BEA to RR (7 December 2018)
Dear comrades of the Revolutionary Regroupment
We just started a political discussion with you by the active initiation of comrade Icaro Kaleb. Both organizations have similarity that we respect many parts of the iSt and the IBT’s politics. Therefore, we are seriously engaging in this meeting with you comrades with big hope.
However, both of us have grown in different culture, language and political situations. So those things might be source to obstruct our smooth conversation and to produce unnecessary misunderstandings. I think that we cannot avoid this rather natural process but only can overcome this by patient explanation and conversation.
Last Friday/Saturday I have talked with comrade Icaro about the history of both organizations and political viewpoints especially on Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Russia February revolution. After that, comrade Icaro added some more comments and I heard you comrades all know the conversation.
* * *
I’d like to ask some questions on the comments which are unclear to us and to explain different ideas on how to evaluate the results of Egypt, Iran and February revolution.
“We tended to agree with the IBT at the time as it became a civil war. But in terms of the coup in Benghasi, we did not support it.”
It is about Libya. Do you think when “it became a civil war” the character of the conflict was changed? And in the second sentence, we do not know what “the coup in Benghasi” and “it” in “we did not support it” means.
“In Syria, it is amazing that the IBT was still neutral after so much imperialist intervention.”
What do you mean “imperialist intervention”? Could you give some examples of it?
“Their coming to power is never described as a “victory” or “partial victory” of any kind by Lenin or Trotsky, but as a maneuver of the bourgeoisie to fool the masses.”
I talked “limited, contradictory and partial” victory and “two faces” of the results of the Egypt, Iran and February revolution. Then comrade Icaro commented above. I think it might be ‘all or nothing’ approach.
After the February revolution, Czar’s old regime was overthrown, the army changed their loyalty from Czar to Soviet, workers’ and soldier’s Soviet was built and it had real power, so dual power situation was risen, Bolshevik rapidly grown on the legal and mass base, and most of all it gave the subjective and objective situation to overthrow capitalist system as a whole. In Russia in which there was genuine revolutionary party armed with genuine Marxist program, working class could grip the chance and accomplished the final(?) ‘victory’, differently to other places.
Of course, the result of February revolution did not give us the final goal, socialism, but only the chance to achieve the goal. It was the reflection of the relationship of the forces at the time between the reactionary forces, ‘French and British imperialism, supporters of old regime and capitalism and Compromisers(Menshevik and Social revolutionary)’ and revolutionary forces, ‘working class supported by peasants and Bolshevik.’ That’s why it was limited and partial victory and had two contradict faces. And Trotsky described the February revolution using repeatedly the word “victory.” Everything has two faces. Everything is the unity and conflict of opposites.
I’d like to quote some comments that Trotsky described the February revolution with ‘victory’ from only one chapter “Chapter 9 The Paradox of the February Revolution” in the History of Russian Revolution
“The majority have already vanished. Such was the first reaction of the Duma, dissolved by the czar, to the victory of the insurrection.”
“However, even in those very first days of victory, when the new power of the revolution was forming itself with fabulous speed and inconquerable strength, those socialists who stood at the head of the Soviet were already looking around with alarm to see if they could find a real “boss.””
“But the situation changes the moment the victory is won and its political fortification begins. The elections to the organs and institutions of the victorious revolution attract and challenge infinitely broader masses than those who battled with arms in their hands.”
“This fact determined the political situation after the victory.”
7 Dec 2018