Barnesites echo Matgammaism on Israel and general move to right concerning Imperialist interventions

Paul Pederson's latest article in the American Militant shows a dramatic further shift to the right in attacking a pro-boycott movement of Israel and defend their neutrality miltiary in battles between an agency of Imperialism (which Israel being defined by Maxine Rodinson as a Colonial-Settler state which the US SWP has accepted until very recently) and a battle for freedom against Zionist oppression even although it is led by Bourgeois Nationalists.


This is a break from the Leninist-Trotskyist programme of supporting the Colonial Revolution against Imperialism unconditionally despite whoever time leads it at a certain stage. In 1981 the Barnesites broke from Permanent Revolution. It is only by carrying out Trotsky's method of Permanent Revolution can Revolutionary Marxists take advantage of Bourgeois Nationalists/semi-Feudal elements or even possible Petty-Bourgeois forces coming into conflict with Imperialism to stregthen the working class in leading the middle class and other oppresed groups which combines Bourgeois-Democratic tasks such as ending Imperialst super-exploitation with Socialist tasks of expropriating the Capitalists. When the Barnesites dumped Permanent Revolution was a qualitative turning point in degeneration. Ever since then particulary after 1989 revolutionary threats to Stalinism Barnes feels he cannot defend his politics against opponents. His evolution since 9/11 when initially he correctly defended the Taliban miltiary against American Imperialism but defended an Ultra-Left line you "could not build a peace movement under Capitalism" completely rejecting their own experiences in building the movement against America's war in Vietnam during the 1960s and early 1970s.


After the Iraq war Barnes has moved consistently to the right on every question of Imperilist intervention except for Cuba and North Korea. On the Iraq war Barnes was opposed to resistance against American Imperialist occupation; neutral in the Israeli-Lebanon war of 2006; supported independence for Kosovo during 2008; and supported Georgia against Russia in the same year. Now the Barnesites has gone further and actually publishing a book which praises Imperialism for developing the productive forces in Equatural Guiena!


This move to the right by Barnes represents putting two fingers up to the rising world revolution these defeats Imperialism have suffered in these wars (with the one exception being Kosovo where Imperiaism won out for a period). The American masses are radicalsing partly due to American Imperialsm losing wars and Israel losing two wars since 9/11. Barnes reacts by going more hysterical fearing this deepening radicalisation combined with the rise of Trotsky will sweep him away. That is why we have these hysterical attacks on the WWP and ISO being "anti-Semetic". These organisations mentioned by Pederson are oppoents of Trotskyism but they should not be slandered. The British AWL would not condemn the NATO 1999 war on Serbia, and oppose calls to withdraw American/British Imperialist troops from Iraq. They like Barnes slander oppoents of Zionism as being "antI-Semetic" and simiarly oppose a boycott of Israel. One diference between Matgmamma and Barnes is that Barnes still clings to the correct formula of fighting for a democratic Secular society! and is not supporting an Imperialist war.


Pederson's quote of Hamas's anti-Semetism is framed to leave the impression they are 'Fascists'. Fascism as Trotsky argued can only occur in Imperialist countries as it represents a reaction to severe Capitalist crisis by a tendency to expansionism and adventurism. Italian and Spanish Fascism was charcterised by massive miltiary interventions to supress the Colonial revolution. Trotskyists do not support reactionary ideas of Bourgeois Nationalists but do see it at times leading an objectively (despite being subjectivally counter-revolutionary as represenstives of an enemy classes which is why political class independence has to be maintaned) anti-Imperrialist struggle. As Jim Cannon would say Fascism is counter-revolutonary through and through both objectively and subjectively as it carries out the interests of the Imperialist Bourgeosies. Lenni Brenner in a 1984 work (which is available on the Marxist Internet Archive) entitled; "The Iron Wall: Zionist Revisionism from Jabotinsky to Shamir" shows how Zionism and Fascism worked together quite closely together from the 1920s to the end of World War 2.


The Barnesites in justifying their revisionist line of Imperialism developing the productive forces in Equatorial Guiena are beginning to seperate Lenin from Marx. In a Militant article several weeks ago the author utilised a quote out of context from Marx's Communist Manifesto about the progressive character of Capitalism in creating an international division of labour. Marx was correct about the achievement of an international division of labour as representing a major development of the productive forces. As a movement Revolutionary Marxists now know that Capitalism even in its progressive epoch set back productive forces in the Colonies. Lenin when analysing Imperialism began to develop that analyisis of why Imperialism super-exploits the Coloinies/Semi-Colonies. Trotsky worked out his theory of Permanent Revolution by analysing how Imperialist super-exploitation could only be ended by the working class seizing power. Cannon in a polemic with Shactman over the Proletarian Miltary Policy (See SWP in World War 2) that revisionists seperated Trotsky from Lenin. Barnes seperated Trotsky from Lenin when he dumped Permanent Revolution. Now as he moves to the right on Imperialism Barnes is seperating Lenin from Marx.


It is on Kosovo declaring independence from Serbia in 2008 and supporting a concilationist Bureuacratic regime to Imperialism in Georgia during a war with Russia that the Barnesites have become more clearly counter-revolutionary and begin to take a more openly pro-Imperialist position. At certain stages in 1998 the Kosovan struggle against Serbian national oppression was progressive particulary the mobilisation of the miners. The KLA as a multi-class movement could not be supported and Trotskyists were correct after Imperialism intervened seriously with the pro-Imperialist wing of KLA winning out in February March1999 that the defence of the FRY workers' state had to be emphasised more. After the NATO bombing of FRY began Trotskyists while opposing Milosevic's anti-working class national cleansing of Albaians would have critically supported the Serbian army fighting the KLA on the Kosovo-Albanian border particulry if this border was used by NATO to invade Kosovo.


One of Imperialism's victories was seizing the state power in Kosovo. The Bourgeois Nationalists are only a problem becase Serbian Stalinism's crimes played into their hands. In a 2001 assembly election the main Bourgeois Nationalist party was electorally decimated. Due to the victory of Imperialism and Bourgeois Nationalists in Kosovo unemplopyment is around approxmately between 70% to 90%. In the Chinese Xinhua news agency there was an article appearing a few weeks ago saying that Kosovon workers are resisting further privttisation. If the workers are armed defending the renmants of a workers' state then there could be a dual power situation. After the 1990 defeat of the Sandinistas that Nicaragua was still a workers' state until at least until 1996 because the Sandinista army still had an independent miltoary base in the state apparatus and the workers were defending their socio-economic gains against Capitalist restoration with arms. From 1996 I do not know whether the Capitalists won out in restoring Capitalism.


As Jon Grey said in April 1999 in the Manchester, British Guardian the NATO war on Serbia could lead to Imperialism having less influence in Russia. He hinted it could play into the hands of a wing of Stalinism opposed to Imperialism's encroachment on their country. This blunder of Imperialism combined with the August 1998 Financial crisis led to intermediate Bureaucratic elements linking up with harder Stalinists against Imperialist penertration to remove Yeltisin. Since January 2000 the Russain economy has recovered. Barnes's main methodlogical error on supporting the conciallationist elements and Capitalist restorationist forces against the Russian workers' state was that American Imperialism and Israeli armed forces to weaken the Russian workers' states influence were behind Georgia's attack on South Ossetia testing how they could go after Russia before that Bureaucracy reacted. If Imperialism had won in Georgia American Imperialism could have gone further challenging Russia raising the dangers of World War 3. The Russian workers' state being salvaged is a gain for world revolution because it can influence Eastern Europe against going Capitalist and pose an alternaive to Capitalism. Despite the Bureaucracy not wanting their society to be a total challenge to global Capitalism fearing an upturn in world revolution will lead to their overthrow through a Political revolution.