Like I said in a previous email, I'm back to engage in a discussion with
you. I'm really enthusiastic to discuss with your group since we share
about the same political positions. Now, I am a member of a Communist
Left group named Klasbatalo which is based in Montreal, Canada.
We ... and recently we were in discussion with the IFCL
(ex-Internal Fraction of the ICC), the group Controversies
(which you probably know is a scission of the ICC), the Istituto
Onorato Damen (which is a scission of the ICT) ; and on a new political
level for us, we informally met the canadian IWG a few weeks ago.
So to start with a good method, I send you with this email our
basic political position for you to examine it.
As you will see, we share the same legacy : the Communist Left one.
Would you give me a few feedbacks about them for us to begin a fraternal discussion?
Right now, we try our best to get engage the different groups - sharing the
same programmatic Communist Left legacy - in a fraternal discussion to
see them meet points: to help them to our best to get them converge and
overcome the state of sectarianism which seems to become some kind of
tendency since about the last decade.
So, I hope I'll have a few news from you so we can bring a discussion together,
Alex for Klasbatalo
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
“Proletarian revolutions, ... constantly criticize themselves,
constantly interrupt themselves in their own course, return to
the apparently accomplished, in order to begin anew; they deride
with cruel thoroughness the half-measures, weaknesses, and paltriness
of their first attempts, seem to throw down their opponents only so the
latter may draw new strength from the earth and rise before them again
more gigantic than ever...”
Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte
Thanks for your E-mail. We believe debate is vital, necessary and crucial to the internationalists. The revolutionary movement cannot take the effective steps unless the internationalists play a dynamic rule to development this movement. This is only possible through the discussion and confrontation of different view point within the Proletarian Political Milieu.
The aim of debate should be, contributing to clarity within the Proletarian Political Milieu, which in turn contributes to the preparation for the formation of the historic Internationalist Communist Party, the indispensable weapon for the victory of the Communist Revolution.
You wrote a list of groups that you have been in discussion without saying anything about the “discussions”. For us, your aim, in discussion with us is not clear. Do you want this list should be longer? What is your criterion for discussing with a circle, group or a political current?
For us your practice and actions have not been in the direction of contributing to the clarity within the Proletarian Political Milieu, but to more confusion. You have contributed to uncertainty about the most important currents within the PPM. But first let’s explain something.
When we talking about Rosa Luxemburg as a source of inspiration for the proletariat, this doesn’t mean that we disregard her lack of clarity in the mass party question and the process of developing of class-consciousness. Or when we talking about Lenin the greatest Marxist within the history of proletariat, once again, this doesn’t mean that we disregard his lack of clarity about the question of national or his 1902 apprehension about the process of developing of class consciousness.
And again when we talking about International Communist Current and Internationalist Communist Tendency the most important organizations that the proletariat has created after degenerating of the Communist International, this doesn’t mean that we disregard their possible lack of clarity in some questions. These currents are the most important currents that historically and organically rooted in the current that has defended of the communist positions during the blackest period of contra-revolution. These currents are still the most important avant-garde of the proletariat.
We urge all, the political criticism of these currents but a Chinese wall separates criticism from discrediting. We have declared that any attack to these groups, is an attack to the Internationalist Voice and their achievements are not only for them, but also for the working class, the Left Communist and all internationalists.
We choose the first from your list “IFCL (ex-Internal Fraction of the ICC)” that you have been in discussion. We don’t recognize neither external nor internal fraction of the ICC. Formation of a fraction means that the current (in this case, ICC) has completely gone to the bourgeoisies’ terrain. The actions of these people (“IFCL”) have been discrediting of the International Communist Current and they coded the name of their polluting companies creating of “fraction” and saving of the ICC. If the currents like “worker communism of Iran” pollute terms like Worker, Communism and etc these people pollute “Left Communism”, “Internationalism”, “Bilan” and etc.
These fugitives from “Left Communism” never fought within the ICC, because the precondition for such struggle was not, otherwise the story of their battle from Paris to the Marseille and from Marseille to the Mexico City should be a source of inspiration for a new generation of Internationalists.
For us Left Communism is not only some “Political Positions” but also the principles and values of the proletariat. To eliminate the influence of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois ideologies, tireless duties of internationalists should be to strive to strengthen the proletarian values and principles which are a reflection of proletarian class consciousness.
The precondition for a political debate with you is that you put your practice on serious criticism and publicly reject the actions of groups like “IFCL” and contributing to the strengthening of the proletarian values and principles. We urge you.
15th October 2011