*Why I left Socialist Action

Andrew Pollack



Some of you know, either from reading my articles or from informal
discussion, that I had been in Socialist Action (US). This note is to
explain why I resigned on October 3rd.



My disagreement with SA centered on differences over antiwar and solidarity
work, and the party-building opportunities flowing from them.



I won’t claim that my choice as an individual in this matter carries much
if any weight in the historical balance, but I felt I should make the
record, even if only so that SA is not associated with words and deeds of
mine that it clearly doesn’t agree with, and which in fact it has insisted
that I desist from.



SA views its work against imperialism as necessarily revolving solely
around work through the United National Antiwar Coalition, and in that
context to consist politically only of pushing the demands “Out Now” and
“Hands Off [name of country].” It believes it has no duty, as one would in
a traditional united front, to criticize in its own name members of that
united front such as Workers’ World Party who have promoted the virtues of
neocolonial dictators such as Qaddafi, Ahmedinejad, and most recently
Assad, with whom WWP and friends had a most pleasant tea while his troops
and allies were butchering Syrian revolutionaries.



What’s worse, SA is opposed to doing solidarity work with the Syrian and
other Arab revolutions. This is stated most bluntly in this new
article:http://socialistaction.org/2013/10/threat-still-looms-of-u-s-attack-on-syria/



The leading bodies of SA have made clear that I as a member would not be
permitted to disseminate information about such solidarity work, nor to
share articles by other revolutionary groups about those revolutions. The
groups under such a ban include, among others, the ISO here in the US, the
Revolutionary Socialists in Egypt, the Revolutionary Left Current in Syria
– even the seven Arab revolutionary socialist parties who jointly issued a
statement calling for support for the Syrian Revolution, and even though
some of the signers and authors of that statement are members of the same
Fourth International of which SA is a sympathizing
organization!http://www.al-manshour.org/en/statement-by-rev-socialists-marxists-on-us-attack-on-syriaSA
has also forbidden promotion of union solidarity and anti-repression
campaigns promoted by the UK’s MENA Labor Solidarity Network
(http://menasolidaritynetwork.com/ ), allegedly because they, like
others
named here, were too critical of the Muslim Brotherhood!



One doesn’t leave a revolutionary organization lightly, and normally a
disciplined communist whose perspective had been defeated would stay in the
group and bide his or her time until an opportunity arose to try to change
the group’s line.



That’s why, for instance, Paul Levi, while correct politically, was wrong
organizationally
(seehttp://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1924/reminiscences-of-lenin.htm
).



On a movement level the same willingness to be disciplined and accept
disagreeable tasks exists; I’ve often appreciated, for instance, the
anecdote in Draper’s history of the CPUSA describing Bill Dunne telling
communist delegates to a garment union convention, after they had walked
out declaring their intention to form a new union, that they were to return
to the fight within the union, even if it meant crawling on their bellies
to get back in.



Those considerations however are not the most relevant in this situation.
SA is one of several Trotskyist organizations in the US, and sympathizes
with the most important revolutionary socialist International. But it is
not THE revolutionary party in the US. And its sectarianism and
abstentionism means it is cutting itself off from a chance to aid in the
building of that International through support for the growing
revolutionary parties throughout the Arab world. SA is also defaulting on
its elementary responsibility to organize solidarity with that region’s
revolutions. In this situation, working in joint movement and partybuilding
activity with those Arab revolutionaries takes precedence, in my mind, to
waiting for SA to change its line.



For those interested in opposing war and building solidarity with
revolutions, and in engaging in comradely discussions with fellow
revolutionaries doing such work, see
https://menasolnetus.wordpress.com/andhttps://www.facebook.com/MENASolidarityUS



Hopefully soon I will see more SA members involved in such work.



Andrew Pollack*

Reply via email to