The original article is here:

SWP minority (Morrow, Heijenoort, Goldman) better estimated the situation in Europe because they didn’t set high hopes on “revolutionary potential” of the working class, which supported its traditional Social-Democratic and Stalinist parties. These parties adhere to the policy of “class collaboration”, in reality renouncing socialist program.

Trotskyists (majority of SWP) have become self-congratulatory, self-complacent, just like the Communists, after the victory of Hitler in Germany in 1933:

By November 1944 it was obvious that the resolution of the October

1943 Plenum had failed to foresee the course of events in Europe

and to orient the Trotskyist cadres in the tactics required by the political

moment. Yet despite the insistence of the Minority Report to the

Convention on “the importance of a democratic interlude,”16 the

Resolution adopted by the Sixth Convention of the SWP in November

1944 started by stating that “the events of the past nine months have

served to underline the validity of our previous analysis of the world

situation” (Sixth Convention of the SWP, 1944, 361).

Careless political analysis:

Militant editorial “Warsaw Betrayed,” arguing that it had not

taken up the question of

the duty of guerrilla forces — and in the circumstances that is what the Warsaw detachments

are — to subordinate themselves to the high command of the main army,

the Red Army, in timing of such an important battle as the siege of Warsaw.

On the contrary, the editorial appears to take as its point of departure the

assumption that a full-scale proletarian uprising occurred in Warsaw and that

Stalin deliberately maneuvered to permit Hitler to crush the revolt. . . . W e are

deeply concerned about this carelessness in writing about such a crucial question.

(Letter from Dobbs dated August 23, 1944, quoted in Jacobs, 1944, 34.)

According to Morrow, the sectarianism of the French section was

long-standing; indeed “when the armed proletariat made the Paris insurrection

in August 1944 our party was completely outside the movement

thanks to their false position on the resistance movement” (Morrow,

1946c, 31)

denial of political reality and glossing over past mistakes in political analysis,

staking a virtual claim to infallibility on the part of the party leaders

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