January 16, 2006: Cadre groups
Lenin formulated the strategy behind the formation of Third International style parties more or less like this. Split the mass revolutionary currents away from the mass reformist parties far enough ahead of the outbreak of revolutionary conjunctures for the working masses and their allies to have time to understand the differences between the revolutionary and the reformist points of view, and to gain confidence in the revolutionary leaderships.
This split was in Lenin's view a necessary condition for revolutionary victory. But, several preconditions are implied:
1. Existence of a mass reformist party, implying in turn the existence of millions of working people and sympathizers committed to socialism;
2. Existence of a large revolutionary current within the broader mass socialist movement, forming its left wing;
3. Existence of a seasoned leadership at the head of the revolutionary current, capable of leading a new TI-style party after the split;
4. Reasonable anticipation of a pending revolutionary conjuncture.
Without these preconditions the split and the strategy behind it make no sense.
Formation of TI-style cadre groups under American circumstances, at least since WWII, is contrary to Lenin's strategy. In our circumstances, absence of a mass reformist movement implies a different approach, one closer to Marx's approach to the First International.
Comments
Draper in his essay "The Myth of Lenin's 'Concept of the Party'" stresses that the Bolshevik/Menshevik split inside the Russian movement wasn't Lenin's doing. The minority refused to accept the democratic outcome of the congress, and walked. I'm pointing this out for clarity's sake. In the post-1917 period Lenin emphatically advocated splits from the SD parties; this was the strategic conception behind formation of the TI.
Posted by: Mark Phillips | January 26, 2006 06:04 PM