Every now and then a hint of reality pierces the shutters of the SLL print-shop, ruffling not a few political feathers. Such a case in point is the Czech tragedy of last year.
The [illegible] tried and found wanting - our great "theoreticians" actually tried to come to terms with events. And what tragic results that brought with it (proving the old adage that the sectarian always falls into the trap he sets for others!)
But let's ignore the fluctuation, week by week, in their analysis - after all, we are dealing with "reality" - and concentrate on their political appraisal of the Czech C.P. during those tragic events (see FOURTH INTERNATIONAL vol. 5, number 3). To anyone unlucky enough to be initiated into SLL polemic, the usual yarn might just give way to a [illegible]:
"The 14th Congress of the Czech C.P., an emergency congress, was held in a factory, under the protection of the working class. At this point the Czech C.P. disintegrated as a Party directly linked to Moscow by breaking its links with Moscow, it tended towards becoming a centrist party."
"...disintegration of the Czech C.P. and bureaucracy was leading in the 14th Congress to the formation of trends which were tending towards expressing the programme of the political revolution, an integral part of the world socialist revolution." (op. cit.)
When they mention that this move was introduced under the "pressure and resistance of the working class", doesn't it sound stranger still? After all, hasn't their great campaign against that mythical Pabloite revisionism been CENTRED round opposition to "The anti-marxist idea that 'mass-pressure' could change the essential nature of the bureaucracy; the anti-marxist idea that 'mass-pressure' could force the bureaucracy to go along with the world revolution; the assumption that [illegible] again under "mass pressure" - the communist parties could lead the working class to the conquest of power: it was against these Pabloite theories...that marxists...gave battle..." (LABOUR REVIEW, Volume 4, number 2, 1959)?
Are we then to presume that the SLL - which refuses to see in Cuba a workers' state because Castro is not a bona fide member of the Fourth International - have been bitten by that very disease that they have so gallantly been trying to combat for the past 15 years?
The answer is probably much simpler. The campaign against "Pabloism" is really a campaign against that intractable reality they have such unfortunate encounters with, but which - from time to time - they are forced to acknowledge.
Not too inaccurate, you might think. The move towards political factions within the Czech C.P. did have this effect. But coming from the pen of our great "theoreticians" - who have devoted so much effort protecting the labour movement from "pabloite revisionism" - doesn't it sound a little strange?
Tut, tut, you might say remembering Trotsky's comment that the sectarian, buffetted by events, has the knack of making a 190 degree turn when necessary. But that isn't all. Oh no, our great "theoreticians" almost OUTDO in Pabloism - their mythical Pabloite enemies: