We, finally, publish our english version of our bulletin 31 and 32. The delay is due to technical (computers) reasons, added to the Summer holiday period, and to other political priorities our fraction had. Amongst them, the debate with the IBRP we'll present in our issue 33 and the intervention in the French events, working class struggles and the "violence" in the surburbs. Nevertheless we want to apologize for this delay to our english readers.
The results of the French referendum are now known. The "No" has won. And, since then, we attend a redoubling of the media-politics bourgeois campaign, this one becoming more and more deafening, delirious, and especially untrue and mystifying. For the bourgeois fractions which were for the "Yes", it is a "seism", a "catastrophe", a "setback", a "major crisis" for France and Europe ; and for those who invited to vote "No", it is a "social censure motion ", a "social revenge" against the élites, "the class struggle in the ballot boxes". Panic stricken, a leader-writer of France Soir (French popular daily paper) even went to affirm, shortly after the referendum: "What French people wants, it is a revolution. A real one !" On both sides, one only seeks to mislead the working class and especially to weaken it while it takes back the way of its struggles.
The "No" has nothing to do with a "catastrophe" or a "major crisis" for France and Europe; as we underlined, while really situating ourselves from the point of view of the interests of the working class, in the statement ("Referendum campaign in France") which we made (available on our Internet site since nearly one month) and that we publish in this bulletin : "The great tendencies and orientations, those which touch to the evolution of the economy in the way of the crisis and of the growing misery, are the fruit of internal contradictions of the capitalist system as a whole. The European Community, through its various evolutions and adventures, has never been able to bring solutions to the capitalist crisis and, even less, was not favorable to the interests of the workers. On the contrary ! As for the essential decisions on the diplomatic, strategic and military levels, they are not taken within this framework but within the framework of alliances to which the bourgeoisie and its media do not do much publicity. It has been thus, for example, of the imperialist pole which is constituted, for a few years, behind the Franco-German tandem to be opposed to American superpower."
Concerning the change of government and the various movements and episodes which occur in the great (and even small) political parties of the French capitalist class, that are presented to us as sudden starts of crisis, they are essentially movements related to the voluntary reorganization of the bourgeois political apparatus in order to face the current needs for the class struggle.
The "No" (and more largely the "democratic" vote) is even less the expression of "the class struggle in the ballot boxes"; it is even one of the most effective means than uses the bourgeoisie to make it sterile. In a more immediate way, this "No" is, on the other hand, the opportunity for the bourgeoisie to give back credit, amongst the workers, to the Left political parties, in particular through their more "social and "radical" fractions. These are the same fractions which have the responsibility, on behalf of the exploiting class, and to its profit, to control, lead astray and dismantle the working class struggles of tomorrow.
What results more and more clearly from this situation, it is the displayed will of the ruling class, through the use of this referendum, to set back the most effective politico-ideological anti-workers aparatus. It is what appears with the vigorous current revival of the "right-and-left play", proposing the alleged "fundamental difference" between these 2 capitalist fractions (one defending the Capital and the other the Workforce), as with the (re)mobilization of all that is the "social" and "radical" Left represented by the defenders of the "No" supposedly "pro working-class" which were opposed to the defenders of the "Yes", stigmatized as "defenders of capitalism", even of the "most wild capitalism".
Believing, today, that this process is specific to the situation in France and that it concerns only the two antagonistic classes of this country is, at least, blindness in front of what is increasingly obvious at the international level. In fact, at this very moment, in an other country of the center of capitalism, and not the smallest one – Germany -, we can find from the part of the bourgeoisie the same will than in France to set up the same kind of anti-proletarian aparatus. Since its last failure in by-elections, the SPD in power is apparently seeing its fate sealed. While calling for anticipated elections for next September and refusing by advance any electoral alliance with the "greens" (as opposed to what he made to come into power), Schröder could hardly do better to scuttle himself. And as if he wanted to prepare for a forthcoming place in opposition he dares, as for today, to try and give its party a more adapted "left" profile and a more "social" language ("We want a more solidarity society which distance clearly of the radical positions about the market of the Liberal Party – FDP – and of a part of the CDU", dares to declare one of his acolytes, whereas its government never ceased following an openly anti-worker policy). And to be sure to get credible Left nearby the workers, the German bourgeoisie goes until causing a scission in the SPD (behind the former leader Oskar Lafontaine) and organizes around it a "radical" Left with the PDS (former Stalinist Party of East Germany) and other left spheres of influence.
This will to release and put forward, today, this type of Left wing (able to control and lead astray the working class struggles) is also shared by the bourgeoisie of other countries (Italy, GB…). It is a matter, obviously, of a general tendency, a policy which tends to become common to all the national bourgeoisie, in particular those of the countries of the center of capitalism. By adopting it, the ruling class reveals the questions it seeks to answer, i.e. the rising combativeness of the working class, and confirms the reality of what began 2 or 3 years ago, i.e. the revival of the working class struggle at the international level.
In front of this situation, it is thus essential, for the communist organizations, to highlight the ruling class' lies, its policies of diversion as well as the traps that it elaborates against the working class and to give to their class prospects for fight. It is what two of the large currents of the proletarian camp did : the IBRP and the ICP (Le Proletaire). We refer the reader of this bulletin to the publications of these groups and to their Internet sites. These two groups also published and diffused a leaflet for the May 1st. Two leaflets in phase with the situation, according to us, and calling the proletarians to the fight.
Our fraction joined the diffusion of the leaflet of the IBRP (see in this bulletin). This document, for us, has the great merit to situate itself from the start as an international leaflet and to be diffused internationally. Thus, it was distributed by the IBRP in Italy, in England, in Canada and in France, where this organization has a political presence, but also in Germany, and in Mexico and in Paris with the collaboration of our fraction, finally in Argentina thanks to the comrades of the Circulo Communista Internacionalista. This international diffusion of a leaflet is a new demonstration of the fact that the BIPR really became the true pole of regrouping of the communist forces. We are delighted about it.
We publish also a leaflet of Internationalists Notes, representative of the IBRP in Canada.
The political presence of the IBRP is also illustrated by the public meeting which was held in Paris the 19th of last February. We refer the reader to the report of this meeting in this bulletin.
The dynamics of regrouping of the revolutionary political forces is a vital need for the proletariat, obviously for its historical combat but also for the development of its current fights. This dynamics also passes by the debate and the confrontation of the points of view within the proletarian camp. Following other discussion and reflection texts, we present to the comrades and to the readers a new document on the question of the decadence. If we reject the delirious vision of the decomposition and the chaos of which the current ICC made its only framework of "analysis", we firmly remain anchored on the question of the decadence, base, according to us, of a global understanding of the situation of capitalism since nearly one century.
Lastly, we publish some correspondences of readers and comrades and our answer to comrade LL. Concerning the letter of G, we simply want to stress that we share the concern and the reasoning of the comrade. His perspicacity on what the struggles of the workers in Germany mean and his courageous clearness concerning the drift of the "official" ICC concerning these struggles are symptomatic reactions that the militant workers will have, tomorrow, vis-a-vis the work of demoralization that this organization adopts more and more. We leave to the readers the concern to judge question.
We take the opportunity to incite, once again, our readers to communicate to us their points of view and critics. Even if we are not always able to quickly answer and to all and every mail(1), these points of view and critics are part of the general reflection in the revolutionary camp, of our own reflection and standpoint. They are useful for us but they are especially useful for our class.
June 10th, 2005
The Internal Fraction of the ICC
1. Some of the correspondences which are sent to us are also sent to the ICC. The thing is very positive because it shows a will of clearness on behalf of the correspondents, a refusal of the small hidden policies. It would seem that the current ICC took pretext of these exchanges between our fraction and a comrade to charge us of I do not know which new "crime". We are delighted that the current leaders of this organization are interested in our debates! If they could take the opportunity to express themselves on the true political issues!