| english | français | deutsch | italiano | svenska | español |  |
nederlands | português | Ελληνικά |
| русский |  |
 |
 |
 |
filipino |  |
türkçe | magyar | suomi |
We fully share the concern and indignation of these tens of thousands of young people, but we must ask ourselves whether this movement, in its objectives, approaches and methods, is a real struggle to solve the problem, or whether it is a trap that can only lead them to discouragement and bitterness about being used and misled.
Brazil is wracked by increased repression, growing poverty and greater insecurity, further attacks on workers, threats of war and risks of chaos, all linked to the new president, Jair Bolsonaro, who took office on 1 January, 2019. Bolsonaro symbolises the epoch in which we are living which produces the most sinister and repugnant elements. It is a law that we can be sure will be verified, whatever the political moves of the new president: the exploited will pay more than their predecessors and the crisis of capitalism will only get worse...
The confrontation between the bourgeois factions in Venezuela - between Chavismo and the opposition parties - has undergone a qualitative leap since the beginning of 2019. It takes place in a context of an unprecedented worsening of the economic and social crisis, the most evident sign of which is the increase in poverty experienced by a large part of the population. But it is part of a scenario marked by worsening rivalries between the great powers - some giving their open support to the regime of Nicolás Maduro, others to the proclaimed interim president Juan Guaidó. The US threat, as voiced by senior officials and Donald Trump himself, does not exclude a US military intervention, using "humanitarian aid" as a justification. Support for Nicolás Maduro has come mainly from countries such as Russia and China, the main allies of Chavismo. However, rather than a direct military confrontation between the great powers, the potential danger lies in the use of the population and workers as cannon fodder in a war between bandits.
For the last two months, the question of the ecological catastrophe threatening our planet has been at the centre of attention in Belgium. With the march on 2 December 2019, which brought together 75,000 people in Brussels, this mobilisation around climate change has taken on an unprecedented breadth.
This report on the national situation in the UK was adopted by a recent general meeting. Its aim is to examine the historical background to the present political mess afflicting the British bourgeoisie.
This report on the national situation in the UK was adopted by a recent general meeting. Its aim is to examine the historical background to the present political mess afflicting the British bourgeoisie.
In order to mark the passing of 100 years since the murder of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht in the wake of the workers’ uprising in Berlin, January1919, we are re-issuing two articles. The first, “Lenin, Luxemburg, Liebknecht, written in 1946 by the Gauche Communiste de France, was first published in English in World Revolution 228, in February 1989, but is only now being put online; the second article was written in 2015 response to the annual parades in Berlin, where the left wing of capital tries to claim Rosa and Karl as their forebears. But as the title of the second article puts it, “Rosa Luxemburg belongs to the proletarian revolution, not the social democrats”. Not only that: both articles remind us that it was precisely the social democrats, the real ancestors of today’s “left”, who were primarily responsible for these murders, part of the job of crushing the threat of proletarian revolution. The revolution of the future must never forget who its most dangerous enemies are.
In order to mark the passing of 100 years since the murder of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht in the wake of the workers’ uprising in Berlin, January1919, we are re-issuing two articles. The first, “Lenin, Luxemburg, Liebknecht, written in 1946 by the Gauche Communiste de France, was first published in English in World Revolution 228, in February 1989, but is only now being put online; the second article was written in 2015 response to the annual parades in Berlin, where the left wing of capital tries to claim Rosa and Karl as their forebears. But as the title of the second article puts it, “Rosa Luxemburg belongs to the proletarian revolution, not the social democrats”. Not only that: both articles remind us that it was precisely the social democrats, the real ancestors of today’s “left”, who were primarily responsible for these murders, part of the job of crushing the threat of proletarian revolution. The revolution of the future must never forget who its most dangerous enemies are.
President Trump’s demagogic foreign policy of “retreat behind walls” and “America First” are aimed at his electoral base and beyond, where workers are not keen on endless foreign wars, showing the persistence of the “Vietnam Syndrome” which Trump is using for his own advantage. Following the disasters of US imperialism in the Middle East (and Afghanistan), a realignment of US forces has some support among the military and wider layers of the US bourgeoisie, but not necessarily using the same methods as Trump. This president personifies the global dynamic in the phase of the decomposition of capitalism which has deepened since the break-up of the blocs in 1989: the development of the centrifugal tendencies of “each for themselves”, unpredictability, the fortress mentality, the sudden abrogation of international treaties and protocols, etc.
President Trump’s demagogic foreign policy of “retreat behind walls” and “America First” are aimed at his electoral base and beyond, where workers are not keen on endless foreign wars, showing the persistence of the “Vietnam Syndrome” which Trump is using for his own advantage. Following the disasters of US imperialism in the Middle East (and Afghanistan), a realignment of US forces has some support among the military and wider layers of the US bourgeoisie, but not necessarily using the same methods as Trump. This president personifies the global dynamic in the phase of the decomposition of capitalism which has deepened since the break-up of the blocs in 1989: the development of the centrifugal tendencies of “each for themselves”, unpredictability, the fortress mentality, the sudden abrogation of international treaties and protocols, etc.
It would be a great mistake to think that the disarray in the ruling class in the face of populism is helpful to the working class. Right now there is a historically low level of strikes and the proletariat is finding it very difficult even to recognise itself as a class. It risks falling for and being divided along the lines of the various ideologies put forward by the ruling class. None of these ideologies, for Brexit or Remain, for referendums or parliament, have anything to offer the working class.
It would be a great mistake to think that the disarray in the ruling class in the face of populism is helpful to the working class. Right now there is a historically low level of strikes and the proletariat is finding it very difficult even to recognise itself as a class. It risks falling for and being divided along the lines of the various ideologies put forward by the ruling class. None of these ideologies, for Brexit or Remain, for referendums or parliament, have anything to offer the working class.
In November 2018 the two main groups of the communist left in Britain, the ICC and the Communist Workers Organisation, held meetings in London on the centenary of the German revolution. From both meetings it was evident that there is fundamental agreement on a number of key points arising from this experience. And yet there were also definite disagreements between our two organisations, which emerged at the CWO meeting and were further debated at the ICC meeting the following week, which was attended by a member of the CWO. This article looks at the principal differences that emerged.
In November 2018 the two main groups of the communist left in Britain, the ICC and the Communist Workers Organisation, held meetings in London on the centenary of the German revolution. From both meetings it was evident that there is fundamental agreement on a number of key points arising from this experience. And yet there were also definite disagreements between our two organisations, which emerged at the CWO meeting and were further debated at the ICC meeting the following week, which was attended by a member of the CWO. This article looks at the principal differences that emerged.
We are publishing here large extracts from a reader who, while welcoming the overall approach of the leaflet on the Yellow Vest movement distributed by our section in France also criticises certain of our positions, in particular the idea that nothing good for the proletariat can come out of this inter-classist movement. These questions touch on extremely important aspects of the proletarian struggle: what is the working class, its struggle, its perspective.