ILLUMINATING STUDY OF A CASE OF THE INFANTILE DISORDER
By Joseph Hansen
MARXISM VS. ULTRALEFTISM, Key Issues in Healy's Challenge to the Fourth International, by Ernest Germain. Published by the Fourth International, 21 rue d'Aboukir, Paris 2, France. 97 pp. US$1 or 7 shillings or 5 francs.*
If it were possible to place the polemical literature of Marxism in the scales and weigh its quantity, the amount devoted to centrist opportunism would far outbalance the writings on ultraleft sectarianism.
The reason for this is rather obvious. Centrism reflects the pressure of capitalism on the labor and socialist movement in a rather direct way and most often has affected the course of big mass parties involving hundreds of thousands of members and a range of influence far beyond them in the working class.
Ultraleft sectarianism reflects the same pressures in an indirect way, taking the deceptive form of an apparent intensification of devotion to revolutionary principles. It most often involves only narrow ingrown circles, little inclined to activity, exercising small influence and with no hope of substantial growth. Hence the rather limited concern of revolutionary Marxism with the "infantile disorder," as Lenin called it.
In the case of the Socialist Labour League, all this would seem applicable. Its strenuous. activism, which boils down to a simplistic tactical prescription that can be put in two words: "Picket them!" is a very meager substitute for the genuine implementation of Marxist theory in political practice. Its leaders are singularly unoriginal and unproductive, having made no contributions whatsoever of their own to theory outside of the very dubious ones considered in this pamphlet.
It can be added that in Britain, where the leaders of the Socialist Labour League have gained some notoriety for their success in practicing the theory that socialism and epithet-mongering are identical, it may seem to many to be an utter waste of time to deal with the
* Available in England from Pioneer Book Service, 8 Toynbee St., London, E.1; in Canada from Vanguard Book Store, 824 Yonge St., Toronto 5; in the U.S. from Merit Publishers, 5 East Third St., New York, N.Y., 10003. views of such’a bizarre sect.
This pamphlet, however, is proof of the fact that the nature of the object under examination does not necessarily preclude the elucidation of lessons of rather broad interest.
In fact Germain's analysis of the views of the SLL leadership turns out to be of general value; for it considers some key issues of the day such as the nature and development of the Cuban revolution, the nature of the Soviet state and where it stands today, the importance of the colonial revolution as in Algeria and Vietnam, the problem of coalition governments, and the very important ques~ tion of building a revolutionary socialist party in England.
These questions are not unfamiliar ones. They come up repeatedly for analysis and discussion. However, insofar as polenics have been involved, it has generally been against the opportunists. To consider the issues in the light of the ultraleft approach offers a certain novelty that in this instance at least proves to be refreshing.
Especially in Britain, where "Healyism" has become identical with the whole~ sale use of venomous epithets, wild charges and obscure incidents involving allegations about "combining with the right wing" and "Transport House" and "calling the cops," it should prove a relief to read an analysis of the SLL that shuns these back alleys and considers only what is really important -- the theoretical positions and political policies that lie at the heart of the peculiar place of the SLL in the British radical movement.
Utilizing the Marxist method in his study, Germain considers the SLL positions in their development. Thus we are enabled to gain a rational understanding of the process by which this ultraleft group, which boasts of its orthodoxy in maintaining the principles of Trotskyism, eventually came to make sweeping -- if unacknowledged -- revisions of those principles.
As cases in point, Germain shows how by maintaining that Cuba is still a capitalist state, the SLL leaders were compelled to revise Trotsky's theory of the permanent revolution; how their uncritical support of one wing of the nationalist movement in Algeria at an early stage and their subsequent abstentionisn in the Algerian revolution compelled them to revise Trotsky's position on the colo-
nial revolution; and how their denunciation of the "black power" aspects of the Negro struggle in the United States has forced them in fact to reject Trotsky's position on this vital question in the development of the American revolution.
Most ironic of all, Germain points out how in their eagerness to club "Pabloism" to death, they themselves stumbled into what they would call "Pabloite" positions.
Since the pamphlet was written, the SLL leaders have espoused the cause of Maoism. This is scarcely due to any sudden desire on their part to reform themselves and undergo a cultural revolution such as passing a motion binding all members to carry the little red book of Mao's thought, the better to recite quotations to each other.
Two possibilities are involved that are not necessarily contradictory. One is the attractiveness to the SLL leaders of Mao's current ultraleft posture coupled with his antidemocratic attitude derived from training in the school of Stalinism. The other is the hope of influencing and possibly winning over the few Maoists to be found in England.
One can wish them well in this turn and express the hope that they deepen and speed their application of Mao's thought. Healy, the national secretary of the SLL, is in particular to be congratulated for having finally found a goal worthy of his talents: to become the Enver Hoxha of Clapham High.
The new level reached by the SLL leadership fits in logically with the previous novelties they have advanced. In straining to maintain their identity as a sect, they end up by bidding for membership in a personality cult more extreme and revolting -- if that is possible -than the one fostered by Stalin.
The Marxist explanation for such a seemingly surprising culmination is provided by Germain's study of the SLL.
We recommend it to students of Marxism in general and to connoisseurs of ultraleftism in particular.