La historia del trotskismo americano, 1928–1938: Informe de un partícipe

by James P. Cannon

"El trotskismo no es un nuevo movimiento, una nueva doctrina", dice Cannon, "sino la restauración, el renacimiento del marxismo genuino tal como se expuso y se practicó en la Revolución Rusa y en los primeros días de la Internacional Comunista". En 12 charlas en 1942, James P. Cannon recuenta un periodo decisivo en la labor de construir un partido proletario en Estados Unidos.

Índice, Fotografías

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, The United States Of America, American

348 pages, Paperback

First published August 1, 2002

About the author

James P. Cannon was born in Rosedale, Kansas, in 1890. His father, who had originally come from Ireland, was a socialist and was a regular reader of Appeal to Reason.

At the age of 18 he joined the Socialist Party of America and became a devoted follower of Eugene Debs. His friend Tom Kerry claimed that Cannon considered Debs as "one of the greatest orators, agitators, and propagandists that the American working class radical movement had produced."

Cannon was also an organizer for the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) where he worked under Frank Little, who was lynched in 1917. Cannon also got to know Vincent Saint John. He later recalled: "Despite his modesty of disposition, his freedom from personal ambition, and his lack of the arts of self-aggrandizement, his work spoke loudly and brought him widespread fame."

According to his friend Joseph Leroy Hansen: "Fundamentally, Jim was an angry person. He was angry at injustice, at inequities, at special privileges, at exploitation. He was angry at poverty, lack of opportunity, oppression, racism, and sexism."

Reviews

[Gabrielle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cannon deliver here a vivid history of the beginning of trotskyism in the movement, unlike other review here I don't find that he is writing somewhat badly, quite on the contrary he write simply while drawing it to the point. One critic however is that he tends to repeat itself a bit, and most importantly that in always equating the task of the party with "the period" he tends to not really show the nucleus of the problems the american trotskyistes were confronted with. It's still a reading I could recommand

[Donna Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

James P. Cannon was one of the founding members of the Socialist Workers Party (USA; at least one organization in another country has adopted this name since its inception, but they are not affiliated). In this succinct, carefully documented account, Cannon provides an interesting narrative that begins at the time of the Russian Revolution. The Trotskyists were expelled from the Communist Party USA when Lenin died and Stalin came to power. It was more than a struggle between two leaders, of course, it was about political program and internationalism versus the stagnation and calcification of what had once been an inspirational victory.

Before there was a Communist Party (USA) there was a Socialist party, but it was a very loosely affiliated organization with a lot of currents of thought all mixed together. There were young workers, Wobblies, Social Democrats, and a lot of folks who merely wanted change and a better deal for ordinary, everyday people, but weren't sure what form that should take. It was out of this mass of turmoil that the seeds of the CPUSA were recruited.

The first time I read this book it gave me a really tough time. I had not yet studied Russian history and was new to a lot of the terms. If you don't know a Bolshevik from a Menshevik, this will be hard for you, too. Cannon did not write this with a mass audience in mind; he wrote it for the revolutionists who were his contemporaries, as well as for SWP historians of the future.

I have been a supporter of the SWP my whole adult life, and was a member in my younger years. (Membership among revolutionists is not just a matter of signing up, paying dues, and getting a card; it is an active pursuit, and it is exhausting though inspirational for Marxists looking to make the world a better place). Now that enough time has gone by for me to be familiar with the nomenclature, this wasn't a hard read at all. Cannon's narrative unfolds smoothly in a series of 12 speeches transcribed from meetings. His personal acquaintance with Trotsky, from whom American Trotskyists sought guidance, gives him an authority few others can equal.

He recounts the fierce factional struggles that took place among American Communists, and why the Trotskyists sought to remain inside the party as a faction rather than breaking off when it was clear that there were two viewpoints that could not be reconciled. He also talks about the decision of the expelled Communist League to join the Socialist Party in order to recruit from within. Historic luminary A.J. Muste, a man who would give his entire life to issues of social justice, initially joined the Trotskyists, but eventually felt the pull to return to religion, and left again. The fusion between the Trotskyists and the American Workers Party ultimately created the Socialist Workers Party.

One of the things he emphasizes is that the first question always has to be the Russian question. Today, the SWP looks first to the Cuban question, a revolution which had not yet occurred when Cannon wrote these lectures. (The SWP now regards Trotsky's ideas highly in most areas, but takes distance regarding his position on the 'permanent revolution').

There are a lot of important principles that are explained here, and explained well, and the sense of revolutionary continuity it gave me was a warm, living thing to hold close in these uncertain times.

Recommended highly for those interested in a serious political exploration.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cannon really captures a lot of the atmosphere of what it must have been like to be a Trotskyist in this time, and tells some incredibly heroic tales of the work that the SWP in its various pre-war permutations carried out. As a quite simple narrative of the path of the Trotskyists in this decade it is good.

However, Cannon as a storyteller here is fully in line with the way that he too often behaved - utter bias against his factional enemies, and obfuscation of the political issues at play through nonsensical denunciations of various 'petit-bourgeois' deviations within the organisation. On this, Albert Glotzer (writing as Albert Gates) gives a good run-through of Cannon's book: https://www.marxists.org/history/etol...

With the knowledge of 80 more years of Trotskyism after the events of this book, it is clear that despite his invaluable work in building the American revolutionary left he miseducated a generation, and passed on not the tradition of Trotsky but rather of Zinoviev.

[Wayne · Rating 5 out of 5]

James P. Cannon's History of American Trotskyism manages to avoid being sterile, dry, or self-serving. It is the history of the heroic days of the American Trotskyists, and it holds a wealth of ideas and commentary for those of us who hold to that tradition.

History of American Trotskyism is not just history on the page; it is a guide to action. Cannon goes into the problems of a small group getting deeply involved in mass work, from the 1934 Minneapolis Teamster strikes to the defense of Leon Trotsky from Stalinist slander, and in so doing he lays out the principles of a Trotskyist party. In the reading, it quickly becomes evident why the Trotskyists in America went from a handful of expelled members of the Communist Party to the largest and most influential section of the Fourth International in the course of ten years.

[Niko · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating account of the beginnings of the communist movement in America from an anti-Stalinist perspective.

[Andrés · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good lessons to be learned with also contradictions to be understood from comrade Cannon's well-written history of the first steps given by trotskyists in the US.

Despite being completely isolated from the working class after Stalinism became the dominant force in the Communist International, it's important to note how perseverance and clarity in ideas, program, and the most pressing political issues at the time, allowed a small group of marxists to gain back the strength and connection to workers in the fight for revolution.

This text also brings important lessons and should be read critically. Cannon unintentionally depicts a mechanistic approach to the issue of the “French turn” or entryism. Successes in the union front, specifically in Minneapolis, shouldn't have clouded the judgement of the leadership into fusing with other organizations so quickly. A case for doing that can certainly be made and justified. But the truth is, much progress was lost because, as Cannon himself admits, merging with less principled and disciplined organizations at the time, held back growth in the political realm. They had to instead focus on dealing with the varied quality of the militancy. Even after that, renouncing so much to join the Socialist Party, only to be expelled a year later, although presented as a triumph, if analyzed dialectically, shows both anxiety and a certain fetishized view of the building of the party.

[Will · Rating 5 out of 5]

It gave me a better perspective on what issues parties can go through, even a party that has a good program, and has strong cadre, can still encounter problems and, at every turn, can falter or fade if one isn't careful. A good lesson if you ask me, and is crystallised with this quote from Cannon: “Politics is the art of making the right move at the right time.”

In general, because of the speaking style thanks to this being a recorded lecture, there are some parts where the context of the period would help in better understanding the events that Cannon speaks of, but this is not necessary. Good for me!

[Yessiwrites · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm conflicted. I can't say I enjoyed reading this, but I'm glad I did. Lots of good background information, and I learned a lot more about 1930s organizing/militant tactics/how crucial revolutionary socialists were to the growth and strength of the labor movement (because of course they were!). It just reminds me of that saying, you don't have to be friends with your comrades, you just have to respect each other's integrity and work. I respect Cannon's integrity and work.

[Shaun Richman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Cannon's not a great writer, and an unreliable narrator, but this is still a pretty good primary source for 1920's and 30's leftwing labor.

[Vivek Singh · Rating 5 out of 5]

A treasure trove of experience. It should be read by all those who want to understand Bolshevism.

[Tess · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is entertaining, easy to read, and infinitely educational.

[Feargal McGovern · Rating 4 out of 5]

More like a guide to organizing a small revolutionary group and how to develop into a larger party, than a history. That said great re-count of the early years of the US Socialist Wokers Party

[Mrtfalls · Rating 4 out of 5]

Someone I know described this book as being "useful in the same way fairytales are useful for children". Basically, the actual history and factional fights between different American Trotskyists and between Trotskyists and Stalinists, is much more complicated and much less black and white than Cannon describes it.

I am a fan of Cannon, but his uncritical simping for Trotsky shines through and some of it is quite cringe the way he basically said we were alright because comrade Trotksy had the right line and in the end that would stand us in good stead and see us through. Also when you know that Cannon took Trotskys line of supporting the USSR invasion of Finland, some of his grandstanding seems a bit sour.

Nonetheless, a good book demonstrating the importance of good political program in building a revolutionary party and the ups and downs the endeavour can have.

[Marc Lichtman · Rating 5 out of 5]

James P. Cannon is one of my favorite writers, not to mention favorite revolutionary leaders. When I read this in college (not for a course) I literally couldn't put it down and wound up reading all night long. The European intellectuals who were leading much of the Fourth International for years hated Cannon, and rarely lowered themselves to read him. I find his folksy humor endearing--they found it embarrassing. They probably get lost in detail like that and miss the significant points he was making.

Of course, I love Trotsky too, but even his worst detractors admit his literary genius. But there really is both a class question and a question of whether you think Americans are "uncultured" when it comes to reading Cannon.

Those who don't find much content to him are too indignant to even look for it. Sad. There's lots of Cannon in print, and it's all worth reading. Be sure to also read First Ten Years of American Communism: Report of a Participant.

[Anthony Saunois · Rating 5 out of 5]

A tremendous account full of lessons. Second or third time of reading this history