Discussion on World Socialist Web Site 3 comments

Cliff Slaughter: 1928–2021

arandomposter33 17 minutes ago Detected as spam Thanks, we’ll work on getting this corrected.

From the standpoint of the working class and Democratic Power, the ICFI seems to have held on only to Slaughter’s betrayal and systematically opposed his contributions. The SEP stood up for Objectivism in the form of Materialist Determinism, arguing that Marx ignored the need for a conscious revolutionary leadership that worked for the construction of the movement internationally. The insistent demand of Democratic Power for cooperation in the construction of a Spanish-speaking party in South America meets only with suppression of the type the SLL used between 1982-1984. In opposing an analysis of nationalist movements as “unconscious Marxists”, Slaughter absolutely had it right. Yet the SEP twists this position into an opposition to Lenin and Trotsky on nationalism. The defense of smaller nations, colonies, and underdeveloped and indebted former colonies should not end ever, even after Marxism is dead and forgotten. Their independence, their right to secession, their economic development, and their ascendance towards equality break up the empire, the states of the ruling class, and the political-financial strangle-hold imposed by the banking monopolies, the slanderous media monopolies, and the police-state bureaucracy on working class politics.

If Slaughter argued against idealist ways of thought while Healy, as leader of the ICFI, argued for them, then this is to Slaughter’s credit. However, as is more likely, if Slaughter and Healy had deliberately contradictory policies, then they effectively established and maintained the nano-bureaucracy through their boss-ship over the party. If one bureaucratic leader argues one way and his right-hand argues the opposite way, any ordinary member will have to endure all the suffering for their socialist activity without any of the benefits. The benefits, they argue, should naturally by stolen by their leaders just as the capitalists steal surreptitiously from the workers.

The proof of the revolution’s greatness, its ability to stand up in the face of government repression, depends on its ability to gather the forces of the working class in the name of constructing cultural and political heroes as they struggle against the wounded and dying capitalist system. The bureaucracy would rather hold this process back, as it holds back the construction of socialist parties, as it holds back the development of socialist consciousness and the revolution itself. Bureaucratic maneuvers such as Healy’s and Slaughter’s still exist within the SEP, as the Objectivist now argues for Materialist Determinism. The idealist argues that he has no responsibility to meet half-way and debate those who propose the construction of ICFI parties in countries where they do not yet exist.

Abandoning those countries and their working class populations leads the party into the dead-end of social chauvinism, which rather than gaining the highest positions in the party deserves a trial and prosecution by the membership of the revolutionary party. If no ossified committee within the SEP-ICFI bureaucracy can summon up the will to construct this trial, then the entire party membership should convene, including expelled members who had no right to an appeal, and in such a way put the modern-day Shachtmanite committee-stackers on trial. Barring this act of civilized life, the committee-stackers will see the coming of committee-sackers, and in that way their miniature Roman triumvirate will have to answer for their crimes against the people.