The current issue of L
<https://lanticapitaliste.org/arguments/1939-1944-resister-loccupation-fasci
ste> ’Anticapitaliste, the weekly newspaper of France’s Nouveau parti
anticapitaliste, has a two-page feature on the resistance to fascist
occupation in WWII, and the role of the French Trotskyists. The author,
Laurent Ripart, mentions that Trotsky, writing in June 1940 after the German
victory, explained that “France is becoming transformed into an oppressed
nation,” adding that “Of all the forms of dictatorship, the totalitarian
dictatorship of a foreign conqueror is the most intolerable.” Trotsky’s text
is here: https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1940/06/course.htm. 

The French Marxist historian Pierre Broué, in an article entitled “How
Trotsky and the Trotskyists confronted the Second World War
<https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/revhist/backiss/vol3/no4/brouww2.html
> ,” refers to the concept of revolutionary defeatism (without naming it as
such) and notes that “Trotsky was no longer prepared merely to pose the
revolution as the means to escape the war.” He developed what he regarded as
“a difference of development, quantitative and qualitative, between the
policies of revolutionaries in the First and Second World Wars,” says Broué.
He quotes Trotsky:

During the last war, not only the proletariat as a whole, but also its
vanguard, and, in a certain sense, the vanguard of the vanguard, were caught
unawares. The elaboration of the principles of revolutionary policy towards
the war began at a time when the war was already in full blaze and when the
military machine exercised unlimited rule. [5]

During the First World War the perspective of revolution seemed remote even
to Lenin. He wrote that only future generations would see it. Trotsky
recalled:

Prior to the February Revolution and even afterwards, the revolutionary
elements felt themselves to be not so much contenders for power as the
extreme left opposition. [6]

Therefore, the struggle for the independence of the proletariat, the
rejection of ‘civil peace’, and the necessity for the class struggle of the
proletariat, were the primary tasks in 1914-18, as defensive measures:

The attention of the revolutionary wing was centred on the question of the
defence of the fatherland. The revolutionaries naturally replied in the
negative to this question. This was entirely correct. This purely negative
reply served as the basis for propaganda and for training the cadres. But it
could not win the masses, who did not want a foreign conqueror. [7]

Trotsky recalled that the Bolsheviks succeeded in Russia in winning the
proletariat and the majority of the people, in the space of eight months,
and that this success was not in response to a negative refusal to defend
the bourgeois fatherland, but to the aspirations of the masses, to which the
Bolsheviks knew how to give positive answers:

The decisive rôle in this conquest was played, not by the refusal to defend
the bourgeois fatherland, but by the slogan “All power to the soviets”. And
only by this revolutionary slogan! The criticism of imperialism and of its
militarism, like the renunciation of defence of bourgeois democracy and so
on, could never have won the overwhelming majority of the people to the side
of the Bolsheviks. [8]

Elsewhere in his essay, Broué notes that in 1940 “the French Trotskyists
were divided into two tendencies over perspectives which were ultimately as
far away from each other as they both were from that of Trotsky. Beginning
from the conception that the defeat of French imperialism and the occupation
of French territory were leading, not only to national oppression, but to
the rebirth of a genuine ‘national question’ in which all classes were
interested, as in a colonial country, the majority of the POI, organised
around the committees which published La Verité, outlined a strategy
according to which the bourgeoisie of an occupied country becomes the
natural ally of the workers’ movement, and the latter devotes itself
completely to “national resistance”. Conversely, the La Seule Voie (The Only
Road) group, which had emerged from the PCI, and subsequently became the
CCI, denied that an imperialist nation could ever become an oppressed nation
following a military defeat, and considered that national demands were “the
importation of bourgeois ideology into the proletariat in order to
demoralise it”.

“These two positions, remote from each other, were both in a way the result
of isolation,” writes Broué. “Under the pressure of the European Secretariat
[of the Fourth International], they were gradually abandoned.” But the
participation by the revolutionary Marxists in the French Resistance was
limited by their disperson and persecution but also by the support to De
Gaulle and his English allies on the part of the dominant Stalinists in much
of the organized Resistance.

Many of these contradictions are excellently portrayed in the popular French
TV narrative “Un Village Français” (A French Village), its hundred episodes
in eight series (!) created in large part by Frédéric Krivine, a scion of
the Krivine family (Alain, Hubert and Jean-Michel, the last his father)
famous in French Trotskyism since the Sixties. Available for viewing on MHz.

Richard



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#31471): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/31471
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/107689154/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to