Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 20:13:20 +0000
From: Joćo Paulo Monteiro <jpmonteiro-AT-mail.telepac.pt>
Subject: M-I: Transitional Program


A critique of Trotsky=92s =91Transitional Programm=92 (1938)



This document is now only slightly younger than my father and it=92s not
ageing any more gracefully than he is. But then Leon (asides from the
fact that he would never have expected us to live in capitalist
societies by 1996, or is it 7) would probably blush to see it in the
center of marxist debate almost sixty years on. Since there have been a
number o references to it in these lists and I was caught in the most
innocent ignorance of it=92s content in the course of a debate with Bob
Malecki, I decided to read it carefully and give it a critical review.
Trotskyism has no tradition whatsoever in the portuguese marxist debates
or workers=92 movements - it first appeared in the 70=92s straight from the
student agitation of the time. Presently we have only a small group
(Partido Socialista Revolucion=E1rio - mandelite, Unified Secretariat) of
youngsters, with some intelectuals and artists on it too. It=92s
literature (I subscribe their monthly magazine =91Combate=92) is all about
music, life styles, the latest cultural trends, education problems, drug
liberalization, comics, women and gay problems, etc., etc.. Not a
paragraph of marxist debate and nothing of interess to the workers -
strikes, wages negotiations, union life. They couldn=92t care less for the
=91Transitional Program=92.
Lets see it, from point 1 to 21 (bolshevik=92s lucky number, remember?). I
am reading a portuguese edition. My quotes may not coincide exactly you
what you have in front of you.



1. =93The objective requisites of socialist revolution=94

I never could quite understand this story about the objective conditions
been ripe (or indeed rotting) but the subjective conditions totally
missing. This smells bad dialectics. The =93subjective=94 factors are
included in the general historical conditions, or, by other words, the
historical process is an entirely materialistic one. If the forces of
production are ready, the relations of production are hurting social
development and the subjective factors will meet the challenge.
Inevitably. Ideology, organization, tactics and revolutionary energy
will be there =91just in time=92. I mean, we can have (by biological
aleatory factors) very good leaders in one generation and not so good in
the next. We can meet some hindrances on a superstructure level. But, on
a global historical perspective, I=92m sure everything will fit in place
just fine. What I=92m not so sure of is the result of the final assault.
I have a quarrel about concepts such as =93decadence=94, =93putrefaction=94
=93decomposition=94 and others current in trotskyite and left-communist
circles. We now know that capitalism=92s best years were yet to come when
Trotsky wrote this document. Contrary to what he says, keynesianism
would indeed rescue capitalism from its acute crisis of these years,
spreading the most astonishing period of sustained growth and technical
revolution that the history of humanity as ever witnessed (1947-72).
There=92s a strong sugestion in Trotsky=92s text, and elsewhere, that all
capitalist countries would end up turning to fascism. In short,
pratically everything he says here is proved wrong.


2. =93The Proletariat and its direction=94

Leon could be a loathsome guy. I never could understand what he had
against Andres Nin and the P.O.U.M..
O.K., everything=92s ready for revolution, except all these traitors and
imbeciles that can=92t see it yet.


3. =93Minimum program and transition program=94

Interesting. However, in the last paragraph, he seems to be seeing a
continuum between minimum demands and proletarian revolution. This is
yet to be proven. Socialism step by step never worked. Until now, we
were never able to keep a suficient level of sustained and mounting
pressure from below.
That approach seems to be dependent once again of his =93decadent
capitalism=94 suposition that we now know was wrong then. Is it right now?
We can never know for sure. We=92ll have to keep knocking.


4. =93Wage mobile scale and mobile scale of work hours=94

Excellent stuff. It=92s feasability certainly deserves to be studied in
detail.


5. =93The unions in the transition epoch=94

I have no objections on the general idea, but I wouldn=92t remove entirely
the option of creating new unions (or similar organisms), although not
in a sectist base of course. There have been some interesting and
creative initiatives in France (in a totaly apolitical approach) among
nurses, civil servants, etc..
I wonder if his numbers on unionization are still correct generally. For
Portugal, they=92re not. We do a little better than that.


6. =93Factory comités=94

I don=92t think we can speek of =93dual power=94 with the simple constitution
of factory comités. We had lots of those in Portugal back in 1974-75 and
the state bourgeois power was unimpressed. The only problem worrying
them was restless far-left military rebelion. We had workers comités on
the factories (many of them occupied) and popular comissions on a
neighborhood basis but not any integration between them. And no
political party willing or able to lead this movement. I would start
speaking of dual power when a significative part of the production is in
the workers=92 hands, politically organized at local, national and
international level. I don=92t believe we can do this in a national basis
anymore. Only after disrupting decisively the core capitalist countries
(although maybe through a revolutionary movement that can have its
beginnings anywhere in the near periphery) can we move forward to build
real, solid workers=92 power.


7. =93Commercial secret and workers control over industry=94

Trotsky believed (Lenin too, hellas) that the process of concentration
and centralization of capital would lead to a giant national trust. The
proletarian revolution=92s task would be simply to expropriate the
bourgeoisie and keep on the economic planification by more or less
similar means. There will be, of course, some measure of workers=92
control but the bulk of the planning will be transfered to =93specialists
sincerely devoted to the people: accountants, statisticians, engineers,
savants, etc.=94. Very slippery business indeed.
Trotsky=92s obsession with =93great public works=94 betrays his capital
accumulation approach to building socialism. Given the time he would be
starting a =93great leap forward=94 of his own. I always had the impression
that that story about =93degenerate workers=92 state=94 should be read like
this: put me in the place of that son-of-a-bitch and I=92ll un-degenerate
it in a few weeks.


8. =93The expropriation of certain capitalist groups=94

Again that progessive =93expropriation=94 approach. He now takes care to
contrast it with the reformist=92s nationalizations and, on point 4), we
do have mention to a linkage with workers=92 and peasents=92 power. But this
is the guy of all those expedient administrative methods back in Russia,
including integration of the unions in the state. I always found a facet
of cold, =93modernist=94 social engineer on him. I=92ve read some =93visionary=94
texts of his once and it was stuff worth of =931984=94 or =93Brave New World=94.


9. =93Expropriation of privat banks and

All this question of =93finance capital=94 being in command (it goes back to
Hilferding, by way of Lenin) needs to be reevaluated. There=92s no strong
evidence suporting it.
A single state bank then. I won=92t pronunciate myself on the technical
side of the question. But I=92m already seeing too much state here and too
few internationalism. And this state is the bourgeois state, that later
will pass =93from the explorers=92 to the workers=92 hands=94 (last paragraph).
Just like that? Totally unchanged?


10. =93Strike pickets, combat unities, workers=92 militia and arming the
proletariat=94

This was certainly apropriate in the 20=92s and 30=92s. We haven=92t had this
kind of permanent street gang warfare since then, which doesn=92t mean we
won=92t have it soon if the present crisis keeps deepening.
The british S.W.P. no doubt draws from here its appeal for some physical
action against the fascist gangs. Well, I=92m all for it. But I hardly see
any historical analogy. Yet.
The National Rifle Association will be delighted.


11. =93Alliance of the workers and the peasents=94

The peasent question in the most developed capitalist countries has been
completely shaken since then. The bourgeoisie has learned its bit too.
It doesn=92t like to be fired upon from two fronts. As things are for the
moment in Europe, with heavy subsidizing of agricultural production by
state and UE institutions, I don=92t think we stand much of a chance of
having the peasentry on our side. Anyway, its number has decreased
dramatically. We would expect further advance of the capitalist
relations of production into the countryside but that is precisely where
the bourgeois-peasent alliance is puting the brakes on. In developed
countries, wherever the small peasentry isn=92t nearly extinct it=92s
heavily engaged in the bourgeoisie=92s embrace.


12 - =93The fight against imperialism and war=94

This is mostly of pure historical interest.


13. =93The worker-peasent government=94

The same here. The worker-peasent alliance could still make some sense
in countries like India, Egypt or Indonesia but it must engage a faction
of the local bourgeoisie in some kind of national-popular democratic
regeneration movement. Success for a proletarian revolution is
unthinkable here unless integrated in a global movement that strikes
decisively the core capitalist countries.


14. =93The soviets=94

Fine.


15. =93Backward countries and the program of transitory demands=94

There are no =93colonial or semi-colonial countries=94 left. Permanent
revolution is out of business, if it ever made any sense. No
significative =93feudal heritage=94 can be found anywhere. No national
independence problems. All countries of some relevance in the world
today are predominantly capitalist and industrialized, although most of
them are peripheric and dependent, which is totally another problem.
There are more hunter-gatherers than =93feudals=94 now-a-days but I suppose
we=92re not considering permanent-revolutionizing the inuit, the
amazonians or Iryan Jaya.
Permanent revolution was an interesting concept in the sense of world
revolution. But if we have learned something with the XXth century
revolutions it is precisely that we can=92t voluntaristicaly whip out some
isolated backward country into socialism just like that.


16. =93Transitory demands program in the fascist countries=94

Painful to read. Totally frustrated expectations.


17. =93The situation in the USSR and the tasks of the transitory epoch=94

The same here. Wrong, totally wrong analysis.
How could he, at this time, still point =93real bolcheviks=94 among the
=93soviet=94 burocracy? I wonder what happened to Reiss. He must have had
cardiac colapse on reading this. The GPU found him stone dead already.
=93Cain-Stalin=94? Is this premonitory or something? Iosip Djugashvili,
where is your brother Leon?


18. =93Against oportunism and unprincipled revisionism=94

A bit of rhetorics won=92t do no harm. No analysis of the different
patterns of reformist and oportunistic degeneration is offered. No ways
shown for avoiding them.


19. =93Against sectarianism=94

This must be against the bordiguists and other left-communists. It=92s a
piece of sectarian loathe on its own, wrapped up in dreams of grandeur.
Worst was to come. I just wish he could have followed trotskyism.


20. =93A place for youth! A place for labouring women!=94

Sure, why not. If this is the only prescription available against
oportunistic degeneration, I=92m afraid it won=92t take us very far.


21. =93Under the banner of the IV International=94

Well, I=92m afraid the =93sceptics=94 were right. It didn=92t work. It had a
complete program, doctrine, tradition and some cadre endowed with an
=93unmatched temper=94. How ungrateful of the workers not to have gathered
at once under this =93stainless banner=94. I=92m glad there are some dedicated
people still trying to kick start this thing.




Now, my trotskyite friends. This document here is a precious historical
relic indeed, but it=92s quite obvious it can only have a very residual
and occasional usefulness in any serious reconstructive effort of
marxist politics today. Why do you keep brandishing it like the holy
grail of revolution?


Jo=E3o Paulo Monteiro



     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---