Worker IMT Recruit Forced Out of Party by IMT Nanobureaucracy

Worker: Hey ive been reading your blog and its super interesting and a breath of fresh air to have open criticism in this modern atmosphere of party repression. My question is why is David north the Millionaire pretending to be a marxist ? Or is he really one but super out of touch with the working class and thus he created a sect? Are they literally scamming communist just for money? Also why do they have some good articles, but some horribles trash ones aswell? I hope you will have the answers i seek, cheers !

Wed 2:56 PM

Randomposter33: These are good questions. Do you mind telling me where you’re from? Are you part of any socialist group?

Wed 4:58 PM

Worker: Im from ***, i was part of IMT but i wasnt donating enough money and i was engaging with criticism too much online so they basically soft kicked me out. After i was invited to my first branch meeting, i was told my questions were not welcomed and that i should join something else

Wed 5:00 PM

Worker: Which was absolutely insane to me because they kept telling me about how the branch meeting is the most democratic place ever and i could debate whatever topic i wanted. It was a lie lol, sorry i overshared

Wed 5:01 PM

Randomposter33: Not at all. I am writing a long reply.

Wed 5:02 PM

Randomposter33: I’d even like to know more, like what specific topics you wanted to debate and why they would not permit questions. But first I’ll try to answer your question.

Wed 5:03 PM

Randomposter33: Well, North joined in the 70s and worked closely with Alex Steiner. I would say the Vietnam War radicalized him, and he may have seen that the SWP and the Workers’ League did provide a Marxist analysis. At that time, the Workers’ League had emerged from the split with the SWP and found a leader in Healy. Healy had defended the Marxist position that the revolution needed a conscious leadership that understood the conflicts between socialists of previous generations. The SWP split from the ISFI in 1953 and rejoined 1963 over this topic. They argued in 1953 that the Fourth International cannot forget the lessons of history proving Stalinism was counterrevolutionary. Others, calling themselves Pabloists, for whatever reason, began to support the Stalinist bureaucracy.

Wed 5:07 PM

Randomposter33: This was partly due to the emergence in Eastern Europe and Asia of new Stalinist states, which they saw as proof that the Fourth International would not provide the leadership of the world revolution. This could not completely explain the problem, since a closer look at these states proved they sought deals with imperialism, persecuted Trotskyism and workers’ democracy, and worked to restore capitalism by degrees and then in full.

Wed 5:11 PM

Randomposter33: That alone could have given them reason to stay true to the 1953 decision. Their participation in radical movements and their competition in the field with Stalinism convinced them that the workers were really their enemy and the bureaucracy alone provided them with political solidarity. This brought them further into an alliance with the Stalinists, betraying the workers further. They reunified in 1963, and the Workers’ League and the Spartacist League split along with the British Party leader Gerry Healy.

Wed 5:15 PM

Randomposter33: North joined Healy’s group but under the influence of the same social forces as the SWP leadership. He gave in to Stalinism through its approach to party politics: purges, slander, and leader-worship. In 1971, the ICFI split again between the SLL of the UK and the OCI of France. North and Steiner worked together to suppress the discussion of the split and create a sort of hero-worship or a zero-criticism environment as a means of gaining favor with Healy.

Wed 5:18 PM

Worker: I have picked up on the fact that modern Trotskyst organization like SEP and IMT have a strong, almost stalinist Bureaucracy. Like when me and my branch read revoltion betrayed, we talked at length about the economic criticism of Trotsky. But i cant believe we DID NOT for a second talk about Trotsky’s call for party democract, Trotsky’s defence of factions. It struck me because its like they are purposely not encouraging members to have opinions and organize arounds these opinions

Wed 5:26 PM

Randomposter33: It is not clear exactly what happened to the leader of the Workers’ League at that time, Tim Wohlforth. He left the party most likely due to Nancy Fields, a government agent that worked as his secretary. Fred Mazelis took over the party and attempted to create a semblance of democracy. He did not last long, perhaps due to criticism of Healy, and North and Steiner replaced Mazelis. That was in 1976.

Wed 5:32 PM

Worker: Im verry happy your interested, i really want to talk about it and figure out if im crazy or not. Okay so in the branch meeting, 45 min was reserves for a leadoff, kind of a presentation on a topic by a comrade. The week i was invited the leadoff was on the Black Panther Party. After the leadoff there was time for discussion. Another invitee, not even me, asked a question about mutual aid related to the BPP. I bounced off this question because i had a question of my own. Can mutual aid be beneficial inside the party ? Can we say organize a fundraiser for comrades who cant buy books, could we maybe help the most struggling of vanguard members because my reasoning was a cadre with a full belly is more effective. I really wanted to learn, these were questions, legitimate questions i think. I was somewhat satisfied with the discussion, no tension happened at the branch. Its at the bar after that the president told me : 1- that i monopolized the conversation 2- that i should know the answers to theses questions by now, and bringing it up in branch was disrespectful (???) 3- that they dont need me, i need the party. He basically said i really dont care if you have issues , i dont need you

Worker: Later that week, i got in a meeting with my recruiter and the president

Wed 5:32 PM

Worker: Told me i did very bad, and that after 1 year of involvement,they suddenly decided they “were not gonna recruit me now, or soon” which is insane because my recruiter was telling me it was matter of time before i joined and he was excited about it. But all of a sudden, they had a consensus that i wasnt member material

Worker: It profoundly hurt me

Worker: So north is kind of just the last conman standing huh

Wed 5:34 PM

Worker: Oh also the president and 70% of the membership is students, i was one of the only ACTUAL worker and they treat me like im sticky trash on their shoe

Worker: Really i cant stress enough how rude and belittling they acted with me

Wed 5:37 PM

Randomposter33: Sorry, was interrupted for a second. I am back.

Wed 5:38 PM

Worker: Absolutely no worries take your time, my story is convulated af

Wed 5:38 PM

Randomposter33: That was in 1976. David North founded a company in 1978 that received millions of dollars from a few large corporations, and that company has an estimated $25 million in annual revenue today.

Randomposter33: No, I hear you, it does get complicated, but impatience is worse.

Wed 5:40 PM

Randomposter33: If you look at David North in isolation, you might think he just happened to start a company and that company just happened to make millions. However, if you see David North as the successor to Nancy Fields, even if he is not directly a government agent but more of a petty-bourgeois corporate infiltrator, a hostile take over by the corporations seems likely.

Wed 5:41 PM

Randomposter33: The government, the corporations, and the political elite could easily conspire to take over the party with money. To Fred Mazelis, it must have seemed like a miracle that a millionaire would show up and give the party everything it needed.

Wed 5:43 PM

Randomposter33: I hope that answers your question on why he joined in the first place.

Wed 5:45 PM

Worker: Yes thank you that was very detailled

Wed 5:46 PM

Randomposter33: I do not give up on the Fourth International, since that party has existed since 1938. Even if capitalists take over the revolutionary party, that is no different from the rest of the world, rule by capital.

Wed 5:46 PM

Randomposter33: When the working class takes the power, they will take capital that at that moment does not legally belong to them. They address this contradiction with the concept of a dual power, in which a revolutionary state and a dying state exist side by side, sharing the power. The same concept would apply to a party with dual leadership, one capitalist leadership and one worker owned and operated.

Wed 5:49 PM

Randomposter33: It is not a scam, and we know this from the Marxist theory of revolution. The revolutionary party is actually a stabilizing force that can convince the people to settle and wait for a better opportunity. That is not a scam either. The Marxist theory of revolution begins with the economic collapse of capitalism. It then explains that capitalism requires a working class and actually produces a working class to work the machines. The fact that capitalism leads to economic collapse combined with the fact that it created a large working class combine to form a revolution. Out of the economic requirements for a revolution comes the political requirement for a party. The revolutionary party produced then comes into conflict with the state and ruling class who use the political police to sabotage their democracy, their capacity to choose good leaders, their leaders’ decisions, etc. Since these tactics often are themselves illegal, secretive, and unpopular, the people can use the party to train revolutionary leaders and steadily raise the consciousness of the masses.

Wed 5:57 PM

Randomposter33: We still need Lenin and Trotsky to train our leaders because they documented this struggle with the state very well. Their exposure of state agents, opportunists, centrists, etc., soft cultural forces, all went into proving that a revolutionary victory was not only possible but inevitable.

Wed 6:00 PM

Worker: Wow i really love your analysis, its making me feel less hopeless, we have dealt with this before and we will deal with this again. Revolution is a process

Wed 6:05 PM

Randomposter33: As I said before, Stalinism gained power over both the ISFI and the ICFI of the 1953 split in different ways. Many of the quirky, abrasive, or culturally tasteless behaviors that come from them has its roots in Stalinist political and cultural infiltration. However, as Trotsky explained, the Stalinist are not a separate class in the same sense that the middle class is divided into those who serve and align with the workers and those who serve and align the capitalists. In the end, the differences between capitalist and worker become pronounced enough that we can see who defends capitalism within the Fourth International, who defends ill-gotten fortune and undeserved fame, and who defends the working class. The Stalinists cannot stay in the middle forever because they betray both sides.

Wed 6:06 PM

Randomposter33: Trotsky saw the political revolution against Stalinist bureaucracy and the social revolution in the West as inseparable parts of the world revolution, like a Great Awakening.

Wed 6:11 PM

Randomposter33: Sorry to go on for a while, but this is also an opportunity to get all my thoughts in print for safekeeping or distribution.

Wed 6:12 PM

Randomposter33: Why are some articles good? Because of that process where the working class does not give up on its own emancipation despite all political obstacles. Political obstacles will seem small when economic forces turn into open conflict between the classes.

Wed 6:15 PM

Randomposter33: Since some revolutionaries still write for the WSWS, that reaches the workers, those advanced workers can then send more of their intellectuals and leaders into the party. They then provide the writing for a new political cycle of readers, writers, and activists. That is a necessary gathering of forces. At the same time, the forces of reaction leave nothing to chance. They want to be there too, at the conferences and book tours, and even during the “Long March.”

Wed 6:20 PM

Randomposter33: OK, now I’ve answered your original questions.

Randomposter33: I have to see what else you wrote since then.

Wed 6:22 PM

Quoting worker: “It struck me because its like they are purposely not encouraging members to have opinions and organize arounds these opinions.”

Wed 6:24 PM

Randomposter33: Exactly. That is the main difference between the party and the trade union, and they are eliminating it.

Wed 6:25 PM

Quoting worker: “Im verry happy your interested, i really want to talk about it and figure out if im crazy or not.”

Wed 6:31 PM

Randomposter33: The same forces that call us crazy will throw a hissy fit if we talk about support groups within the organization. Healing requires a community, like a village raising a child. By calling people crazy, they mean they hate their entire community. Stress affects people in different ways, and with the political police, who knows how much of that stress is torture-related or stress from knowing the government wants them in prison? Medicine can determine the outcome of a war, and those who would deny the revolution medicine (or the right to acquire medicine as a group) in the name of purging all the sick are really traitors, not friends.

Wed 6:37 PM

Worker: Wow I wish people like you were in the party , you have such a good analysis of the “dual forces” inside the movement. And the relationship between the revolutionary layer of the party writting good articles which sends more revolutionary layers in the party is really fascinating

Worker: And yes, I’ve always felt ostracized for thinking that a party is also a community, and communities support each other. And they DO throw hissy fit if you bring that up !

Wed 6:59 PM

Randomposter33: Well, to answer your question, mutual aid does not come from Leninism but from the Black Panther Party who never broke from Stalinism. We need to blame ourselves for the power of Stalinism because we did not organize a Black Nationalist Faction, similar to the Bund of Lenin and Trotsky’s RSDLP, or encourage the reading of CLR James to bring black nationalists over to internationalism. If we had, maybe mutual aid would have worked for us as a recruitment tool. There will always be some tension between any ruling faction, who has to defend the funds of the party from waste and abuse, and the people at the bottom who want to see those funds spent on them. In general, that should lead to a rotation among the leaders, assuming factions had rights like in Lenin and Trotsky’s party. Since factions do not have rights, we should demand immediate seizure of party funds combined with social and charity events to show they are the criminal infiltrators and we the wider community. Creating such structures should build roots for the party in the community and bring people together as a counter-weight to the factionalism. To accuse everyone who at one point or another needs help only serves to enslave party members to the few millionaires at the top. They do not want mutual aid but a lifetime of submission in exchange for a meal. Such contracts are a crime in themselves. They also want loan sharks to keep the people in debt. The profit motive is not really just an individual motive either. The profit motive is used to justify slavery for one class at the expense of another. They go further still in arguing that revolutionaries should have slaves, like Thomas Jefferson did. Marx argued that philosophers of the antiquities all argued that slavery was necessary to create a superior type of man. We have to reject that view in favor of a view that the superior type, if it really exists, comes from and constantly depends on a community that defends its most vulnerable while rescuing an every greater part of the population of the world as a whole.

Wed 7:11 PM

Randomposter33: Their superior type succumbs to criminalization and demonization, which they in fact need to drive their slaves ever harder in the spirit of competition. That criminalization and demonization leaves permanent scars on their personality and appearance. Their superior type is really inferior in that sense, someone to keep us in fear of offending them. This actually drives socialists away rather than empowering them or providing them with extra resources.

Wed 7:18 PM

Randomposter33: Norman Thomas, the Presbyterian Minister who succeeded Eugene Debs as head of the Socialist Party of America, deserves credit for bringing that clergyman’s air of haughtiness and contemptuousness. He resembles the New York Intellectuals, a group of successful anti-Stalinist writers, a part of which became the neoconservatives. David North follows along the same lines, as does Bernie Sanders. Sanders has more of a mass media professional makeover that combines hippie culture with politics. They all come from New York, the capital of imperialism and home to the most billionaires. Centuries of capitalist excess has become ingrained in their culture. All the greatest products found throughout the world find their way there as they once did to the Roman aristocrat. The suits and the robes of their society stem directly from socio-economic classes. They cannot escape their socio-economic background, so they idealize it as further support for their chauvinism. They sympathize with Robespierre and Napoleon and see the Sans-Culottes as an unthinking herd. They see themselves as organically a head on the human body of society, when in fact the majority of humanity wants their heads on a plate.

Wed 8:41 PM

Randomposter33: Sorry, I wanted to get all my thoughts out on writing. I am still writing. In my opinion, that is not monopolizing but more like giving in to the power of a socialized monopoly.

Wed 8:44 PM

Randomposter33: I am also very happy to hear from you. I have had very few good chat conversations on Twitter, but that is my main objective at this moment. Collaboration on writing with other Trotskyists should bring more organizational results in the near future.

Wed 8:55 PM

Quoting worker: “that they dont need me, i need the party. He basically said i really dont care if you have issues , i dont need you”

Wed 8:58 PM

Randomposter33: OK, the party needs the working class. Otherwise, they look like a sect. The petty-bourgeoisie and the Protestant ministry need the party. We do not need them. Without the party, they will not be able to gather everyone together in their own name, in honor of themselves. In that sense, the revolution is really a restoration of order and a societal recognition of the real balance of power. The party takes the power from the petty bourgeoisie, then the party can work for the workers. When the party finally works for the workers, the workers can then rise to the top by establishing a new workers’ state. The workers can then submit to the authority of the new state with the agreement that the state will wither once equality breaks down class division. In effect, the citizens of the new classless society can then replace the workers and their state with something greater, the ascendancy of the classless Communist within Communist society and the state’s withering away.

Wed 9:22 PM

Randomposter33: OK, that about answers it all.