The Struggle Inside the Socialist Workers Party Index | Main Document Index | ETOL Home Page
[Resolution of the Fourth Internationalist Caucus in the National Committee submitted to the February-March 1982 plenum]
In the recent past, a number of organizational concepts have been introduced by the current party leadership which begin to constitute a challenge to the historic norms of functioning of the SWP. This process has been accelerated since our August 1981 convention, as serious political differences have increasingly emerged on the SWP National Committee, which in turn reflect developing tendencies within the party as a whole. It is not the goal of this resolution to present a comprehensive overview of our organizational principles. Such a task is, of course, a periodic necessity for our movement, and would be quite useful at present. The last time this was done was in 1965. But given the immediate questions that have been raised, the most urgent necessity is to place the question of our organizational functioning in its correct political framework. Only by starting from this general perspective will we be able to arrive at correct solutions to whatever specific problems might arise in the SWP today.
The organizational principles of the Leninist revolutionary party are summed up by the concept of democratic centralism. This concept flows from our most basic political task—constructing a revolutionary combat party which will prove capable of leading the American working class to political power. It is a two-sided, dialectical concept, which encompasses the greatest possible democracy in discussing and deciding every political question we face, as well as the greatest possible centralism in action—intervening in the class struggle with a single voice, as a united force. Neither side of this dual concept has any meaning in isolation or separation from the other.
One of the most important factors in the welding of a democratic centralist party is an active, informed, politically conscious, and critical membership. Anything which cuts across the construction of such a membership is completely alien to democratic centralism. This is the correct content which must be given to the concept of “worker-Bolshevism.” The revolutionary party requires a membership of worker-Bolsheviks because history clearly demonstrates that even the best, most dedicated, and most educated leadership is no guarantee of a correct course at all points in the class struggle. It was the existence of such a membership in the Russian Bolshevik party in 1917, for example, whose understanding was far in advance of the official party leader ship in February and March, that set the stage for Lenin to wage his successful fight for the famous “April Theses.”
There is no such thing as a leader, or grouping, within the revolutionary party who is always right, or who has a monopoly on a correct political course. That is why periodic conflicts and disagreements over one or another question are inevitable, and should be considered normal; and that is why each and every member of the organization has not only the right but the responsibility to consider and review every decision taken by the party.
Finally, it must be kept in mind that every member of the revolutionary party must be trained as a leader of the working class and of the mass movements. This makes it essential to develop each member’s ability to understand and apply the Marxist method, which cannot be done simply by reading books or attending classes, though these things are indispensable. Nor can this method be learned merely by carrying out directives from above on what to do. It can be learned only by members testing their own ideas and gaining experience both within the party and in the mass organizations.
The centralism side of the democratic centralist duality is equally important. Without the ability to intervene in the class struggle as a single, united, fighting unit, the revolutionary party would be reduced to impotence. Particularly in the United States, with the most powerful ruling class on earth, our small forces must maximize our impact if we hope to chart a course forward and win acceptance for it among working people.
Discipline, loyalty, and dedication to the party are the natural attributes of workers who have come to understand the necessity of a revolutionary Marxist program. These attitudes reflect their commitment to the cause of socialism, and their appreciation of the party as the indispensable instrument for the victory of the new society. The collective effort of millions will be required to bring this about, and only the conscious Marxist vanguard, acting as a unitary force, can hope to channel these millions onto the correct road.
An effective application of democratic centralism to party building requires that the two sides of this formula complement and reinforce one another. In fact, without the ability to carry out decisions in a centralist manner, party democracy becomes a hollow shell with no content. Discussion may lead to decision, but if decision does not lead to action then it has no meaning. On the other hand, if centralization of activity takes place without the fullest and most democratic decision-making process possible, then the likelihood of serious errors increases qualitatively, and over time becomes inevitable.
On the subjective level, the reality of party democracy will reinforce the dedication of every comrade to participate wholeheartedly in common political work. (This assumes in the first place an honest and comradely discussion in which all sides make an effort to understand the views of others and share a willingness to review their own opinions in the tight of subsequent developments.) And the effectiveness of united activity, in turn, can only result in the rededication of every member to participate, fully and open-mindedly, in the broad discussions necessary to insure that the basic programmatic goals of the party are applied with a correct strategic and tactical approach.
It is completely destructive to the functioning of the revolutionary party if democracy and centralism come in conflict unnecessarily. The need for a full participation of the membership in the decision-making process cannot be allowed to significantly restrict the ability of the party to act. This is what we mean when we say that we are not a discussion circle but a party of action. And it must also be understood that in order to construct a cadre of worker-Bolsheviks, the centralist aspect of party functioning should be limited, to conflict as little as possible with the ability of the membership to read, think, exchange ideas, and participate in the overall, collective consideration of political questions.
It is with this understanding that we must approach the problem of what specific organizational norms and guidelines should govern the revolutionary party at any given moment. The 1965 “Organizational Principles” can be an extremely helpful and useful guide if understood and applied correctly. But we must keep in mind that there are no prefabricated blueprints which we can apply. Rigid and formalistic thinking is as inappropriate here as in any other area. Many factors must be taken into account, including the level of the class struggle, the size of the organization, the degree of legality, the extent and character of political disagreements, the level of experience of the cadre, etc. We must consider the concrete reality we face today if we are to effectively chart a road forward for resolving the currently disputed questions, preserving the unity of our party, and laying the basis for a mass revolutionary Marxist vanguard to lead the third American revolution.
Submitted February 22, 1982
The Struggle Inside the Socialist Workers Party Index | Main Document Index | ETOL Home Page | Marxists’ Internet Archive