Revolutionary Strategy: Marxism and the challenge of left unity

by Mike Macnair

When you are radically lost it becomes necessary to retrace your steps. In the present case, this means retracing our steps to the strategic debates of the early workers’ movement and the Second International, which defined the strategic choices available to socialists in the early 20th century, and in this sense led to the blind alley of 1918-91.

Genres: Politics, History, Nonfiction, Theory, Philosophy

204 pages, Paperback

First published July 1, 2008

Reviews

[Foppe · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'd long chosen to basically ignore the whole 'party' question, because the notion of all of these socialist & communist parties splitting and arguing themselves to be the only correct tendency, while investing much more time in 'exposing' their 'rivals' than in doing actual work, etc., really turned me off.

This book largely justifies that intuition, while also explaining how those tendencies originated, and where they went (and still go) wrong.
The brief fundamental answer to this is that they all adopted bureaucratic centralism while banning factions, as this completely destroyed their ability to grow through discussion and by trying, failing, then learning from failure. And it also really hurt the growth potential of those parties (because the antidemocratic tendencies both scared and repulsed newcomers, even as they ossified the party by creating an atmosphere of fear).

This sadly is an issue that affects both ML/'Stalinist' and most Trotskyist parties to this day, so I'm very grateful to Macnair for explaining the reasons for it and for providing a book in which all of this is explained in an accessible way. It won't answer any and every question you may have, of course, as it is pretty short, but it does ask the right questions. See the weeklyworker.co.uk website for more.

If you want to get something done on the left, and you're sick of toxic structures, I'd highly recommend reading.

[Bhaskar Sunkara · Rating 5 out of 5]

A few flaws, but a very valuable work. Out of print until the 2nd edition comes around, but the work can be freely obtained (with the author's blessing) here: http://radicalebooks.blogspot.com/200...

[Tiarnán · Rating 4 out of 5]

A weird book but overall full of insights.

Convincingly lays out the strong points of First International Marxism, the Kautskyianism of the Second International, and some of the genuine advances made by the early Comintern.

Less convincing is the seeming fetish of the 'democratic republic' and constitutional republican forms.

[Tom Steenblok · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mike hoeft niet naar obscure Trotten te verwijzen om zijn punt te maken. Hij doet het toch, ondanks dat deze pientere oude man zijn energie beter in argumentatie kan steken

[sube · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book seeks to demarcate a revolutionary strategy (very unsurprising...), this is defined from the lessons of history - specifically, a more positive appreciation of Kautskyism, as well as negative appreciation of other elements of history of communism (Comintern, sectarianism, etc). The basic conclusion is revolutionary strategy composes of a struggle for a democratic republic (i.e. central rule for what is to be decided centrally, local rule for what is necessary to be decided locally) and internationalism, based upon a "strategy of patience", i.e. the struggle of winning a majority for democratic republic + internationalism, via the creation of an independent workers' party with corresponding social organizations. This is against people who seek to simply manage the capitalist state, the dividing line over reform/revolution as often defined.

However, the book has some issues: 1. the author makes dumb comments. Like how one should have taken a "neither-nor" stance in the Italian invasion of Ethiopia (lol?), Iraq War (lol?), etc. and 2. that the first half of the book is fairly weak, because it's mostly about historical debates without really teasing out the strategic implications too much, but just rediscussing e.g. the three sides of the second international and why they were wrong, etc., which is different than what book sets out to be.

Ultimately, there is enough of an interesting argument that it made me think and is worth reading - however, there are severe issues and limitations both it in its positions layed out there and the structure of the book.

[shayen · Rating 4 out of 5]

A rich pamphlet that I listened to via Cosmopod's Audiobook series.

In terms of analysing historic issues of Trotskyism and Stalinism/official communism it is appealing insofar as it offers the necessary criticism of official communism for its bureaucratisation and the damage it did to the Communist Partys outside of Russia.

In terms of the political issues with Trotskyism, what stood out the most was the concept of the revolutionary purge as carried-out by Trotsky's side in the 1940 SWP debate. I need to revisit that debate, but it makes a convincing case that Trotskyism's schismatic tendencies has its origin story in the Fourth International itself before the death of Trotsky.

Furthermore, an interesting point is made that Kautsky pre-renegade is, as far as I know, never encouraged reading within the branches of Trotskyism I'm familiar with, and that Trotskyism and Stalinism have both suffered through neglecting the theoretical contributions made by pre-renegade Kautsky.

My conclusion is the need to read pre-renegade Kautsky (the Road to Power) to really grasp more what ideas are underpinning this thesis.

I found several weaknesses in the analysis ie the claim that the Russian Revolution's leadership was acting in terms of a national break with capitalism, when the historic record shows that the Bolsheviks genuinely tried to assist the European Communists through the establishment of the Third Internatonal in 1919. To me, it speaks to a genuine internationalism in its early days, which seems to call into question some of Macnair's assessments of the period up until the Fourth Congress of the Communist International.

Additionally, the CPGB has failed to grow and offer a vehicle as political alternative. It seems to me that although Macnair's group have many insightful points to make, they themselves struggle in constructing a Communist group in Britain, never mind a continental Communist Party (which the pamphlet aspires for). But, the manner in which they deal with Stalinism and Socialism in One Country is solid, and the criticisms of Trotskyism feels to be in good faith and with respect to the contributions made by Trotsky himself.

I will return to the book again, I'm sure.

[Valdemar Gomes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really great! Although Macnair is great at explaining, I'd have a more enriching experience if I had more historical background covered before I read this.
Nothing more to add, loved it.

[Jake · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very enjoyable read. I think Macnair diagnoses correctly a lot of issues with contemporary left politics among stalinists, trotskyists and anarchists. I do not find some of his points on the national struggles in the third world compelling, but I do agree with his critiques of left-nationalism. The framework of democratic republicanism remained somewhat elusive beyond the short illustration of central democratic administration of tasks which are necessarily central and local or sectoral administration where possible. I think the degree to which the democratic republic is fetishised may be problematic. I disagreed with his critique of the SWPs line on defencism and imperialism in chapter 5 but otherwise found it quite decent. I think the text could do with a consideration of the strategy of building up a conscious minority of the working class as the base for any immediate support of the minimum programme which guards against potential degeneration of consciousness as a result of short-term crises of capitalist government as we have seen in Greece and might do shortly in Ireland. Overall very well written and worth reading for any socialist who is interested in a democratic mass party and not a fan of the history of bureaucratic sects that have dominated the left for decades.

[Bob Manschot · Rating 4 out of 5]

great political theory but can be difficult to read because of the high context

[A.C. Weaver · Rating 5 out of 5]

Found this book very useful, would have been challenging to finish without a reading group for it

[Rohit · Rating 3 out of 5]

Theoretical analysis of debates within the European communist movement, mainly prior to and during the Russian Revolution, and lessons for today. Decent enough as this kind of work goes (there's plenty of bad analysis out there of people trying to extrapolate Bolshevik praxis to today), and bucks some Marxist-Leninist orthodoxy. But still suffers from the problem of usually being too abstract, and taking for granted that all the lessons of revolutionary theory and practice can be gotten from this particular period. I also generally think its of extremely limited use to try to apply lessons of revolutionary strategy without also including some kind of analysis of the present day.

[Mikaellyng · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably one of the most important contemporary works on strategy for the left. A bit heavy on the mid-2000s UK trotskyist scene. Hoping for a follow-up or a new edition for a more general audience.

[Anem0ne · Rating 4 out of 5]

crushes every time

[Jorge Seijo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Segunda vez que o leo e cosqueime dun montón de cousas que ignorara a primeira vez, un dos libros que máis me amoldou a cabeza. Lectura obrigada.

[Evar Kristoffer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid account of the decisions made by Marxist and adjacent thinkers throughout the last century. I think the authors diagnosis overall is accurate; but sometime lacking.

My first critique is that there is a lack of cohesive and prescriptive ideas for what to do as a communist in the 21st century.

Another critique regards the time-svale necessary to organize. The ecological situation is much more dire today than in the 2000’s. It is true that the system is global, and requires global labor organizing; but it needs more than that.

Thirdly, in the light of discussions of Technofeudalism and the death of capitalism- what if the proletariat is much less the revolutionary force it once was? We need newer analysis if Varoufakis is right in his thesis of the transition of capitalism to «technofeudalism». In many ways this book is an important read for revolitionaries and thinkers. However, it isn’t the final edition of strategi thinking it may have seemed when published.

Mike is clearly a Sharp mind to pay attention to and read more from for sure.

[Stephen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really good look at viewing the terrain of conflict through the history of the struggle---but without centering the history itself. A ton to learn from this. While Macnair may not not be the most lucid of writers, and the books really is very short, it's absolutely worth taking time out to map the terrain of conflict and understanding what has worked well and what has not. Highly recommended for the current Left!

[Sanrio Simp L3an · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I picked up this book I was not the same person I am now. My entire outlook on this world has changed and I now know the real traditions of revolutionary marxism. It is a wonderful exposition of the correct strategy that has long been lost to perversions of history.

[Sholto Marti · Rating 5 out of 5]

A critical and succinct analysis of the necessity of revolutionary strategy and its absence from contemporary Marxist politics - truly an excellent work that sets forth the beginnings of a path in the rejuvenation of Marxism as a political strategy, and thus of the socialist movement as a whole.

[joeyyy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant analysis of the strategy of the socialist movement in the past and its consequences today
Read if you’re sick of the movement being splintered into tiny insane undemocratic sects and wanna know why!

[Gracie Rodriguez · Rating 4 out of 5]

valuable book! good for looking at the left's historical dead ends / mistakes and thinking about strategies for right now

[l robin s · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very much enjoyed reading and discussing this in a group. Good background on the party politics of the 20th century as someone with little to no prior knowledge. Highly recommend for any reading group