2 questions emerge from my examination of “Law of Uneven and Combined Development”

1. Examine the states where revolution has taken place, and compare these to the states where no revolution has taken place. How to explain the difference, concretely?

2. Examine the new emerging “class” of “creators”, differentiate between revolutionary and non-revolutionary strands.

This is about critique of previously existing states, their emergence from revolutions, and decay.

But what about the “new state”, new society to emerge in the future? For this, we need to know the histories of previously existing revolutionary organizations. I know of only 4 Internationals. The 5th one which leader of Venezuela attempted to create did not materialize, and was not serious from the start. It was to me a front organization for his policies of defense against imperialism.

The decay and destruction of 3rd International is synonymous with the decay of the Russian communist party, with emergence of Stalinism.

But, what about the 4th one? Why did it not emerge out of the nucleus which Trotsky created? 

I have a feeling that the reason for failure was the same one that led Lenin to part with Trotsky, at the founding conference of the Bolshevik party (1905, II Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party). And this was a desire to compromise on important principles, out of the fear of being left alone, or in insignificant minority. A union of Trotsky with the American SWP, and in particular with J.P. Cannonб appears just of such a nature. I have never met a revolutionary from the U.S., and it seems the only way for a revolutionary (social) to survive is to run away from that country. 

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.