Two logics become increasingly apparent within the proletarian camp : for one side those who take into account the questions raised by the war orientation more and more affirmed and by the renewal of the workers struggles. These, political groups of the Left Communist or isolated individuals, develop the debate, the fraternal political confrontation, the discussion, and take on their responsibilities in front the class. On the other side, those who desert the class terrain and multiply the excommunications by way of debate. On one side almost the totality of the proletarian camp, on the other... the ICC.
The texts we publish here illustrate these two dynamics.

On the side of the political debate and the intervention towards the class

We publish here the letters of comrades JC, Toño and JL who all three express the need for debate which do exist within the working class.
JC underlines the "theoretical socle" aspect of the ICC and we agree with him on this. He notes too that this organisation refuses the debate and gives itself away the other groups and individuals of the proletarian camp. We notice it too and we fight it.
For his part, Toño considers that the ICC attitude in the struggles of Spring 2003 is the same as the one adopted in France in Winter 1995. We disagree with this point of view and we prepare a statement text on this subject(it'll appear, we hope, in our next bulletin). The question of the role of revolutionaries in the struggles is a basic question and we call our reader to take position of comrade Toño's text. The debate with this comrade is engaged for a certain time now and it goes on.
Finally, according to JL, our bulletin "deals with fundamental questions, of great interest for the working class. The simple reading of this text (our communiqué on the class struggle in France available in English on our web site) is a pleasure for me".

Among others, we've received too a letter from comrade LL :
"I agree with you to say this struggle movement constitutes a very important moment for the renewal of the struggle and the consciousness of the working class in France and in Europe [...]. Thus I agree with you to say that the revolutionaries had to and will have to participate actively placing themselves within the movement by proposing axes of development and not criticising from the balcony or staying on the sidewalks" [it means criticising from outside].

This various letters show the concern to understand the situation, to draw the balance-sheet of the struggles, to engage the debate in a fraternal and open way, without ostracism. It's a sign of the present period.
We add to this chapter a statement of our fraction on the ICC attitude in the workers struggles of late Spring. More than the desertion of the struggle, we can see a scab behaviour and, unfortunately it's in coherence with the abandon of class criterias in the analysis and the understanding of the situation. By publishing this statement, we want to push the debate and provoke a reflection among the present ICC militants as well as, wider, among those who "exclusive readers of the ICC, have no means to take any position..." following the terms used by JC.
We repeat, the debate is a vital necessity for the working class. Unfortunately the ICC stands in a situation of obstacle against this discussion. That's the second part of our rubric.

On the side of the struggle against the ICC sectarianism and its Stalinist drifts

As counterpoint of what comes before, we publish various documents.
Firstly a clarification on the "case" of comrade Michel. "Foundator" of the ICC since 1968, this respected militant within the ICC and beyond has been in charge of important responsibilities within the organisation during 30 years. He has resigned of the ICC in October 2001 after having been accused of being the main responsible for a so-called new clan. He suffered the worst vilenesses by the present leadership of this organisation. Michel being silent since then, the liquidationist faction has done, and carries on doing, circulate towards the militants and the sympathisers remarks that he would had supposedly said against the fraction. That is precisely this very method that was used by the "bolchevizators" of the CPs during the IC degeneracy. Rumours are hawked, supposed remarks by so-and-so, in order to denigrate, to condemn, to banish the oppositions. We refer our readers to our pamphlet "La dégénérescence de l'Internationale Communiste : le cas du Parti communiste français".

In the same kind of idea, we publish a letter that the ICC has sent to our comrade P. This letter deserves very few comments so much indignity it expresses. The comrade P. joined our fraction a year ago. He had intervened in a Public Meeting of the ICC in June 2002 (see our bulletin 11) to express his "surprise" in front of the new crisis of the ICC. Then he closed to the fraction and, on the basis of profound and verified political agreement, he integrated to our struggle against the degeneracy of our organisation (which has been his during 20 years - 1976-1995). If the liquidationists give him notice to state (on what grounds ?) on the validity of the false accusations against our fraction, it's above all to get a pretext to refuse him, him too, the access to their public meetings and, secondarily, to keep going gossips about him within the ICC.
To these two comrades, the fraction claims highly and proudly its proletarian solidarity and rejects the ignominies the liquidationists unloads on them.
After having prohibited through its press to the members of the fraction to participate (and even to be present !) at its (so-called) public meetings, the ICC had prepared a strong "order contingent" [service d'ordre in french] to ban us to any access to its public meeting in Paris mid-September. We had written, and sent to the proletarian camp groups, a statement in relation to this scandalous attitude. We distributed it at the public meeting and we publish it here.

Let's notice this "interdiction de séjour" ("prohibition of staying") comes after the "interdiction of speaking", that it constitutes in itself, by the way it's applied, an act of real violence against revolutionary militants (has the present ICC forgotten its quarrels with Lutte Ouvrière 1 ?), and that it follows the sad attitude of the ICC in Mexico. There, actually, the militants preferred to cancel their public meeting rather than respond to the questions posed by the members of the fraction. When the relation is 20 against 1, they threat and when the number of militants is equal, then they sneak off ; all that in order to avoid the debate. Great lesson of communist conviction !

In this same rubric, we refer to the presentation of this bulletin where we recall the readers' meeting of the ICP (Le Prolétaire). The debate developed there serenely and without ostracism. This meeting also clearly stated against the ICC methods.

The reader will find too in the following pages, two "historical" articles of 1932 and published in L'Etincelle. These two texts answer in advance to the ICC liquidationists' quibbles on the question of the defence of the organisation against the infiltrated agents' penetration. Here is how revolutionaries confront the problem. One of these texts is signed by Marc who isn't but our comrade MC whose struggle the present ICC claims to be the continuation. Let's them read if they are still able to do so !

Finally we publish extracts of the letter of a reader from Canada.
For this Canadian comrade, "what is clear is the discredit that this (the prohibition we suffer to attend the ICC public meetings) casts on the very notion of organisation. How pathetic they are !"

The whole logic of these texts, is that elements increasingly numerous react against the ICC drift, against its practices more and more far away of the class ground and of the principles leading the revolutionary organisations. The fraction is not alone to bring to the fore the clearly opportunist orientation of this organisation (organisation which is ours, we reaffirm it) ; the Left Communist organisations as well as individuals oftenly attached for a long time to this organisation, notices with us this drift. The goal that we must pursue is to make this organisation draw back, to bring the honest militants remaining inside to question this logic. For our part, we just make "the shame more shameful by giving it publicity" according to Marx's expression.
And we have no intention to stop, whatsoever are the insults, the threats, the physical attacks.

The fraction, October 5th, 2003

1 This French trotskist group had banned the ICC of any public participation in its annual "Fête de Lutte Ouvrière" a long time ago. Of course, the ICC denounced this as the expression of a bourgeois attitude and the bourgeois nature of this trotskist group.

Communist Bulletin - 21