Square of Somerville Committee and other social activists and concerned citizens support the call by the National Bradley Manning Support Network and others to rally nationwide at local Obama headquarters on Thursday September 6, 2012, the day President Obama is scheduled to accept the Democratic Party nomination of president, to call for freedom for alleged WikiLeaks whistleblower, Army Private First Class Bradley Manning. We also will be calling on the president to use his constitutional authority to pardon Private Manning now.

Contact: Al Johnson-Event Coordinator -alfredjohnson34@comcast.net
or Pat Scanlon (VN 69’)-Coordinator, VFP Chapter 9, Smedley Butler Brigade patscanlonmusic@yahoo.com

FREE BRADLEY MANNING-PRESIDENT OBAMA PARDON BRADLEY MANNING NOW!

Check our Facebook event page –Downtown Boston Bradley Manning Support
Rally-September 6th- http://www.facebook.com/events/439879979398064/

Call for action at Obama 2012 offices nationwide Sept. 6th during DNC

The Bradley Manning Support Network, Afghans For Peace and SF Bay Iraq Veterans Against the War Call for Nationwide Actions at local Obama Campaign Offices September 6th 2012 during the Democratic National Convention! Free Bradley Manning!

Since Army PFC Bradley Manning’s arrest in May 2010 for allegedly sharing the “Collateral Murder” video and other evidence of war crimes and government corruption with the whistle-blower website WikiLeaks, progressives and human rights activists have been asking, “Why isn’t President Obama stepping in to help Bradley?”

After all, it was President Obama who in May 2011 declared with regards to protests in the Middle East,

“In the 21st Century, information is power; the truth cannot be hidden; and the legitimacy of governments will ultimately depend on active and informed citizens.”

On Thursday, August 16, US military veterans in Portland OR, Oakland CA, and Los Angeles CA, occupied Obama 2012 campaign offices and faxed a letter of demands to the Obama campaign’s central office. Those letters began:

As those who have spent years serving our country, we have faith that as Commander-in-Chief, President Obama will do the right thing in answering our request.

The letter went on to list the following demands:

That President Obama retract and apologize for remarks made in April 2011, in which he said Bradley Manning “broke the law.” Because President Obama is commander-in-chief, this constitutes unlawful command influence, violating Article 37 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and prevents Bradley from receiving a fair trial.

That President Obama pardon the accused whistle-blower, taking into consideration his 800 days of pretrial confinement. UN torture chief Juan Mendez called Manning’s treatment “cruel and inhuman,” as it included nine months of solitary confinement at Quantico despite Brig psychiatrists recommending relaxed conditions.

The Bradley Manning Support Network maintains hope that justice will prevail and that President Obama can be the vehicle of change on this issue, but first he needs to hear loud and clear from veterans and civilians across the country that the American people want amends for the unlawful torture of Bradley Manning, and believe he should be freed.

Organizers of the August 16 West Coast actions are now urging others to join them in a nationwide effort to hold actions at many more local Obama campaign offices on September 6th, the day of candidate’s nomination acceptance speech. We want to share messages of support for Bradley with Obama campaign offices from coast to coast.

Please contact emma@bradleymanning.org for more information about attending and/or organizing an event.

Labor donated

From The Pens Of Karl Marx And Friedrich Engels-Their Struggles To Build Communist Organizations-The Early Days- Works of Frederick Engels 1847-Draft of a Communist Confession of Faith



Click on the headline to link to the Marx-Engels Internet Archives for an online copy of the article mentioned in the headline.

Markin comment:

The foundation article by Marx or Engels listed in the headline goes along with the propaganda points in the fight for our communist future mentioned in other posts in this space. Just below is a thumbnail sketch of the first tentative proceedings to form a communist organization that would become a way-station on the road to building a Bolshevik-type organization in order fight for the socialist revolution we so desperately need and have since Marx and Engels first put pen to ink.
*************
Marx/Engels Internet Archive-The Communist League

A congress of the League of the Just opened in London on June 2, 1847. Engels was in attendance as delegate for the League's Paris communities. (Marx couldn't attend for financial reasons.)

Engels had a significant impact throughout the congress -- which, as it turned out, was really the "inaugural Congress" of what became known as the Communist League. This organization stands as the first international proletarian organization. With the influence of Marx and Engels anti-utopian socialism, the League's motto changed from "All Men are Brothers" to "Working Men of All Countries, Unite!"

Engels: "In the summer of 1847, the first league congress took place in London, at which W. Wolff represented the Brussels and I the Paris communities. At this congress the reorganization of the League was carried through first of all. ...the League now consisted of communities, circles, leading circles, a central committee and a congress, and henceforth called itself the 'Communist League'."

The Rules were drawn up with the participation of Marx and Engels, examined at the First Congress of the Communist League, and approved at the League's Second Congress in December 1847.

Article 1 of the Rules of the Communist League: "The aim of the league is the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, the rule of the proletariat, the abolition of the old bourgeois society which rests on the antagonism of classes, and the foundation of a new society without classes and without private property."

The first draft of the Communist League Programme was styled as a catechism -- in the form of questions and answers. Essentially, the draft was authored by Engels. The original manuscript is in Engels's hand.

The League's official paper was to be the Kommunistische Zeitschrift, but the only issue produced was in September 1847 by a resolution of the League's First Congress. It was First Congress prepared by the Central Authority of the Communist League based in London. Karl Schapper was its editor.

The Second Congress of the Communist League was held at the end of November 1847 at London's Red Lion Hotel. Marx attended as delegate of the Brussels Circle. He went to London in the company of Victor Tedesco, member of the Communist League and also a delegate to the Second Congress. Engels again represented the Paris communities. Schapper was elected chairman of the congress, and Engels its secretary.

Friedrich Lessner: "I was working in London then and was a member of the communist Workers' Educational Society at 191 Drury Lane. There, at the end of November and the beginning of December 1847, members of the Central Committee of the Communist League held a congress. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels came there from Brussels to present their views on modern communism and to speak about the Communists' attitude to the political and workers' movement. The meetings, which, naturally, were held in the evenings, were attended by delegates only... Soon we learned that after long debates, the congress had unanimously backed the principles of Marx and Engels..."

The Rules were officially adopted December 8, 1847.

Engels: "All contradiction and doubt were finally set at rest, the new basic principles were unanimously adopted, and Marx and I were commissioned to draw up the Manifesto." This would, of course, become the Communist Manifesto.
************
Markin comment on this series:

No question that today at least the figures of 19th century communist revolutionaries, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, are honored more for their “academic” work than their efforts to build political organizations to fight for democratic and socialist revolutions, respectively, as part of their new worldview. Titles like Communist Manifesto, Das Kapital, The Peasants Wars In Germany, and the like are more likely to be linked to their names than Cologne Communist League or Workingmen’s International (First International). While the theoretical and historical materialist works have their honored place in the pantheon of revolutionary literature it would be wrong to neglect that hard fact that both Marx and Engels for most of their lives were not “arm chair" revolutionaries or, in Engels case, smitten by fox hunts. These men were revolutionary politicians who worked at revolution in high times and low. Those of us who follow their traditions can, or should, understand that sometimes, a frustratingly long sometimes, the objective circumstances do not allow for fruitful revolutionary work. We push on as we can. Part of that pushing on is to become immersed in the work of our predecessors and in this series the work of Marx and Engels to create a new form of revolutionary organization to fight the fights of their time, the time from about the Revolutions of 1848 to the founding of various socialist parties in Europe in the latter part of the 19th century.
**************
Works of Frederick Engels 1847-Draft of a Communist Confession of Faith

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: MECW Volume 6, p. 92;
Written: by Engels, June 9 1847;
First published: in Gründungsdokumente des Bundes der Kommunisten, Hamburg, 1969.

Editor's Note: From Progress Prublishers.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question 1: Are you a Communist?

Answer: Yes.

Question 2: What is the aim of the Communists?

Answer: To organise society in such a way that every member of it can develop and use all his capabilities and powers in complete freedom and without thereby infringing the basic conditions of this society.

Question 3: How do you wish to achieve this aim?

Answer: By the elimination of private property and its replacement by community of property.

Question 4: On what do you base your community of property?

Answer: Firstly, on the mass of productive forces and means of subsistence resulting from the development of industry, agriculture, trade and colonisation, and on the possibility inherent in machinery, chemical and other resources of their infinite extension.

Secondly, on the fact that in the consciousness or feeling of every individual there exist certain irrefutable basic principles which, being the result of the whole of historical development, require no proof.

Question 5: What are such principles?

Answer: For example, every individual strives to be happy. The happiness of the individual is inseparable from the happiness of all, etc.

Question 6: How do you wish to prepare the way for your community of property?

Answer: By enlightening and uniting the proletariat.

Question 7: What is the proletariat?

Answer: The proletariat is that class of society which lives exclusively by its labour and not on the profit from any kind of capital; that class whose weal and woe, whose life and death, therefore, depend on the alternation of times of good and bad business;. in a word, on the fluctuations of competition.

Question 8: Then there have not always been proletarians?

Answer: No. There have always been poor and working classes; and those who worked were almost always the poor. But there have not always been proletarians, just as competition has not always been free.

Question 9: How did the proletariat arise?

Answer: The proletariat came into being as a result of the introduction of the machines which have been invented since the middle of the last century and the most important of which are: the steam-engine, the spinning machine and the power loom. These machines, which were very expensive and could therefore only be purchased by rich people, supplanted the workers of the time, because by the use of machinery it was possible to produce commodities more quickly and cheaply than could the workers with their imperfect spinning wheels and hand-looms. The machines thus delivered industry entirely into the hands of the big capitalists and rendered the workers’ scanty property which consisted mainly of their tools, looms, etc., quite worthless, so that the capitalist was left with everything, the worker with nothing. In this way the factory system was introduced. Once the capitalists saw how advantageous this was for them, they sought to extend it to more and more branches of labour. They divided work more and more between the workers so that workers who formerly had made a whole article now produced only a part of it. Labour simplified in this way produced goods more quickly and therefore more cheaply and only now was it found in almost every branch of labour that here also machines could be used. As soon as any branch of labour went over to factory production it ended up, just as in the case of spinning and weaving. in the hands of the big capitalists, and the workers were deprived of the last remnants of their independence. We have gradually arrived at the position where almost all branches of labour are run on a factory basis. This has increasingly brought about the ruin of the previously existing middle class, especially of the small master craftsmen, completely transformed the previous position of the workers, and two new classes which are gradually swallowing up all other classes have come into being, namely:

I. The, class of the big capitalists, who in all advanced countries are in almost exclusive possession of the means of subsistence and those means (machines, factories, workshops, etc.) by which these means of subsistence are produced. This is the bourgeois class, or the bourgeoisie.

II. The class of the completely propertyless, who are compelled to sell their labour[70] to the first class, the bourgeois, simply to obtain from them in return their means of subsistence. Since the parties to this trading in labour are not equal, but the bourgeois have the advantage, the propertyless must submit to the bad conditions laid down by the bourgeois. This class, dependent on the bourgeois, is called the class of the proletarians or the proletariat.

Question 10: In what way does the proletarian differ from the slave?

Answer: The slave is sold once and for all, the proletarian has to sell himself by the day and by the hour. The slave is the property of one master and for that very reason has a guaranteed subsistence, however wretched it may be. The proletarian is, so to speak, the slave of the entire bourgeois class, not of one master, and therefore has no guaranteed subsistence, since nobody buys his labour if he does not need it. The slave is accounted a thing and not a member of civil society. The proletarian is recognised as a person, as a member of civil society. The slave may, therefore, have a better subsistence than the proletarian but the latter stands at a higher stage of development. The slave frees himself by becoming a proletarian, abolishing from the totality of property relationships only the relationship of slavery. The proletarian can free himself only by abolishing property in general.

Question 11: In what way does the proletarian differ from the serf?

Answer: The serf has the use of a piece of land, that is, of an instrument of production, in return for handing over a greater or lesser portion of the yield. The proletarian works with instruments of production which belong to someone else who, in return for his labour, hands over to him a portion, determined by competition, of the products. In the case of the serf, the share of the labourer is determined by his own labour, that is, by himself. In the case of the proletarian it is determined by competition, therefore in the first place by the bourgeois. The serf has guaranteed subsistence, the proletarian has not. The serf frees himself by driving out his feudal lord and becoming a property owner himself, thus entering into competition and joining for the time being the possessing class, the privileged class. The proletarian frees himself by doing away with property, competition, and all class differences.

Question 12: In what way does the proletarian differ from the handicraftsman?

Answer: As opposed to the proletarian, the so-called handicraftsman, who still existed nearly everywhere during the last century and still exists here and there, is at most a temporary proletarian. His aim is to acquire capital himself and so to exploit other workers. He can often achieve this aim where the craft guilds still exist or where freedom to follow a trade has not yet led to the organisation of handwork on a factory basis and to intense competition. But as soon as the factory system is introduced into handwork and competition is in full swing, this prospect is eliminated and the handicraftsman becomes more and more a proletarian. The handicraftsman therefore frees himself either by becoming a bourgeois or in general passing over into the middle class, or, by becoming a proletarian as a result of competition (as now happens in most cases) and joining the movement of the proletariat — i. e., the more or less conscious communist movement.

Question 13: Then you do not believe that community of property has been possible at any time?

Answer: No. Communism has only arisen since machinery and other inventions made it possible to hold out the prospect of an all-sided development, a happy existence, for all members of society. Communism is the theory of a liberation which was not possible for the slaves, the serfs, or the handicraftsmen, but only for the proletarians and hence it belongs of necessity to the 19th century and was not possible in any earlier period.

Question 14: Let m go back to the sixth question. As you wish to prepare for community of property by the enlightening and uniting of the proletariat, then you reject revolution?

Answer: We are convinced not only of the uselessness but even of the harmfulness of all conspiracies. We are also aware that revolutions are not made deliberately and arbitrarily but that everywhere and at all times they are the necessary consequence of circumstances which are not in any way whatever dependent either on the will or on the leadership of individual parties or of whole classes. But we also see that the development of the proletariat in almost all countries of the world is forcibly repressed by the possessing classes and that thus a revolution is being forcibly worked for by the opponents of communism. If, in the end, the oppressed proletariat is thus driven into a revolution, then we will defend the cause of the proletariat just as well by our deeds as now by our words.

Question 15: Do you intend to replace the existing social order by community of Property at one stroke?

Answer: We have no such intention. The development of the masses cannot he ordered by decree. It is determined by the development of the conditions in which these masses live, and therefore proceeds gradually.

Question 16: How do you think the transition from the present situation to community of Property is to be effected?

Answer: The first, fundamental condition for the introduction of community of property is the political liberation of the proletariat through a democratic constitution.

Question 17: What will be your first measure once you have established democracy?

Answer: Guaranteeing the subsistence of the proletariat.

Question 18: How will you do this?

Answer. I. By limiting private property in such a way that it gradually prepares the way for its transformation into social property, e. g., by progressive taxation, limitation of the right of inheritance in favour of the state, etc., etc.

II. By employing workers in national workshops and factories and on national estates.

III. By educating all children at the expense of the state.

Question 19: How will you arrange this kind of education during the period of transition?

Answer: All children will be educated in state establishments from the time when they can do without the first maternal care.

Question 20: Will not the introduction of community of property be accompanied by the proclamation of the community of women?

Answer: By no means. We will only interfere in the personal relationship between men and women or with the family in general to the extent that the maintenance of the existing institution would disturb the new social order. Besides, we are well aware that the family relationship has been modified in the course of history by the property relationships and by periods of development, and that consequently the ending of private property will also have a most important influence on it.

Question 21: Will nationalities continue to exist under communism?

Answer: The nationalities of the peoples who join together according to the principle of community will be just as much compelled by this union to merge with one another and thereby supersede themselves as the various differences between estates and classes disappear through the superseding of their basis — private property.

Question 22. Do Communists reject existing religions?

Answer: All religions which have existed hitherto were expressions of historical stages of development of individual peoples or groups of peoples. But communism is that stage of historical development which makes all existing religions superfluous and supersedes them.

In the name and on the mandate of the Congress.

Secretary: Heide [Alias of Wilhelm Wolff in the League of the Just]

President: Karl Schill [Alias of Karl Schapper in the League of the Just]

London, June 9, 1847