Why Study the Fourth International?
Lessons from François Moreau's "Combats et Débats" for Today's Activists
Welcome to our new blog, dedicated to exploring the rich and complex history of the socialist movement to inform and empower today's activists. As we embark on this journey, we want to start by delving into a crucial, often debated, but undeniably vital chapter: the story of the Fourth International. François Moreau's multi-part work, "Combats et Débats de la IVe Internationale," provides an insightful lens through which to examine this history.
Why begin with the Fourth International? Because unlike many other anti-Stalinist revolutionary Marxist tendencies that emerged in the 1930s and have since faded away, the Trotskyist movement, centred around the Fourth International, has shown remarkable tenacity and has played an important role in supporting progressive struggles worldwide. Understanding its origins, struggles, debates, and survival is essential for contemporary activists seeking to build effective revolutionary organisations today.
The Imperative to Build a New International
Moreau's account highlights that the formation of the Fourth International was deeply rooted in a specific historical context, driven by the perceived failures of social democracy and the rise of Stalinism. Social democratic parties were seen as having failed to confront the bourgeoisie on fundamental historical questions, becoming integrated into the bourgeois state and implementing capitalist austerity programmes. Their support for World War I in 1914 was a decisive event for revolutionaries, necessitating a definitive break. Simultaneously, the rise of Stalinism in the USSR and the degeneration of the Communist International under its influence were seen as having profoundly compromised the interests of the working class and international revolution. The anti-revolutionary character of the Moscow-aligned communist parties became clear, as they transformed into defenders of the Stalinist bureaucracy, prioritising Moscow's interests over those of the international working class.
The origins of the Fourth International lie specifically in the Left Opposition formed within the Communist Party of the USSR in 1923, which fought against bureaucratisation and for a return to socialist workers' democracy and revolutionary internationalism. This struggle extended globally with the formation of the International Left Opposition.
The initial project for the Fourth International was conceived as a broad regroupment of all revolutionary forces breaking with both Stalinism and social democracy, not just Trotskyists. Many non-Trotskyist organisations, some numerically larger than the early Trotskyists, were part of this vision. The "Declaration of the Four" was signed by the International Communist League and three left-socialist organisations in Germany and Holland in favour of its founding. Trotsky even indicated a willingness to be in the minority in such a new International. However, other currents refused to join, and the Fourth International was ultimately founded in 1938 exclusively by Trotskyists. This decision was justified because the other currents, despite being more substantial forces, did not form a new International themselves and largely fell back to the right.
Navigating Challenges and Internal Debates
The Fourth International faced significant challenges from its inception. It was founded in a period of intense reaction in Europe, marked by defeats for the labour movement, the rise of fascism, and the degeneration of communist parties. Despite its relatively small size, the International demonstrated vitality, renewing and developing because its programme corresponded to the real dynamic of the revolutionary process and addressed the historical interests of the working masses.
The history is marked by crucial struggles and tactical debates. The movement shifted from attempting to reform the communist parties to building new revolutionary organisations after the failure of the Comintern. A key tactic was the "French Turn," where Trotskyists joined socialist parties as a revolutionary tendency to connect with a broader range of militants. This tactic was extended to other countries like Belgium and the United States. While it allowed for growth in numbers and influence, it also caused internal conflict and divisions. Moreau notes that this tactic allowed Trotskyists to strengthen considerably, transforming them from external fractions into active organisations addressing the entire workers' movement as an independent political pole.
During World War II, the Fourth International anticipated that the conflict would lead to social and political crises. They advocated revolutionary defeatism in imperialist countries while calling for the defence of the USSR against imperialism to save the remaining achievements of the October Revolution. This defence did not imply support for Stalinism. Trotskyists were among the first to join the resistance against Nazi occupation in 1940. The International also supported colonial struggles, deeming it legitimate for oppressed peoples to exploit their imperialism's difficulties to achieve liberation.
Post-war events brought new challenges and debates. The Fourth International anticipated a new revolutionary wave after 1943, which did materialise, notably in Italy, France, Greece, Yugoslavia, China, Vietnam, and Indonesia. However, Stalinist parties played a role in suppressing this wave in Europe, aligning with the Yalta agreements. The victory of revolutions led by Stalinist parties in countries like Yugoslavia, Vietnam, and China, often requiring conflict with Moscow, challenged the traditional Trotskyist view of these parties as monolithic and entirely subordinate to the Kremlin. This led the Third World Congress in 1951 to adopt the perspective that Stalinist communist parties could "project a revolutionary orientation" under mass pressure in crisis situations.
Internal debates were constant, including significant disagreements over the nature of the USSR and post-war states in Eastern Europe. The International supported the Yugoslav party against Moscow due to its progressive positions, though this ended in disappointment. The 1956 Hungarian Revolution illuminated the question of Stalinism, with the Fourth International supporting the insurgents and developing its programme for political revolution in Eastern countries.
A major internal crisis was the 1953 split, marked by controversies over Michel Pablo's views on the transition to socialism and accusations against him. The US Socialist Workers Party (SWP) played a leading role in this split, exhibiting what Moreau describes as "national messianism". Despite facing intense centrifugal pressures and the "temptation of national-Trotskyism", the international leadership in the 1950s is credited with preventing sectarian degeneration and defending against liquidationist tendencies. The International rejected the concept of "party-fraction," operating instead as an international organisation based on a revolutionary programme and flexible democratic centralism. Preserving the international organisational framework was seen as vital.
The International underwent a process of reunification, culminating in 1963, influenced by a shared desire to overcome sectarianism and the behaviour of rival sectarian groups like the Healyites and Lambertistes. The 7th World Congress in 1963 adopted a document assessing class struggles across the three sectors of the world revolution, marking an important step beyond a previous vision of uniform trends.
The period from 1968 to 1975 saw significant expansion and the rise of a new revolutionary generation. The Cuban Revolution, led by a new movement rather than a Stalinist-linked party, was particularly significant. Solidarity with the Vietnamese movement became a central campaign.
Later periods, such as 1975-1990, saw realignments, mutations, a bourgeois counter-offensive, and the crisis of Stalinist regimes. The SWP's influence within the International declined significantly. The Twelfth World Congress in 1985 acknowledged the counter-offensive but maintained confidence in the working class's capacity for struggle. This congress officially concluded the formation of a new workers' state in Nicaragua, based on a revision of previous analyses.
The Enduring Relevance of the Fourth International
So, why is this history important for us today?
1.
Uninterrupted Revolutionary Continuity: The Fourth International claims an uninterrupted revolutionary continuity rooted in the best period of the Communist International. This link provides a connection to the core principles of Marxism and Leninism – internationalism, workers' democracy, and workers' power – and an offensive program historically used to confront challenges like Nazism and World War II. While other anti-Stalinist currents perished or fossilised into sects, the Fourth International endured.
2.
Wealth of Experience: The International has accumulated a wealth of experience in struggles across the three sectors of the world revolution. Its analyses and tactical approaches, such as entrism, the united front versus popular front distinction, and its approach to colonial struggles, offer valuable lessons for today's complex global landscape.
3.
Struggle Against Bureaucracy and Sectarianism: The history is a testament to the ongoing struggle against bureaucracy and the dangers of both opportunism and sectarianism. The Fourth International's efforts to maintain its revolutionary course while engaging with the mass movement, despite internal conflicts and external pressures, provide crucial insights. Its survival preserved an international framework and a common language for analysing events and tasks. Rebuilding this would be a difficult process today.
4.
Analysis of Revolutions: The debates around revolutions led by non-Trotskyist forces (China, Cuba, Vietnam, Nicaragua) highlight the International's effort to grapple with the real dynamics of revolutionary processes, even when they didn't conform to pre-set expectations. While supporting these revolutions against imperialism, the International consistently argued for the necessity of building new, genuinely revolutionary leaderships globally.
5.
A Basis for the Future: Moreau argues that if the Fourth International had not been founded or had disappeared, the task of building a new international rooted in revolutionary continuity would have to start from scratch today, navigating immense ideological confusion after decades of Stalinism. The existence of the Fourth International provides an irreplaceable contribution to the future formation of a new revolutionary international of the masses.
Studying the "Combats et Débats de la IVe Internationale" allows us to learn from the victories and defeats, the theoretical insights and tactical errors, the internal struggles and external challenges faced by the Fourth International. This history is not just for academics; it is a vital resource for contemporary activists dedicated to the cause of international socialism. It highlights that the essential tasks remain: building influential national organisations, developing mass influence, and leading the working masses to power, all while avoiding the pitfalls of sectarianism and maintaining the course towards a revolutionary international of the masses.