Confronted with the lies and confusion from the IGCL, the ICC defends its intervention on the question of war

Submitted by ICConline on

Printer-friendly version

Having re-established the facts about our platform, slandered by the “International Group of the Communist Left”[1], we must now defend the content of our intervention dealing with the war, faced with defamatory statements from the IGCL that attribute the following political approaches and analyses to the ICC: "concealing the danger of war", "abstract and timeless internationalism, based simply on sentiment and morality" and "the introduction of bourgeois idealism into the revolutionary doctrine of the proletariat" ...

The ICC ‘disarms the proletariat when faced with the danger of war’!

According to the IGCL, the ICC adopts an approach to war which "can only pave the way to some kind of moral pacifism since it does not root internationalism in the very material ground of the dialectical relation between the very process of imperialist war and that of the class struggle, which is synthesised in the alternative of ‘international proletarian revolution or generalised imperialist war, revolution or war’".[2]

So, how does it apply this to our intervention? Not a word! It's a bluff, an untruth wrapped up in a fancy phrase to dazzle IGCL followers, if there is such a thing.

Contrary to what the IGCL wants to convey, the ICC's policy on war is perfectly anchored in the context of the current world situation and oriented by the perspective of the need for the overthrow of capitalism by the proletariat:

- In the present period, the main factor in the development of the class struggle has become and will increasingly be the irreversible deepening of the crisis of capitalism, involving increasingly unbearable economic attacks on the working class. Such a perspective is already illustrated by the global dynamic of class struggle revealed by the renewal of struggles in the United Kingdom in the spring of 2022, which then spread to the main industrialised countries of Europe and to the United States, and has since been confirmed regularly by new struggles.[3] The aim of the ICC's intervention is to strengthen both the capacity of the class to develop its struggles resisting these attacks and its awareness of the need to overthrow capitalism.

- The multiplication and worsening of imperialist conflicts throughout the world constitute a growing threat to humanity and play a role in the proletariat's becoming conscious of the need to overthrow capitalism; clearly the ICC did not wait for the IGCL's posturing and bluster to develop this aspect of its intervention.

As for the IGCL's "red alerts" such as "In the name of decomposition, didn’t the ICC definitively rule out any prospect of a third world war?"[4], this is only designed to sow doubts about our organisation's determination to assume its responsibilities faced with the danger posed by war.

The IGCL's attempt to "kill off" the Joint Declaration adopted by groups of the Communist Left on the war in Ukraine

For the ICC, this declaration testifies to the fact that, "in the face of the accelerating imperialist conflict in Europe, political organisations based on the heritage of the Communist Left continue to brandish the banner of a coherent proletarian internationalism and to provide a point of reference for those who defend the principles of the working class." [5]

This initiative, which manifestly annoys the IGCL, leads it to utter whatever comes into its head, without even the slightest concern for plausibility, in order to denigrate it. Blinded by its hatred of the ICC and ignoring the real content of the declaration, it "aims its fire" in the direction of the various signatory groups, without even bothering about the real positions of each group, all of which it sees as guilty of having signed a joint position with the ICC. Thus, for the IGCL, "The initiative from the revolutionary groups that we would characterise as opportunist, namely the ICC, Internationalist Voice, which the Instituto Onorato Damen joined, puts forward the permanence of imperialist war under capitalism and denies the unfolding reality of a consolidation of imperialist blocs..." [6]

The big lie of the IGCL is that the “Joint statement of groups of the international communist left about the war in Ukraine” mentions neither imperialist blocs nor the idea of any "permanence of imperialist war under capitalism". We invite our readers to check this out for themselves.

The IGCL builds on its own lie, stirring up opposition to "the theory of the decomposition of capitalism", defended only by the ICC which could constitute, in the words of the IGCL, "the ICC’s Trojan horse by which it introduces bourgeois idealism into the proletariat’s revolutionary doctrine"[7]. It then backs this up with the claim that the ICC's conceptions lead to "a situation in which history is at a standstill", insofar as "the determining factor of historical development is no longer the struggle between the contending classes in society but rather the effect of decomposition on society as a whole".

In responding to these arguments, our aim is not to convince a member of the proletarian camp, since the IGCL doesn’t belong to it, but we owe it to ourselves to re-establish the truth in the face of the distortions that these parasites inflict on our analysis of decomposition, just as they have done with the contents of our political platform. What does the ICC really say and what dangers does it warn against? “In this situation, where society’s two basic and antagonistic classes confront each other without either being able to impose its own definitive response [world war for the bourgeoisie and revolution for the working class] history nonetheless does not just come to a stop. Still less for capitalism than for other preceding modes of production is a “freeze” or a “stagnation” of social life possible. As a crisis-ridden capitalism’s contradictions can only get more severe, the bourgeoisie’s inability to offer the least perspective for society as a whole, and the proletariat’s inability, for the moment, to openly affirm its own, can only lead to a situation of generalised decomposition, of society rotting on its feet."[8]  When the ICC writes that "history cannot come to a stop" and that "there can be no 'freezing' or 'stagnation' of social life under capitalism", the IGCL presents us with the notion that "history has come to a standstill"! We all know the expression "he who wants to kill his dog claims it has rabies” It would fit this situation perfectly, except that the rabid party here is not the ICC, but the IGCL!

Contrary to the hallucinations of the rabid IGCL, we insist that history cannot come to a standstill. Indeed, as long as the working class constitutes a force in society, communist revolution remains a possibility on the agenda; the other alternative being the destruction of humanity, as a consequence of either world war or irreversible decomposition. For a world war to take place, two imperialist blocs would have to be formed, which is not currently on the agenda and probably never will be. On the other hand, irreversible decomposition is a much more tangible and developing threat and will be just as catastrophic and probably even more devastating than a world war.

By discrediting the ICC and stirring up opposition to "its dubious theory of decomposition", the IGCL's aim was to drive a wedge between our organisation and the other groups participating in the appeal, and thus to hinder the possibility that such a common approach could be repeated at a higher level.

The IGCL speaks of an imaginary call by the ICC for a new Zimmerwald and presents it as a manoeuvre!

Thus, for the IGCL: "it is curious, even ironic, to see the ICC, that rejects any danger of generalised imperialist war, calling for a new Zimmerwald"[9].

The ICC has never called for a new Zimmerwald as such. For us "the real and lasting significance of Zimmerwald lies in the development of an uncompromising internationalist line within a small minority called the Zimmerwald Left. The latter recognised that the First World War was only the beginning of an entire historical period dominated by imperialist war which would require a maximum programme for the working class: civil war, overthrow of the bourgeois regimes, dictatorship of the proletariat with a new Communist International to replace the bankrupt chauvinist 2nd International.”[10] In and through this debate, Lenin and those around him forged a nucleus which was to become the embryo of the Communist International.

The present situation and its prospects - even if they are not expressed in terms of a Third World War between two established imperialist blocs - are sufficiently dramatic to justify a mobilisation of the political vanguard of the proletariat to prepare the conditions for the emergence of the future party of the communist revolution.

This is not how the IGCL sees it. Its logic as a parasitic and police-like group[11] leads it to make its small contribution to sabotaging such a project by demonstrating its trademark pettiness, using the fabrications that are part of its political toolkit. In this way, it reveals the so-called "hidden face" of our approach to a common position of the Communist Left on the war in Ukraine:

a) "Apart the fact it would serve it [the ICC] in its attempt to exclude the so-called parasites from such an initiative, first and above all our group, to accept its basis would allow it to impose its rejection of the perspective and danger of imperialist war in the name of an artificial unity of the conference. Isn’t this precisely what the Istituto O. Damen had to accept?" [12]

Our response: The content of the joint declaration, no more than our own positions, has no mention of any rejection by the ICC of the reality and aggravation of imperialist tensions. The opposite is true.

b) "Thus, in such a conference today, the ICC would play the role the centrist Kautskyists played within the Zimmerwald-Kienthal conferences and would block the consequent internationalists of today, those who set their actions in response to the dynamics and steps towards generalised imperialist war." [13]

Our response: It goes without saying that the IGCL places itself in the category of "today's leading internationalists". In view of the above, and if the question were not so serious, we would have placed the IGCL in the category of "inveterate comedians".

Nevertheless, we retain this characterisation of the group in our article “The fight against imperialist war can only be waged with the positions of the communist left”, in the section "A reminder of the track record of the IFICC / IGCL group".

"The parasitic network, a chaotic mix of groups and personalities, uses an unpalatable rehashing of the positions of the Communist Left to attack the real Communist Left, to falsify and denigrate it." [14]

ICC, June 2024

 

[1] On the various appeals and statements from revolutionary groups since the invasion of Ukraine: “The Question of the Danger of Generalised Imperialist War”, in Revolution or War no. 21, June 2022

[2]  See Footnote [1]

[3] See "The working class is still fighting!", World Revolution 400, Spring 2024.

[4] “ICC 24th Congress: The Rowing Boat of Decomposition Takes on Water”, Revolution or War no. 20

[6] “On the various appeals and statements from revolutionary groups since the invasion of Ukraine: The Question of the Danger of Generalised Imperialist War - The ICC Joint Statement of Groups of the Communist Left”, Revolution or War 21

[7] Ibid

[8]  Theses on decomposition, International Review 107, 2001

[9] “On the various appeals and statements from revolutionary groups since the invasion of Ukraine: The Question of the Danger of Generalised Imperialist War,” Revolution or War no. 21, June 2022.

[10]“Two years on from the Joint Statement of the Communist Left on the war in Ukraine”, International Review 172, 2024.

[11] In the article “The marxist foundations of the notion of political parasitism and the fight against this scourge”, International Review 171, 2024. See the section headed “The IFICC (ancestor of the IGCL), an extreme form of parasitic grouping".

[12] “On the various appeals and statements from revolutionary groups since the invasion of Ukraine: The Question of the Danger of Generalized Imperialist War”, Revolution or War no. 21, June 2022.

[13] Ibid

Rubric: 

Political parasitism