On a travesty of an international conference

Aníbal and Fredo Corvo

French, German, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian

On the website Internationalist Perspective (IP), we read that “A conference of left communists“ (published in July 2023) has been held. IP (ex-ICC, now into “communization”) and Controversies (ex-ICC) organized this meeting of mostly ex-members of the ICC, pompously called “International Conference”. For several reasons, this was only a travesty of an international conference. The most important reasons were the fact that the conference circumvented the subject of the war in Ukraine, and that it avoided confrontation of positions in a sectarian way by excluding those that gave critiques of promoters’ views.

In the summary that appeared in the article above, there is no mention of the central problem of capital and wage labor today, which represents the fundamental danger in the historical evolution of the capitalist mode of production and its class relations: the inter-imperialist war in Ukraine and the formation of two blocs of imperialist capitalism, with the dynamic that is developing whose outcome if the proletariat does not put an end to capitalism is a Third World War.

Any self-respecting meetings of left communists would prioritize the question of inter-imperialist war and the need for the revolutionaries to cooperate in the internationalist struggle of each proletariat against its own bourgeoisie. However, the organizers decided to put on the agenda as a first point the disagreements over the theoretical explanations of the inter-imperialist wars since 1914. All kinds of theorists have been discussing the subject for some 150 years, talking about a decline period of capitalism and its various economic explanations, mainly the saturation of markets and the falling rate of profit. Never did the theorists agree. Moreover, at the break between social-patriotic social democracy and internationalist communists in World War I, adherents of different crisis theories appeared to be on both sides of this fundamental break. These theoretical issues were not decisive for the discussions and cooperation between revolutionaries during the Zimmerwald and Kienthal conferences. It was not until the 1970s that organizations that claimed left communism (the ICC and what is now ICT) discovered economic theory to separate their sects from each other. Only in recent years some, including us, have questioned the idea of a decline of capitalism since 1914 while holding to the reality that every war since then has been an inter-imperialist war, which the working class can only stop or end by fighting for its class interests against its own bourgeoisie.[1] This questioning of decadence since 1914 meets the fierce opposition from various organizations, which believe this discussion will undermine all their positions. At the same time, this sectarianism defends the position within the sect of those who have entrenched themselves as “theorists” behind dogmatic positions.

In the summary of the “conference,” written by a member of Internationalist Perspective, we see that:

• They have preferred to put as political criterium for participation number 1 that capitalism is already decadent and obsolete so that those of us who do not hold such a position are out.
• They have debated the decadence of capitalism, disregarding the theoretical developments of those of us who object with abundant historical-dialectical materialist argumentation and empirical data against the idea of capitalist decadence since 1914. And yet we have had notorious interventions to this effect in the media that have participated in that conference and in others. But sectarianism needs a doctrinaire and simplistic means of comfort, with its corresponding defensive biases. Nothing new but obviously something manifestly negative.
• They have made a series of considerations that coincide in stating that the consciousness of the proletariat and its capacity for self-organization are absent, even though capitalism produces destruction everywhere. Considerations that are limited and superficial, and which therefore maintain the self-indulgent sectarian tone.

At the beginning of the Ukraine war, we both criticized the initiatives by ICC and ICT on the necessary internationalist revolutionary activity against the imperialist war of capitalism. Both one and the other statement do not serve the purpose they articulate. On the other hand, we think joint discussion and action against the war are necessary. “Comrades of ICT” present under the title ‘No War but the Class War – A Call for Action‘, 12 theses about the war in Ukraine and then call on individuals and groups to contact them “if these points are a broad summary of where you stand.” However, the theses do not meet the requirements for cooperation for action against the war, for class struggle against the inter-imperialist war in Ukraine. To this end, it would be necessary to define in some points the minimum agreement that would allow cooperation of groups and individuals with the comrades on this specific point. To this end, agreeing on a part of the theses is sufficient. The propositions as a whole constitute a light-version program of the ICT. They act as a means of winning souls for ICT. In the context of the May 2023 Conference, it is important that in 3 of the 12 theses we found Grossmann/Mattick’s theory of the tendentially declining rate of profit as explaining not only the periodic or business cycle crisis but also a decline in the capitalist mode of production since 1914. This theory has led in the past and continues to lead to underestimation of the ability of capitalism to sustain itself. The ICT call to action is yet another example of its voluntarism and absolute priority for the construction of one’s own organization, which have overshadowed the original intentions of the predecessors of the ICT to prepare the Party through International Conferences where discussion would lead to joint activities with other groups.[2]

Therefore, it is evident that when the initiative to the May 2023 Conference put forward as the first political criterium for participation: “capitalism, from a working-class point of view, is an obsolete system,” IP and Controversies knew this criterium would exclude us as co-signers of a critique of the appeals of ICC and ICT. Consequently, we were not invited as such. Our message would have been that for the formation of action groups against the war, as in conferences of several proletarian internationalist elements and groups a minimum of points is enough, and that a.o. the idea of the decadence of capitalism since 1914 should not be a criterium for participation and if still on on the agenda, only after discussing the present inter-imperialist war.

Since our critique of the 12 points of admission to NWBCW-committees, the ICT has reduced the number of points to 5, eliminating o.a. their idea of the decline of capitalism. In a recent declaration of the International Bureau of the ICT, they state:

“It is clear that not all internationalists yet understand the seriousness of the current path capitalism has embarked on, and remain stuck in the polemics of the past. As a result, they have profoundly misunderstood what the NWBCW stands for. We do not doubt their sincerity as internationalists, so we will not respond to their polemics, which are the same old ones we have heard so often. There are some issues on which we have to agree to disagree if we are to forge a real anti-capitalist movement for the future and trust to material reality bringing revolutionaries together as we face an increasingly desperate system.

At the same time, NWBCW is not a regroupment scheme as it does not ask for total political agreement but just an internationalist position as per the five points above (which recognises that NO state anywhere can be supported whether it is a great imperialist power or a wannabe underdog imperialist country – they are all fighting for a national stake in the global capitalist order).“.[3]

In the worst bureaucratic tradition, the position is changed after receiving critique that finds some resonance. The critique, and those who criticized are not mentioned, covering up the whole question under “misunderstanding” and “polemics of the past”, that probably refer to the 1970-ties polemics between the adherents of Luxemburg and the Grossmann/Mattick theories of crisis, a polemic which is very different from the present discussion about decadence.

Suppose the ICT is serious about its change in admissions criteria for NWBCW. Would it not have protested bringing up the recognition of the decline of capitalism since 1914 as an admission criterium for the May Conference? Apparently, they were happy that we were not present. The ICT was present, cowardly hiding as “Bilan et Perspectives,” the publication in France of the ICT.

Since their respective appeals, the ICT and the ICC have followed their course, and other groups have either kept silent, or have joined these initiatives, or have declared their position and followed their course. Sectarianism remains, as is evident.

Instead of trying to agree on the essentials without silencing the disagreements, instead of spreading the idea of the necessity of the coordinated and common struggle of the internationalist communists against the imperialist capitalist war, instead of setting a time to reach an agreement where the points that all share and do not share appear, they have preferred to follow this line of sectarian action, where it is a question of managing based on a relationship of strength, trying to capture elements towards the own tendency that launches the approach. Those who have been more activist have been the Committees launched by the ICT, No war but the class war (NWBCW), who, in the text mentioned above, make a balance sheet in their traditional vein, in which they make clear their sectarian attitude, and they do it arrogantly.

What we proposed was and is simple to realize, but it broke and breaks the comfortable dynamics of the sects, which is why they need to keep a tight veil over everything that does not emanate from them, or that could become part of their initiatives. If you don’t give in and follow them, their response is ostracism and opportunistic silence.

Some, like the ICC, believe themselves to be the center of the universe and declare the rest to be hostile parasites. Few listen to them, but a few still see revolutionary energy there. Others, like the ICT, tell us that you either play their game or you don’t exist for them. Others are moving towards that position, others continue in their traditional way, others, divided among themselves, like the Bordigist branch of the Italian communist left, continue their stubbornness. Some anarchist expressions reject others who have opted for the nationalist defense of Ukrainian capital (and, therefore of their NATO allies), and some collectives have debated the issue as if it were just another one.

Meanwhile, the imperialist war continues in Ukraine and in other parts of the world. The two blocs are manifesting, consolidating, and opposing each other on an increasing scale. All the bourgeoisie and their states need to squeeze more surplus value from the proletarian class. They are eroding and cutting direct and indirect wages, social welfare forms. All for the development of militarism, which is what governs the essential strategy on an international scale. The proletariat is suffering from labor and social pressures and degradation, nationalist pressures for surrender to the interests of the corresponding bloc against the rival, mass exploitation and imperialist political manipulation of each bourgeoisie, a mass of cannon fodder and of effort and suffering for the cannons, the war of imperialist capitalism demands and leads to something much more drastic.

Therefore, in the face of the approaching crisis of overproduction of capital, with this scenario, on the one hand, the attacks on the proletariat will develop on an increasing scale, quantitatively and qualitatively. The imperialist militarist course continues its unfolding, which has as its conclusion a Third World War if the proletariat does not succeed in eradicating capitalism and its states.

In these conditions, sectarianism is a cancer that erodes the limited capacities of the proletariat and the internationalist revolutionaries.

25-7-2023

Continued with Perspectives for cooperation … , September 1rst 2023

---

[1] The authors of this article have different positions on decadence, which – of course – didn’t prevent them to take shared positions of the war in Ukraine. Aníbal has argued that decadence is for the near future. See Discussions on the historical decline of capitalism. On a recent text by Link. Aníbal’s reply. Corvo has doubted the concept of a declining phase of capitalism. See Capitalism is coming to an end. But how?

[2] Two calls for proletarian internationalism against the war in Ukraine.

Dos llamadas al internacionalismo proletario contra la guerra en Ucrania

At both our sites the interested reader will find foregoing and following articles on our critique, our alternative and a reply to HC’s critique.

For the International Conferences, see International Conferences of the Communist Left: 1977-1980. Paperback – 25 May 2023. Completely transcribed, with a rather personal introduction by the editor. 618 pages.

[3] International Bureau of the Internationalist Communist Tendency, The No War but the Class War Initiative (May 2023): https://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2023-07-05/the-no-war-but-the-class-war-initiative