Goldman Archive | Trotskyist Writers Index | ETOL Main Page
From Socialist Appeal, Vol. IV No. 31, 3 August 1940, p. 4.
Transcribed & marked up by Einde O’Callaghanfor ETOL.
Practically up until the war started and, even for a while after that, many people who were on the fringe of the revolutionary, camp recognized the truth that whatever differences there existed between capitalist democracy and fascism, those differences would not be involved in a war. Everyone who claimed to be a revolutionary Marxist agreed that the struggle would be one for raw materials, for markets, for colonies. That is, it would be purely and simply an imperialist struggle.
The war came, and now many who formerly swore allegiance to the revolutionary phrase have begun to discover differences of such a nature between Hitler Germany and England as to justify a change in their attitude. A Marxist analysis that holds good in time of peace does not seem to hold good in time of war when the pressure of the ruling group becomes really terrific.
In a series of articles written by Lovestone and in another series written by Herberg, the difference in the situation of the working class that would result from a victory of Hitler as against a victory of Great Britain is presented as the fundamental argument calling for a change in the position of the Independent Labor League (Lovestoneites) on the question of the war. Both Lovestone and Herberg now prefer the victory of British imperialism. And judging by their arguments they not only prefer the victory of British imperialism but are in favor of actively supporting it against Hitler.
It is true that they refuse to draw all the logical conclusions from their position. Somehow or other they stress the necessity of keeping this country out of the war as the primary consideration. To any intelligent worker who refuses to be bamboozled by sophistry it would seem that if a victory of the democratic imperialists would mean so much to him he would do his utmost to achieve that victory. ‘
The attitude of Herberg and Lovestone is the same as the sickening one of Norman Thomas – semi-pacifist, semi-isolationist and semi-socialist.
Personally as between Thomas and open chauvinism, I prefer the position of the Social Democrats who are at least logical. They want the victory of British imperialism and they do not beat around the bush, they openly state that the United States should do everything to assure that victory – and they omit the “short of war” business that is Roosevelt’s stock-in-trade.
And why not? If a victory of British imperialism would further the cause of the working masses, as the Lovestoneites indicate, why not give wholehearted support to Great Britain? It is characteristic of the Norman Thomas type of socialist to say “yes and no” at the same time.
We must admit of course that there are differences betweep “democratic” British imperialism and fascist German imperialism. But only he who looks upon those differences as purely static and fails to see the underlying forces at work both in the so-called democratic and in the fascist countries will determine his attitude on the basis of those differences.
Those differences cannot be of very great importance to the five hundred million, slaving under the yoke of British imperialism in the colonies and it is hardly conceivable that they would willingly sacrifice their lives to preserve those differences. It must never be forgotten that any party supporting British imperialism thereby loses the support of a half billion colonial slaves.
But let us confine our consideration to the privileged English workers and see whether the differences existing between British and German imperialism should determine the attitude of a revolutionary Marxist. It is in the first instance obvious that the difference between English “democracy” and German fascism becomes ever narrower as the war progresses. The British worker enjoys precious little democracy at the present moment. He will, however, regain all his rights after a British victory, insist those who advocate supporting British imperialism.
And here we come to the heart of the problem. Not that there is any use arguing as to whether the British worker will or will not regain his rights after the war. He undoubtedly will not, but that is not the major point at issue.
A revolutionary party must consider as fundamental, in addition to the fact that it is impermissible to support one imperialism as against another, that we are living in the period of the decline of capitalism, when all tendencies favor the victory of fascism unless the victory of the socialist revolution intervenes.
A victory of the fascists will bring fascism, say Lovestone and Herberg and a victory of the “democracies” will still give us some lee-way. Even granting that, the disadvantages for a revolutionary party resulting from support of an imperialist war outweigh by far the advantages of a problematical short period of very limited democratic rights that might be granted to the workers as a result of a victory of the “democracies”.
For by supporting any imperialist government a revolutionary party is bound to lose the support of that section which is most exploited by the imperialist regime. In supporting an imperialist war a revolutionary party must inevitably make compromises on the home front, discouraging and demoralizing the workers and making impossible an effective struggle against fascism.
A Marxist party, to preserve its revolutionary integrity, must under no circumstances assume a share in the responsibility for capitalist war or capitalist peace. In the period of the decline of capitalism it must show its bitter hostility to the capitalist order by an uncompromising struggle against its own capitalist enemy.
It must stress the fundamental idea that to defeat fascism, foreign or domestic, it is necessary to destroy the capitalist system.
It dare not stress the fleeting differences, but only the essential identity between “democratic” and fascist exploiters.
Main NI Index | Main Newspaper Index
Encyclopedia of Trotskyism | Marxists’ Internet Archive
Last updated on 23 May 2020