As the second expression of the international co-ordination of the working-class in the class struggle, the importance of the Second International is obvious. Also, from the collapse of this body during the First World War the modern Communist movement, as we know it, arose. Most important, however, is the theoretical/political problematic of the Second International and what it says about the state of theory and practice at that time. Many deviations from Marxism find full expression in the Second International and provide solid reasons for that organization’s opportunism, miscalculation and demise. By analyzing these deviations and reconstructing the problematic from which they emerged, an understanding of our period will be greatly enhanced. For, in many respects, our movement has never made more than a verbal break with the Second International when contrasted to the necessary theoretical labor to initiate a profound break. Having never applied itself to theoretical practice, the U.S. Communist movement is caught in the same revolving door of bourgeois ideology as was the Second International. If we can draw the necessary links between the theory and practice of the Second International and the present we will see the historical roots of our movement’s weaknesses and be better able to deal with them on a concrete level.
1. In the historical article by Abendroth two reasons are given for German Social Democracy’s capitulation to its ruling class during the First World War. These are: “fear of being outlawed” and “Fear of losing mass support.” How could the political, organizational and theoretical suppositions of a Leninist party take into account these factors prior to such a crisis, thereby preventing such a capitulation to the bourgeoisie? How does this relate to our positions on theory and fusion in regards to the historical experience of the CPUSA?
2. In what way is Bernstein a utopian and how does this relate to Eurocommunism?
3. Discuss the economist problematic of the Second International (and Bernstein) and its relation to “immiserization” and the “breakdown theory.” How does this fit into Colletti’s discussion of “social capital?” How are aspects of this problematic seen in the US movement?
4. Discuss the theoretical influence of Engels on the Second International, especially his theory of the state. What characterized this influence and how positive was it?
Wolfgang Abendroth, “The Second International up to the First World War,” in A Short History of the European Working Class, pp. 51-68. (Abendroth is a German Marxist historian.)
Lucio Colletti, “Bernstein and the Marxism of the Second International,” in From Rousseau to Lenin pp. 45-62, 97-108. (Colletti is Italian Kantian/Marxist philosopher.)