我的关于建立新的工人政党问题的译文:

理论


世界各地的工人面临的一个主要问题是政治代表问题。传统的工人组织逐渐地向右转并放弃了社会主义的理念。这里是Peter Taaffe从历史以及意大利和德国最近的经验中总结的一些教训，同时着重关注巴西最新的发展。

建设新的工人政党的问题


历史的和意大利和德国最近的经验教训，以及巴西最新的发展情况。

Peter Taaffe，英格兰和威尔士社会主义党总书记

世界各地开展工人运动的一个核心问题-在现阶段这也许是最关键的-在大多数国家缺乏以一个或多个群众性工人政党的形式发出的独立的政治声音。柏林墙的倒塌和可憎的斯大林政权的垮台亦见证了对计划经济的清除。这是一个重要的历史转折点，对于工人阶级，这具有重大的后果，尤其是它的意识。正好与20世纪90年代长期繁荣和新自由资本主义冷酷的压力相应，社会民主党和'共产’党的根基也腐烂变质。前者，过去列宁和托洛茨基把它归结为'资产阶级工人政党' ，可看到他们完全失去他们的'工人'基础，因为他们已经蜕变成纯粹的资产阶级形式。这意味着在几代人中的第一次—为1 00多年来，在英国的情况下—工人阶级没有一个群众性的政治平台。

不过，马克思主义者面临这样一个局面在历史上不是第一次。马克思和恩格斯都不认为工人运动仅仅通过鼓动、宣传甚或他们强大的理论思想就可以获得独立的阶级意识或社会主义觉悟的。马克思认为经历和与此相结合的科学社会主义思想将成为工人阶级的最好的老师。正是基于这个原因，马克思从来没有淡化他自己的思想理论宝库，而是比如通过建立第一国际在行动中努力和完全不同的工人阶级力量结合起来。

在国际工作中，马克思主义者与英国工团主义者甚至无政府主义者结合。马克思始终从工人阶级的组织和意识的现有状态起继续推进，通过自己的无与伦比的介入以谋求使其达到更高水平。第一国际完成了这一艰巨的任务，但随着巴黎公社的失败和由巴枯宁领导的无政府主义者的蓄意破坏分裂，第一国际竭尽了它的历史使命而告终。但是，通过群众性政党的发展和接纳社会主义等等为第二国际准备条件，这方面的经验是十分重要的。

恩格斯与工党


在十九世纪末，恩格斯在英国采用了与马克思同样的基本做法，比如，在工人阶级的'漫长的冬眠期'，他耐心地宣传一个'独立工人政党’ 的思想，以反对当时的社会主义者，甚至'马克思主义'宗派势力。举例来说，他没有把自己树立在曾经超过10000名成员但对待其他势力特别是结合起来以建立一个独立工人阶级政党的想法采取极端主义和宗派的态度的形式上拥护'科学社会主义'的社会民主党联盟的基础上。那时在开展工人运动中没有比恩格斯更杰出的理论家了，历史上也仅次于马克思本人，但恩格斯坚持认为，以英国工人阶级意识和政治组织的目前的状态，如果它‘真正的向前迈进一步'，这将相当于一打纲要。后来这被群众性工党本身的发展所完全地认可和证明：如果工人阶级群众没有首先经历过它自己的独立的政党的经验，那么英国具有群众基础的'纯真'无瑕的马克思主义的组织不会发展。

当工党形成时，甚至当它还没有一个社会主义的条款时，列宁对工党采取了同样广泛的做法。他认为虽然工党" 不认可阶级斗争，阶级斗争将一定认可工党" 。这再次被继俄国革命后的英国的带有突出的革命色彩的急剧的向左转所证明。这通过工党的著名的条款四在采纳社会主义壮志的工党中传达。这仅仅在1995年才被英国首相布莱尔清除。

自那时起，尽管有居住在新自由主义新工党的大海里的一个孤立的左翼改革者的前哨基地中的如Tony Benn那样的孤注一掷的行动，'新工党'的这一政治堕落的进程已势不可挡和不可改变了。这种蜕变的后果不只是思想上的而且对工人阶级产生了重大的影响。资产阶级高度成功地利用斯大林主义的崩溃进行了遍及全世界的思想反革命运动。其最大的效果发生在社会民主党高层和工会右翼身上。他们热情地对市场的拥抱加强了资产阶级的能力以带着撒切尔的口头禅， '没有替代'来兜售其新自由主义方案。与20世纪80年代不同，那时这个想法被拒绝，而现在被前社会民主党领袖和工会右翼所加强。

“没有更好的选择了，这是唯一的选择。”


当有改良派，'资产阶级工人政党'，统治阶级就至少被迫留意有没有人在监视自己。这些政党在一定程度上也是一种对资产阶级走的'太远'的'检查'，至少部分如此。综观今天的德国，加强了这种看法。由Oskar Lafontaine领导的'左翼'政党的出现，甚至他和这个政党有不足之处，但仍然对社会民主党（ SPD ）产生了影响。由于陷入与默克尔的基督教民主党结成的资产阶级联盟，在选举上和在会员上，社民党遭受了支持上的巨大的损失。反过来说，左翼党从社民党那里拉走了很多支持者，据民意调查，左翼党的支持率目前维持在12 ％左右。这反过来又迫使社民党反对部分'改革' ，如对失业者的野蛮打击，原先在该联盟与前施罗德政府里，他们自己接受了这个“改革”。

在英国，撒切尔的口头禅现在成为布朗的了。他向工会领导层吟诵着'你有什么新工党的替代呢？’。他们的答案就像一个行凶抢劫的受害者那样死抱布朗的腿，因为他猛踢工人阶级和工会本身。现在英国的选举-三个主要政党在'糊涂的中间立场’中不能有效地区分彼此' –事实上是一场闹剧。正如卫报的Polly Toynbee指出的，'先者当选'的选举制度，加上缺乏'选择'，意味着英国下次选举的结果将最终取决于'边缘'。仅仅2万个'摇摆选民’决定这些席位胜负。

这正好与工会上层如工会的Prentis和现在的其他人那样的占主导地位的僵化的右翼官僚集团相配合，这体现在最近地方政府的选票和邮政争议中，这大大地阻滞了任何有效的劳工行动。但来自下层的巨大的不满意味着无论在工业上还是在政治上，这种情况不能允许在没有挑战中继续下去了。如果没有来自左翼包括工会左翼的严肃的挑战，布朗在了解到'没有更好的选择了这是唯一的选择'后会觉得很安全将继续藐视地威胁工会，特别是他们的领导。

目前法国工人阶级在与执意要砸碎自己的权利和社会地位的萨科齐政府的英勇的斗争中面临着相同的困境。在过去15年里，法国资产阶级每一次力图以这样的方式对抗工人阶级，都要么以局部失败结束或'撤回'而结束。但考虑到他们感觉到他们在欧洲和国际上已落后于他们的资本主义的竞争对手，'这个时候'，他们就拼命地迫使工人阶级让步。缺乏一个以群众性政党的形式形成的强大的凝聚力中心，这无疑是削弱法国斗争的一个因素。

萨科齐能够在上次反对他自己的政府的大选中获胜，据他的说法，当时的政府是主持'闭塞社会'的。他唯一能够做到这一点的原因是没有来自罗耶尔女士和她现在的资产阶级“社会主义”党的挑战。罗耶尔女士许诺的每周35小时工作制只是嘴上说得好听，选举之后，她立即出尔反尔。即使在1995年，当法国工人打败了资产阶级及其朱贝计划'，但是缺乏一个群众性的政治替代是显而易见的。那时资本家可能被迫退缩，但因为没有替代性政府及没有群众性政党推动这一进程导致没有得到所有必要的定论。

巴西的教训


由于成立于2004年的社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的形成源于反对卢拉政府于2002年当选之后的向右转，这种情况在巴西并不存在。该党的形成及其以后的演变对巴西本身来说是很重要的，而且还给国际上的工人和左翼运动提供了很多经验教训。社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的建立尤其是公共部门的工人对卢拉和他的工人党（PT）政府在诉求巴西的资本主义中打击工人的迅速的背叛的极端厌恶之产物。

在这部分巴西左翼之前，甚至那些托洛茨基前辈对卢拉建立一个'左翼'政府抱有一些希望。尽管事实上卢拉本人在选举之前曾表现出他屈服于新自由主义的'华盛顿共识' -私有化，不稳定的工作，向外资曲膝-的倾向，那些托洛茨基前辈对卢拉建立一个'左翼'政府依然抱有一些希望。他的右倾转化通过他赢得国际上新自由主义'社会民主党'高层领导们的赞许表现出来。尽管布莱尔与曼德尔森曾攻击过工人党（PT）和卢拉，现在，他得到的只是赞赏。诚如其所言，卢拉被证明使巴西的资本主义和帝国主义放在了‘中用的人手里’。但是，这次对公务员的打击激起了工人党（PT）内部的反对，这通过很多工人党（PT）的议会代表，如Heloísa Helena, Baba 和 Luciano Genro helo有力地表达出来了。他们连同另一个下院议员因反对卢拉的'养老改革方案’而被立即开除。

鉴于事实上卢拉-不同于布莱尔-出生于巴西工人阶级深处，这个被出卖的感觉是十分强烈的。社会主义自由党(P-SoL)集结了巴西战斗的激进的左翼部分。在2004年的成立大会上，该党明显的是社会主义倾向和向左的，其中大部分参加者有托洛茨基背景。托洛茨基主义在拉丁美洲尤其在巴西和阿根廷根基很深。这主要表现在两个主要的趋势，欧内斯特•蔓德尔的第四国际（USFI）联合秘书处和由Nahuel Moreno领导的’morenoite’组织， ' morenoism '和它的国际组织the Liga Internacional de lTrabajadores（LIT -国际工人联合会）代表了蔓德尔的一种反动，他在某一阶段结合了极左的政策-包括灾难性的支持城市游击队运动-带有随即导致第四国际（USFI）在巴西分裂的机会主义。他的一些过去的追随者作为部长参加了卢拉政府。

在‘morenoite’的传统中，可以看到的一个传统就是令人钦佩的工人的自我牺牲，许多人都作出了很大的牺牲，他们中的一些人为工人的事业付出了他们的生命。这种情况尤其在阿根廷和巴西。在同一时间内，莫雷诺对蔓德尔机会主义的反对被粗略地表达出来。此外，莫雷诺自己由于高估了20世纪80年代阿根廷MAS而犯了严重极左错误。虽然阿根廷MAS成长成为一个相当大的力量，莫雷诺高估了其'夺取政权'的能力。他去世后，他的后继者犯了不少错误，而其中最重要的是在斯大林主义崩溃上。他们一边倒地认为这是个’进步’。即使是国际上持有由华尔街日报概括的在一篇社论中宣布的对于资本主义’我们赢了’的观点的资产阶级也不这样。

这导致的结果是‘morenoism’分裂成竞相争夺基础薄弱的前‘morenoite’激进分子的支持的不同的组织和'国际’。当面对反对者时，不是辩论和讨论观点-这是工人国际委员会（CWI）的传统-而是如英国SWP的做法专断地开除，或者仅仅'要求自动离开'，这是其领导层的通常的反应。

早期的成功


尽管如此，成立社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的大多数人来自工人党（PT）并具有托洛茨基的背景。在2006年的总统选举中，为了取代卢拉的所谓的传统左翼'政府，作为该党的总统候选人的来自蔓德尔传统的Heloísa Helena获得了近7百万张选票。对于一个非常年轻的政党，这是极大的成功-举例来说，相比于PT在1982年的第一次全国选举运动更为成功-这有力地证明了那些如像“社会主义革命”（Socialismo Revolucionário [SR]）和CWI的始终赞成建立一个新的群众性政党的主张是正确的。因此，“社会主义革命”（Socialismo Revolucionário [SR]）是社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的先锋之一-在第一阶段出借其资源和办事处给该党-在该党自己的国家行政机关中也举足轻重。最重要的是，这个新政党明文昭示确保如下权利：它是非常民主的平台和具有民主倾向的。

不过，这样的政党，就像德国左翼政党，不是激烈的阶级斗争尤其是工业冲突时期诞生的，这就是如20世纪80年代的工人党（PT）或在存在的第一阶段声称为社会主义者和'革命'的南非工会联合会COSATU的情况。这在社会主义自由党(P-SoL)身上打上了特定的印记：它过去是现在仍然是一个群众性工人阶级政党。俄国革命后形成的新的群众性政党是带领着旧党中的绝大部份的工人积极份子从旧的工人阶级组织和社会民主党中分裂出来的。即使在那时，社会民主党，成员匮乏，仍然留有残余的非工人积极分子的支持。有时，大多数工人醉心于这些组织是由于纯粹的历史惯性和缺乏需要一个新的革命政党的意识。正如列宁和托洛茨基认为的，这就要求这些新的共产党采取'统一战线'的战术以在行动上接触和影响仍然处在社会民主党旗下的工人。

同时，由于卢拉政府转向右边，它越加削弱它的基础。工人党（PT）支持的巴西参议院议长Renan Calheiros已因为一个贪污丑闻被迫离开。据指控，除其他活动外，尤其是他付款给一个他与之有外遇并和她有一个3岁的女儿的前女记者。腐败在巴西很常见，这是资产阶级政党的地方病。但Renan的劣行是一个'极大的丑闻'。民意压力迫使卢拉采取行动解职了Renan。

但自2005年5月以来卢拉政府一直遭到腐败的指控。最初，它们造成了严重损害，但腐败是如此习以为常，如此地和巴西政治生活结成一体以至于巴西人民期待不到更好的政治家了。估计有30 ％的国会代表有对他们提起的刑事诉讼。事实上，很多人谋求职位以避免受到法院的起诉！一项研究指出腐败的代价相当于国内生产总值的0.5 ％。然而，曾经有一段时间，工人党（PT）因它的一个新的社会主义社会的远景被视为'不同'。现在，像其对应的在欧洲和其他地方的前社会民主党和前共产党首领一样接受了资本主义，它已接受了与之相应的'“猪肉桶分肥”'哲学。

巴西资产阶级接受了卢拉的政府，因为它在捍卫资本主义的利润上很'能做事'。信贷和国内需求异常火爆，因为数以百万计的巴西穷人成为'初次消费者’（金融时报）。当美国经济出现垮台及其对作为巴西商品的一个巨大的市场的中国发生影响时会发生什么事则是另一回事了。即使整个巴西经济增长速度放慢，对期待着卢拉政府把百万计的巴西人从日常生活的梦魇中拉出来的成百万人特别是对穷人来说都是一个大灾难。农业，服务业，甚至工业都在世界经济上升的支持下经历了增长。同时，消费者消费也上升了，主要得益于最低工资和最穷的人的福利的少许提高和经济活动中自2003年来规模增加了一倍的约占35 ％的国内生产总值的信贷的投入。世界经济放缓或衰退的可能对拥有由近期经济增长和创造出的尽管工资非常低的就业机会产生的希望的成百万人有破坏性影响。

政府声称至2007年7月的12个月里创造了120多万个就业岗位。这意味着一些最贫穷阶层的人，甚至工人阶级阶层从卢拉政府那里获益。因此，选举上潜在的对政府的支持至今仍未消失。作为'最好选择'，资产阶级容忍了卢拉，绝大多数穷人和工人阶级还没有撤回他们对政府的支持。但另一方面，中产阶层在基础设施，特别是航空业感觉到了剧烈的危机。他们中多数反对政府。经济，社会和政治局势因此极不稳定。

要进一步发展其重要的但有限的6 ％的选民基础，社会主义自由党(P-SoL)应该将自己定位于吸引那些仍暂留在卢拉和工人党（PT）中的工人阶级的‘巨大储备’使之加入他们的行列。一旦巴西遭受经济的暴风雨和由其引起的社会波动,他们将与卢拉和工人党（PT）决裂。但并不保证他们将转向社会主义自由党(P-SoL)，如果该党本身并没有吸引他们的政策，战略和策略的话。

联盟陷阱


意大利重建共产党(PRC)的发展对社会主义自由党(P-SoL)和巴西有很多经验教训和警告。意大利重建共产党(PRC)的创建对意大利工人阶级来说是向前迈了一大步，但在初始阶段，它只有最激进的先进阶层。该党，特别在贝尔蒂诺蒂领导下，没有严重破坏左翼民主派的基础（DS-前共产党的大部分），甚至当后者移向右边时亦然。其中一个原因是意大利重建共产党(PRC)不一致的立场，特别是它不惜牺牲一个动态的阶级斗争政策而把重点放在选票至上主义上。此外，意大利重建共产党(PRC)领导层滑向联盟主义的泥潭而非追求工人阶级对资本主义的不调和的政策。即使在'国家联盟'形成之前，在当地和全市范围，意大利重建共产党(PRC)与资产阶级政党分享权力。这往往导致对工人和当地的工会的攻击，在工人看来，意大利重建共产党(PRC)应对此负责。

在全国意义上，从这到同普罗迪的资产阶级政党正式的联盟不是一大步。起初，意大利重建共产党(PRC)只是从外部支持1996年的'和平'政府。甚至没有得到部长职位的'好处'和与之相随的名头，随着这个政府对工人阶级和工会的打击，意大利重建共产党(PRC)因此遭到了协会的憎恶。这为贝卢斯科尼的返回铺平了道路。现在在意大利他们进了一步，正式加入了和巴西的卢拉那样打击养老金，教育和所有意大利工人阶级过去得到的成果的普罗迪的联盟。在作为意大利下议院议长的贝尔蒂诺蒂的指挥棒下，意大利重建共产党(PRC)正在被看作一个特定的单独的工人政党以便蜕皮变成一具为了创造另一个自由资本主义政党而戴上的作为'革命的东西'的一个部分之面具。

在意大利重建共产党(PRC)内部，这个过程尚未完全完成，但如果社会主义自由党(P-SoL)和所有新的工人阶级组织接受联盟主义的话，它对他们是一个很大的警告。如果没有明确的政策，这意味着这些新形成的组织不但不能形成凝聚群众的中心之源而且可能夭折。社会主义自由党(P-SoL)尚未至此地步，但使其不惜牺牲插手阶级斗争特别是劳工斗争和总的社会运动而顺从于选举一面的资产阶级社会的巨大的压力已对社会主义自由党(P-SoL)领导层产生了影响。

向右转


这在不重视激进政策的选举中被反映出来,尤其在其总统侯选人Heloísa Helena身上反映出来,之所以这样做是为了赢得最大的选票数,她也反对堕胎,但是在该问题上,她和大多数社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的成员发生了冲突.Heloísa Helena的立场遇到了来自最近的社会主义自由党(P-SoL)大会的多数代表的不缓和的反对,但是在她周围的一群人,特别是如来自Rio Grande Del Sul的MP LucianaGenro的一些人已寻求把社会主义自由党(P-SoL)推向更为实用的更为右倾的政策上去,由来自工人党（PT）的现已加入社会主义自由党(P-SoL)行列的“流亡者”加强了这些政策.

他们一起成功地使社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的领导层转向右,这反过来激起了左派的反对,其中社会主义革命（Socialismo Revolucionário）起着作用.反对只得到了社会主义自由党(P-SoL)大会中低于四分之一的支持票, 社会主义革命（Socialismo Revolucionário）寻求超越之即通过社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内部的四团体来形成一个左翼的一致性最强的组织之联合阵线, 社会主义革命（Socialismo Revolucionário）和在巴西扩展的其他有托洛茨基背景的组织卷入了其中。这样的发展在历史上同样地出现过.1933年希特勒在没有共产党的有力的抵制下获胜后,在现存的”国际’中存在着信心上的深深的危机.托洛茨基提出要建立一个新的第四国际的主张,由此产生的是“四团体”政党的形式,托洛茨基认为这额外地重要,这四党是托洛茨基国际左翼反对派、德国社会主义工人党（SAP）以及两个荷兰的左翼政党，即革命社会主义党（RAP）和独立社会主义党（OSP），他们在于马克思列宁的原则基础上的“新国际”宣言上签了字。

早期的“四团体”设定了比目前社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内的四团体更加宏伟的目标，但是问题基本上是一样的，即如何在工人阶级运动中使左翼的潜力最大化，这个团体因为非托洛茨基政党的领导政治上的不一致而没有巩固成为一个新的永久性的形式。在巴西的情况下的组织在政治上假如可以获得透明的话，是一直有机会在社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内形成一个一致的政治力量而更为紧密相连的。

社会主义自由党(P-SoL)，包括意大利的意大利重建共产党(PRC)的早期经历表明假如一个新的政党转向右的话，持续的成功，影响的扩大和成员的扩大不是自动地得到保证的。可是社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的左翼比意大利重建共产党(PRC)的左翼更为清晰并且更具潜力，这是因为来自意大利重建共产党(PRC)的基础的托洛茨基组织寻求了基本不正确的政策。由Livio Maitan领导的第四国际（USFI）和Bertinotti是不能区别开来的。长期以来，他们是相同“派系”的一部分，因此没有形成实质性的力量，其他人要么采用极左立场或者纯粹是宣传性的超级聪明的解说员的角色。

巴西的四团体


目前在社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内组织起来的左翼反对派在政治上比这更强。该组织的联合阵线，社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内的四团体，特别是包括来自位于巴西北部Belem的Alternativa Revolucionária Socialista（革命社会主义-ARS）的同志，圣宝罗的另一个组织是由在圣保罗和一个非常重要的洲Minas Gerais的富有斗争历史的工人组成的CLS，在该洲，CLS在社会运动特别是失地运动以及印刷工人中有很深的基础，另外两个组织参加了这个团体。人们希望四团体在一系列能够吸引社会主义自由党(P-SoL)中的其他持不同政见组织的会议和公众活动中能团结起来。

与此同时，马克思主义者-托洛茨基者左翼的重组进程正在推进，在最近的由在四团体中工作的组织代表参加的会议上，“社会主义革命”（Socialismo Revolucionário [SR]）和这些同志设定了建立人数上更强和更为有影响的马克思主义力量的任务，鉴于在该阶段，社会主义自由党(P-SoL)相对地缺乏新的工人阶级的阶层，仅仅通过集中在党内的活动是不能完成这个任务的，在工业舞台上的斗争即使不能说尤为关键也是事关重大的，但是社会主义自由党(P-SoL)还没有用尽它的潜力。卢拉主义和工人党（PT）的破产将导致重要的阶层把他们的希望寄予社会主义自由党(P-SoL)身上。建立一个新的群众性工人政党的正当理由之一就是提供一个能把至今分崩离析的工人阶级和左翼力量聚集在一起的机会。

这样的新的政党是一个用来讨论、辩论和制定能保证工人阶级在未来获得成功的政策的工具，在该政党内的一个可行的马克思主义者-托洛茨基主义者骨干对于它的成功是至关重要的，没有的话，这些政党，包括社会主义自由党(P-SoL)，即使他们一开始成功，终会停滞、甚至从政治舞台上衰退和消失，在巴西，考虑到该党中的马克思主义的影响，这看起来是不可能的。

将被整个世界的马克思主义者热情地追随的巴西的马克思主义者的任务是通过社会主义自由党(P-SoL)左翼的最好的力量聚集起来以便干预社会主义自由党(P-SoL)内展开的进程和清晰地与改良主义和口头上革命行动上改良的中间路线温和主义决裂。迈向成功的第一步是创建强有力的带有清晰远景、策略、战略和组织性的托洛茨基组织。资本主义正在陷入危机，但是这不自动地意味着左翼将赢得什么。为此，需要建立新的群众性工人政党。全世界的马克思主义者将热情地关注和研究学习社会主义自由党(P-SoL)的发展经验教训以便为其它地方的相似发展提供经验教训的借鉴。

来自当今社会主义12月7日/1月8日版

socialistworld.netcommittee for a workers’ internationalsocialistworld.netcommittee for a workers’ internationalcwi@worldsoc.co.ukTheoryProblems of buildingnew workers' partiesPeter TaaffeGeneral SecretarySocialist Party, England and Wales23 December 2007Lessons from history, the recent experience of Italy andGermany, and the latest developments in Brazil.socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 2TheoryProblems of building new workers' partiesLessons from history, the recent experience of Italy and Germany, and the latest de-velopments in Brazil.Peter Taaffe, General Secretary, Socialist Pary, England and WalesOne of the major issues facing workers around the world is political representation. Traditionalworkers' organisations have been moving steadily rightwards, abandoning the ideas of socialism.Here Peter Taaffe draws some lessons from history and from the recent experience of Italy andGermany, while focussing on the latest developments in Brazil.A central question for the worldwide workers'movement - perhaps the most crucialat this stage - is the absence in mostcountries of an independent political voicein the form of a mass workers' party orparties.The collapse of the Berlin wall and the odiousStalinist regimes also witnessed the liquida-tion of the planned economies. This was animportant historical turning point, with majorconsequences for the working class and, par-ticularly, its consciousness. Coinciding withthe long 1990s boom and the remorselesspressure of neo-liberal capitalism, this actedto rot the foundations of social democracyand the 'Communist' parties. The former,characterised by Lenin and Trotsky in thepast as 'bourgeois workers' parties', wit-nessed the complete disappearance of their'worker' base as they became purely bour-geois formations. This means that, for the firsttime in generations - for more than 100 yearsin the case of Britain - the working class iswithout a mass political platform.But this is not the first time in history thatMarxists have been confronted with such asituation. Neither Marx nor Engels believedthat the working-class movement would ac-quire an independent class or socialist con-sciousness by agitation, propaganda or eventheir powerful theoretical ideas alone. Experi-ence would be the greatest teacher of theworking class, argued Marx, combined withthe ideas of scientific socialism. It was for thisreason that Marx, while never diluting his owntheoretical treasure trove of ideas, strove tolink together in action the disparate forces ofthe working class, for instance, through theestablishment of theFirst International.The Marxists combined with English trade un-ionists and even anarchists in the work of theInternational. Marx always proceeded fromthe existing level of organisation and con-sciousness of the working class, seekingthrough his own priceless intervention, to takeit to a higher plane. The First International ful-filled this colossal task but, following the de-feat of the Paris Commune and the attemptedsabotage and disruption of the anarchists ledby Bakunin, the First International had ex-hausted its historical mission and was woundup. This experience, however, was vital inpreparing the ground for the Second Interna-tional, with the development of mass parties,the acceptance of socialism, etc.Engels & the Labour PartyThe same basic approach of Marx wasadopted by Engels in the latter part of thenineteenth century, in Britain, for instance,during the working class's 'long winter sleep'.He patiently propagated the idea of an'independent working man's party', in opposi-Theory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 3tion to the socialist and even 'Marxist' sectar-ian forces of the time. He did not base himselfupon the Social Democratic Federation thatformally adhered to 'scientific socialism', forinstance, which had at one time upwards of10,000 members but which adopted an ulti-matist and sectarian attitude towards otherforces and particularly to the idea of combin-ing to create an independent party of theworking class. There was no greater theoreti-cian in the workers' movement then thanEngels, historically second only to Marx him-self, but he insisted that, given the existinglevel of consciousness and political organisa-tion of the British working class, that if it tookone 'real step forward', this would be worth adozen programmes. This was clear recogni-tion, vindicated later by the development of amass Labour Party itself, that a 'pure', unsul-lied Marxist organisation in Britain with massroots would not develop without the mass ofthe working class first passing through theexperience of its 'own' independent party.Lenin adopted the same broad approach to-wards the Labour Party when it came into ex-istence, even when it did not have a socialistclause. He argued that while the Labour Party"does not recognise the class struggle, theclass struggle will certainly recognise the La-bour Party". He was again vindicated with thesharp shift towards the left in Britain, with pro-nounced revolutionary overtones, followingthe Russian revolution. This was expressedwithin the Labour Party with the adoption ofthe socialist aspiration, through its famousClause Four. This was only liquidated by the'bourgeois entrist' Blair in 1995.Since then, the process of political degenera-tion of 'New Labour' has been inexorable andunalterable. This is despite the forlorn hopesof those like Tony Benn who inhabit an iso-lated left reformist outpost in a New Laboursea of neo-liberalism. This degeneration isnot just ideological in its consequences buthas materially affected the struggles of theworking class. The bourgeoisie was highlysuccessful in using the collapse of Stalinismto conduct an ideological counter-revolutionworldwide. Its greatest effects were on thetops of the social democracy and the tradeunion right-wing. Their enthusiastic embraceof the market has strengthened the ability ofthe bourgeoisie to sell its neo-liberal pro-gramme accompanied by Thatcher's mantra,'There is no alternative'. Unlike in the 1980s,when this idea was rejected, it is now rein-forced by the ex-social democratic leadersand the trade union right-wing.The only game in townWhen there were reformist, 'bourgeois work-ers' parties', the ruling class was at leastforced to look over its shoulder. These partieswere to some extent a 'check', at least par-tially, on the bourgeoisie going 'too far'. Aglance at Germany today reinforces thispoint. The emergence of the 'Left' Party ledby Oskar Lafontaine, even with all his and theparty's inadequacies, has nevertheless exer-cised an effect on the Social Democrats(SPD). Enmeshed in a bourgeois coalitionwith Merkel's Christian Democrats, the SPDhas seen a dramatic loss in support, bothelectorally and in membership. Conversely,the Left Party has drawn support away fromthe SPD and presently stands at around 12%in opinion polls. This, in turn, has compelledthe social democrats to oppose some of the'reforms', such as the brutal attack on the un-employed, which they themselves acceptedpreviously within the coalition and the previ-ous Schröder government.In Britain, Thatcher's mantra is now Brown's.'What is your alternative to New Labour?' heintones to the trade union leadership. Theiranswer is to cling to Brown's leg like a mug-ging victim, as he puts the boot in to theworking class and the trade unions them-selves. Elections - with the three major par-ties effectively indistinguishable from one an-other in the 'muddled middle' - are virtually afarce now in Britain. The 'first-past-the-post'electoral system, combined with the absenceTheory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - 4 cwi@worldsoc.co.ukof 'choice', means that the outcome of thenext election in Britain, as Polly Toynbee ofThe Guardian pointed out, will be determinedby the 'marginals'. Ultimately, a mere 20,000'swing voters' in these seats decide the out-come.This goes together with the domination of anossified right-wing bureaucratic caste at thetop of the trade unions, like Prentis of Unisonand now others, as shown in the recent localgovernment ballot and the postal dispute,which acts as a giant brake on any effectiveindustrial action. But the colossal discontentfrom below means that this situation will notbe allowed to continue without a challenge,either industrially or politically. Without a seri-ous challenge from the left, including thetrade union left, Brown will continue to treatthe trade unions and particularly their leader-ship with contempt, safe in the knowledgethat 'New Labour is the only game in town'.A similar dilemma confronts the French work-ing class, locked in an epic struggle at pre-sent with the Sarkozy government, which isbent on smashing its rights and conditions. Inthe last 15 years, each time the French bour-geoisie has sought to confront the workingclass in this way it has ended either in theirpartial defeat or a 'draw'. But given their per-ception that they are falling behind their capi-talist competitors, both in Europe and interna-tionally, they are hell-bent 'this time' on forc-ing concessions from the working class. Theabsence of a mass pole of attraction, in theform of a mass party, is undoubtedly a factorweakening the struggle in France.Sarkozy was able to win the last election witha campaign against his own government,which, according to him, was presiding over a'blocked society'. He was only able to do thisbecause there was no challenge whatsoeverfrom Ségolène Royal and her now bourgeois'Socialist' Party. Paying lip service to the 35-hour week, she immediately repudiated thisafter the election. Even in 1995, when theFrench workers defeated the bourgeois andits 'Juppé plan', the lack of a mass politicalalternative was palpable. The capitalistscould be forced back then but because therewas no alternative government and no masspolitical party to advance this, all the neces-sary conclusions were not drawn.Lessons in BrazilThis situation does not exist in Brazil, be-cause of the formation of the Party of Social-ism and Liberty (P-SoL), which was formed in2004, resulting from the revolt against theLula government's swing towards the rightfollowing his election in 2002. The formationof this party and its subsequent evolution isimportant for Brazil itself but also holds manylessons for the workers and left movementinternationally. The establishment of P-SoLwas a product of the utter disgust felt by pub-lic-sector workers in particular at the speedybetrayal of Lula and his Workers' Party (PT)government in its attacks on them at the be-hest of Brazilian capitalism.Prior to this sections of the Brazilian left, eventhose with Trotskyist antecedents, held outsome hopes that Lula would install a 'left'government in power. This was despite thefact that Lula himself had indicated his capitu-lation to the 'Washington consensus' of neo-liberalism - privatisation, precarious work,bending the knee to foreign capital - prior tothe election. His rightward evolution wasshown by the praise that he earned from thehigh priests of 'social-democratic' neo-liberalism internationally. Whereas Blair andMandelson had attacked the PT and Lula pre-viously, now he earned nothing but praise.True to his word, Lula has proved to be a'safe pair of hands' for Brazilian capitalismand imperialism. The attack on the civil ser-vants, however, provoked opposition withinthe PT, expressed forcefully by a number ofPT parliamentary representatives, such asHeloísa Helena, Baba and Luciano Genro.They were summarily expelled, along withanother MP, by Lula for opposing his 'pensionreform' programme.Theory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 5The sense of betrayal was acute, given thefact that Lula - unlike Blair - had originallycome from the depths of the Brazilian workingclass. P-SoL rallied significant sections of thefighting, militant Brazilian left. At its foundingconference in 2004, the party was markedlysocialist and to the left, with most of thoseparticipating coming from a Trotskyist back-ground. Trotskyism has strong roots in LatinAmerica, particularly in Brazil and Argentina.This was reflected in two main trends, theUnited Secretariat of the Fourth International(USFI) of Ernest Mandel, and the 'Morenoite'organisations, led by Nahuel Moreno.'Morenoism' and its international organisation,the Liga Internacional de los Trabajadores(LIT - International Workers' League) repre-sented a reaction to Mandel, who combinedultra-left policies at one stage - including dis-astrous support for urban guerrilla move-ments - with opportunism, which subse-quently led the USFI to fracture in Brazil.Some of his past adherents have participatedas ministers in the Lula government.Within the Morenoite tradition, one can findadmirable, self-sacrificing workers, with manywho have made big sacrifices, some of thempaying with their lives for the workers' cause.This was particularly the case in Argentinaand Brazil. At the same time, Moreno's oppo-sition to Mandel's opportunism was ex-pressed crudely. Also, Moreno himself, asshown by his overestimation of the MAS inArgentina in the 1980s, made serious mis-takes of an ultra-left character. Although theMAS in Argentina grew into a considerableforce, Moreno overestimated its capacity to'take power'. After his death his heirs mademany mistakes, the most important of whichwas over the collapse of Stalinism. They pre-sent this in a one-sided way as 'progressive'.Not so the bourgeoisie internationally, whoseattitude was summed up by the Wall StreetJournal which declared in an editorial that, forcapitalism, 'We won'.The result of this was a fracturing of More-noism into different organisations and'Internationals', ferociously competing againstone another for the support of a narrowingbase of former Morenoite militants. Whenconfronted by opposition, rather than debat-ing and discussing the ideas out - as is thetradition of the Committee for a Workers' In-ternational (CWI) - arbitrary expulsions, as inthe manner of the British SWP, or merely an'invitation to leave', are the usual reactions ofthe leadership.Early successDespite this, most of those who set up P-SoLcame out of the PT and were from a Trotsky-ist background. In the 2006 presidential elec-tions, Heloísa Helena, who comes from theMandelite tradition, as the party's presidentialcandidate got almost seven million votes as aleft alternative to Lula's alleged 'traditionalleft' government. This spectacular success ofa very young party - more successful, for in-stance, than the PT in its first national elec-toral outing in 1982 - was a complete vindica-tion of those, like Socialismo Revolucionário(SR) and the CWI, who have consistently ar-gued for a new mass party. Consequently,SR was one of the pioneers of P-SoL - lend-ing its resources and offices to the party inthe first period - and also had a presence onthe National Executive of the party itself.Above all, this new party enshrined the rightsof platforms and tendencies, which ensured itwas extremely democratic.However, this party, like the Left Party in Ger-many, has not been born in a period of inten-sified class struggle, particularly industrialconflict, as was the case, for instance, withthe PT in the 1980s or COSATU, the SouthAfrican trade union federation, which waspronouncedly socialist and 'revolutionary' inits first phase of existence. This put a certainstamp on P-SoL: it was and remains a smallmass working-class party. The new massparties that were formed in the aftermath ofthe Russian revolution came from splits in theold organisations of the working class, theTheory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - 6 cwi@worldsoc.co.uksocial democracy, taking with them the greatmajority of the active workers in the old par-ties. Even then, the social democracy, largelyempty of members, still retained residual sup-port from inactive workers. Sometimes it wasthe majority of workers who clung to theseorganisations through sheer historical inertiaand lack of consciousness of the need for anew revolutionary party. This required, asLenin and Trotsky argued, that these newCommunist parties adopt the 'united front'tactic to reach and influence in action theworkers still under the banner of social de-mocracy.However, the new formations, the Communistparties, developed in a period of revolution,were generally large, with an active base, andwith roots within the working class. This is notthe case with the Left Party in Germany,which is mostly an electoral phenomenon atthis stage. Only a few workers and youthhave been prepared to enter its ranks - par-ticularly in Berlin and east Germany. In theseareas it is viewed with suspicion because ofthe party's connections with Stalinism andnow the coalition governments in Berlin, inparticular, and elsewhere that attack the livingstandards of the working class. P-SoL in itsfirst phase of existence was different. A num-ber of Trotskyist organisations were presentbut so also was an important layer of work-ers, of 'independents', etc.At the same time, the Lula government re-pelled more and more of its base as it shiftedtowards the right. The PT-backed president ofthe Brazilian Senate, Renan Calheiros, hasbeen forced to take leave because of a cor-ruption scandal. It is alleged, among otherthings, that he arranged for payments to bemade to a female former journalist with whomhe was having an affair and by whom he hasa three-year-old daughter. Brazil is used tocorruption, which is endemic in bourgeoisparties. But the saga of Renan's misdemean-ours was a 'scandal too far'. Popular pressureforced Lula's hand and Renan has beenejected from office.But Lula's government has been dogged bycharges of corruption since May 2005. Ini-tially, they caused serious damage, but soinured and so 'integrated' into Brazilian politi-cal life is corruption that the Brazilian people'expect nothing better of their politicians'. Anestimated 30% of Congress representativeshave criminal proceedings open againstthem. In fact, many seek office to avoidprosecution from the courts! The cost of cor-ruption is put by one study as equivalent to0.5% of gross domestic product. Yet, therewas a time when the PT was perceived as'different', with its socialist vision of a new so-ciety. Now, like its counterparts the ex-socialdemocrats and ex-Communist party chiefs inEurope and elsewhere, having accepted capi-talism it has embraced the 'pork barrel' phi-losophy that goes with it.The Brazilian bourgeoisie is reconciled toLula's government because it is 'doing thejob', defending capitalism's profits. Credit anddomestic demand are booming as millions ofpoor Brazilians become 'consumers for thefirst time' (Financial Times). What happenswhen the bottom falls out of the US economyand has repercussions on China, a huge mar-ket for Brazil's commodities, is another mat-ter. Even a slowdown in the rate of growth ofthe Brazilian economy will be a catastrophefor millions, especially of the poor, who havelooked towards the Lula government for somedeliverance from the nightmare of daily livingfor millions of Brazilians. Agriculture, the ser-vice economy and even industry have experi-enced growth on the back of the world eco-nomic upswing. Also, consumer spending hasrisen, helped by some increase in the mini-mum wage and benefits for the poorest, andan injection of credit into the economy, whichhas doubled in size since 2003. This is about35% of GDP. A world economic slowdown orrecession could have a devastating effect onthe millions whose hopes have been raisedby the recent growth of the economy and thecreation of jobs, albeit very low paid.The government claims that there have beenTheory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 7more than 1.2 million jobs created in thetwelve months to July 2007. This has meantsome of the very poorest sections of thepopulation and even sections of the workingclass have gained from the Lula government.Consequently, the underlying support elec-torally for the government has not yet evapo-rated. The bourgeoisie tolerates Lula as the'best option', and the poor and working classhave not yet, in the great majority, withdrawntheir support from the government. The mid-dle class, on the other hand, feels mostacutely the crisis in the infrastructure, particu-larly in the airline industry. It is, in its majority,opposed to the government. The economic,social and political situation is consequentlyhighly volatile.To advance further from its important but lim-ited base of 6% of the electorate, P-SoLshould be positioning itself to attract to itsranks the 'heavy reserves' of the workingclass which still tentatively remain behindLula and the PT. They will break from thismooring once Brazil is affected by the stormyeconomic and social waves which impend.But it is not at all guaranteed that they willpass over to P-SoL, if the party itself does notembrace the policies, the strategy and tacticsto attract them.The coalition trapThe development of Rifondazione Comunista(PRC) in Italy holds many lessons and warn-ings for P-SoL and Brazil. The creation of thePRC represented a giant step forward for theItalian working class but, initially, it took with itjust the most militant advanced layers. Theparty, particularly under the leadership of Ber-tinotti, did not seriously undermine the baseof the Democrats of the Left (DS - the bulk ofthe ex-Communist Party) even when the lat-ter moved towards the right. One of the rea-sons for this was the inconsistent position ofthe PRC, particularly its emphasis on elector-alism at the expense of a dynamic class-struggle policy. Moreover, instead of pursuinga policy of working-class intransigence tocapitalism, the PRC leadership slid into theswamp of coalitionism. Even before a'national bloc' was formed, at local and city-wide levels the PRC was sharing power withbourgeois parties. This invariably led to at-tacks on the workers and the unions at a locallevel, which the PRC took responsibility for inthe eyes of the workers.It was not a big step from this to a formal coa-lition with the bourgeois parties around Prodiat a national level. Initially, it was supportfrom the 'outside' by the PRC for the 'OliveTree' government of 1996. Without even the'benefits' of ministerial portfolios and the trap-pings that go with them, the PRC conse-quently earned the odium of association withthis government's attacks on the workingclass and the trade unions. This paved theway for the return of Berlusconi. They havegone a step further in Italy now, formally join-ing Prodi's coalition, which like Lula in Brazilis attacking pensions, education and all thepast gains of the Italian working class. Underthe baton of Bertinotti as 'president' of theItalian Chamber of Deputies, the PRC isshedding its skin as a specifically separateworkers' party to become part of a 'red thing',which is a mask for creating another liberalcapitalist party.The process has not yet been fully completedwithin the PRC but it is a big warning to P-SoL and all new organisations of the workingclass if they embrace coalitionism. Withoutclear policies, this means that these new for-mations, rather than being a chrysalis fromwhich a mass pole of attraction can form,could be smothered at birth. P-SoL has notreached this stage as yet. But the enormouspressures of bourgeois society to 'conform',to elevate the electoral profile at the expenseof intervention in the class struggle, particu-larly the industrial struggle and the socialmovements in general, has had some effecton the leadership of P-SoL.Theory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - 8 cwi@worldsoc.co.ukRightward driftIt was reflected in the elections in the playingdown of radical policies, and particularly itspresidential candidate, Heloísa Helena. Thiswas done in order to court the maximumnumber of votes. She has also opposed abor-tion but has come into conflict on this issuewith the bulk of P-SoL's membership.Heloísa's position met with implacable oppo-sition from the majority of delegates at therecent P-SoL congress. But a group aroundher, particularly some like the MP LucianaGenro from Rio Grande Del Sul, have soughtto push P-SoL towards more 'practical' poli-cies, that is a more right-wing position. Theyhave been reinforced by refugees from thePT, who have now entered the ranks of P-SoL.Together, they have successfully shifted P-SoL's leadership in a rightward direction,which in turn has provoked a left opposition,within which Socialismo Revolucionárioworks. This opposition received just under aquarter of the votes at the P-SoL congress.SR seeks to go beyond this in forging aunited front of the most consistent organisa-tions on the left, through a 'bloc of four' withinP-SoL. This has involved SR together withother groups spread throughout Brazil, all ofwhom come from a Trotskyist background.There are some historical parallels with thisdevelopment. After the victory of Hitler in1933, without the Communist Party undertak-ing serious resistance, a deep crisis of confi-dence in the existing 'Internationals' existed.Trotsky raised the need for a new, 'Fourth'International. Arising from this was the forma-tion of a 'Bloc of Four' parties, described byTrotsky as "exceptionally important". The fourparties were the Trotskyist International LeftOpposition, the Socialist Workers' Party ofGermany (SAP), and two Dutch left parties,the Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP) andthe Independent Socialist Party (OSP), whosigned a declaration for a 'new International'on the principled foundations of Marx andLenin.This earlier 'bloc of four' set itself more gran-diose targets than the present bloc of fourwithin P-SoL but the issues were fundamen-tally the same: how to maximise the potentialfor the left in the working class movement.This bloc was never consolidated into a newpermanent formation because of political in-consistencies of the leaders of the non-Trotskyist parties. The organisations in thecase of Brazil are much closer politically, withevery chance, if political clarity is attained, inforging a coherent political force within P-SoL.P-SoL shows, as also with the earlier'experiment' of the PRC in Italy, that contin-ued success, the growth of influence andnumbers, is not automatically guaranteed if anew party shifts towards the right. However,the left is clearer and has more potential in P-SoL than in the PRC. This is because theTrotskyist organisations, from the foundationof the PRC, pursued a fundamentally incor-rect policy. The USFI, led by the late LivioMaitan, was indistinguishable from Bertinotti -they were for a long time part of the same'fraction' and, consequently, did not gain sub-stantial forces. Others either adopted an ul-tra-left position or a purely propagandistic,super-wise role of commentators.Brazil's bloc of fourThe current organised left opposition in P-SoL is much stronger politically than this. Theunited front of organisations, the bloc of fourwithin P-SoL, includes comrades from Alter-nativa Revolucionária Socialista(Revolutionary Socialist Alternative - ARS),located in particular in Belem in the north ofBrazil. Another organisation in São Paulo isthe CLS (Socialist Liberty Collective), madeup of workers with a history of struggle bothin São Paulo and Minas Gerais, a very impor-tant state, where the CLS has an importantbase in the social movements, particularly thelandless movement and among print workers.Two other organisations are participating inTheory: Problems of building new workers' parties, Peter Taaffe, 23 December 2007socialistworld.net - committee for a workers’ international - cwi@worldsoc.co.uk 9this bloc. It is hoped that the 'bloc of four' willbe consolidated in a series of meetings andpublic activities which then could attract otherdissident groups in P-SoL.At the same time, a process of regroupmentof the Marxist-Trotskyist left is under way. Atits recent congress, attended by representa-tives of groups working in the bloc of four, SRset itself the task, together with these com-rades, of building a numerically stronger andfar more influential Marxist force. Given thatat this stage P-SoL is relatively empty of newlayers of the working class, this task will notbe achieved by merely concentrating activitywithin the party. The battle on the industrialstage is as crucial, if not more so, at present.But P-SoL has not exhausted its potential.The collapse of 'Lulaism' and the PT will re-sult in important layers transferring theirhopes to P-SoL. One of the justifications for anew mass workers' party is that it offers thechance for the working class and the left togather together the hitherto disparate scat-tered forces.Such new parties are an arena for discussionand debate and the working out of policiesthat can guarantee success for the workingclass in the future. The existence of a viable,Marxist-Trotskyist spine within such a party isvital to its success. Without this, these par-ties, including P-SoL, can stagnate, even de-cline and disappear from the political stage,even if they have initial successes. Thatseems unlikely in Brazil, given the influenceof Marxism within the party.The tasks of Marxists in Brazil, which will beeagerly followed by Marxists throughout theworld, is to intervene in the processes unfold-ing in P-SoL, to delineate clearly from reform-ism and the shades of centrism - revolution-ary words but reformist deeds - by bringingtogether the best forces of the P-SoL left. Thefirst step towards this goal is the creation of apowerful Trotskyist organisation, with clearperspectives, tactics, strategy and organisa-tion. Capitalism is moving into crisis but thisdoes not automatically mean that the left willgain. To do that, it needs to create new massworkers' parties. The developments in P-SoLwill be eagerly watched and studied by Marx-ists throughout the world, in order to learn thelessons for similar developments elsewhere.From the December 07/January 08 edition ofSocialism Todaywww.socialismtoday.org