Krivine continued: "We are being presented with a choice between a What alternati working peop FRANCIS SITEL
At its Sixth Congress, the Ligue Communiste Revolutionnaire (LCR, French section of the Fourth International) decided to make a unity proposal to organizations, currents, activists and working people posing the problem of developing an alternative to the class-collaborationist policy of the Socialist and Communist parties.
In order to lend added weight to this initiative, the LCR made public its congress discussions, in the conviction that they would be of interest to many other forces. The LCR also wanted the "Rally against austerity, against a capitalist Europe," which it organized in May 1984 in Le Bourget [just outside Paris], to be open to all the organizations desiring to discuss the issues facing us.
This approach was subsequently further concretized in the appeals for "assembling a united anticapitalist force."
What were the bases of this initi-
FRANCE continuation of the austerity policy with a left government or a stepped-up austerity policy under a government of the right. The LCR wants to offer the workers another choice -to reject such austerity policy in general, no matter whether by a left or right government.
"On this basis, we have appealed to all forces that claim to stand to the left of the official left. We have proposed to them to unite our forces in order to lay the basis for building a broad anticapitalist current, which would respect the specific features ot each of its components but discuss of each of its components but discuss and fight together.
"In making this proposal, we took into account the confusion that prevails today in the French workers' movement. But we also took into account the desire of thousands of organized and unorganized working people for an alternative to the threats of the right and the ultra-right and the official left's politics of capitulation."
The following article explains more fully the LCR's proposals for an alternative in the March elections and beyond and the sort of campaign it is waging. ve for le? ative? First of all, there was the assessment that while the situation is still unfavourable, it is at least generating a recomposition in the workers' movement. The crisis in the workers' movement has not yet provoked more than a limited fightback, mobilizations in particular remaining weak. So, what the LCR should do is not fall back on itself but confront this crisis, involve itself in the processes that are underway and try to offer a perspective.
The real objectives of this exercise, therefore, are to make links with Communist and Socialist party activists disoriented by the crises of their leaderships, with trade unionists who reject class collaboration and with far-left activists who have drawn the balance sheet of their past orientations and are determined not to fall back into passivity. More than this, our goal is to build links with all those who are drawing the lessons of the present experience and are seeking ways to continue the struggle.
7
LCR activists are finding and working with such potential fellow fighters every day in the unions, in the mass movement - for example, in the women's movement and the antiracist movement - and in mobilizations, such as those in support of the Kanak people's struggle.
The difficulties we face in giving a general political expression to all these convergences are related to the general climate of disorientation and especially to the lack of big mobilizations around the basic social questions. Only mobilizations on such issues could bring to a head the present crisis in the workers' movement and pose the question "on a grand scale" of a political and organizational alternative.
However, since it is not enough just to wait for this to happen and it being necessary to act today to prepare the way for the future, the LCR has tried to pinpoint what concrete proposals could be made to facilitate the unity and the recomposition of the forces to the left of the reformist left. It was necessary to look for practical tests to clarify what is possible.
Therefore, long before the elections came to dominate the horizon, the LCR was striving to promote the formation of united collectives in the cities, directed toward grouping together activists and working people who wanted to discuss and work together. These collectives were to be focuses for debating the lessons to be drawn from the experience of the reformist left in government and the perspectives to be put forward. They were to be centers for action and the main issues of the day - the fight against austerity and unemployment, the struggle against racism, international solidarity, the defense of anticapitalist policies. About 60 collectives exist.
For the March 1986 elections, the LCR proposed the formation of a broad electoral coalition, extending from the LCR and Lutte Ouvriere (LO, a group that identifies with Trotskyism and focusses on rank-and-file work in the factories) to the environmentalists, to campaign on some key issues - opposition to the return of the right to power, opposition to the class-collaborationist and austerity policy of the Socialist and Communist parties, support for demands that fit into a perspective of breaking with capitalism.
Such a coalition, if it had been possible to put it together, would have offered a real alternative to the workers repelled by the policy of the Communist and Socialist parties. But this, unfortunately, could not be done.
In the first place, the united col8 lectives that existed were not a strong enough grassroots base for mobilizing forces to put over such a perspective. Second, as regards the far-left or environmentalist groups with a national presence, sectarianism, narrowness, specific problems of certain organizations, and real political differences blocked the sort of convergence that would have made it possible to present a united front in these elections.
For example, the Green party, which hopes to polarize the environmentalist vote, ruled out any alliance with the far-left organizations. This disoriented organizations such as the Federation pour une Gauche Alternative (FGA - Federation for a Left Alternative), the Parti pour une Alternative Communiste (PAC, the former Communist Party - Marxist Leninist), and the Parti Socialiste Unifie (PSU), which were anxious to get a "Convergence for a Green Alternative." Thus, it kept them from entering into a dialogue on the national level with the LCR.
Moreover, LO [which has been a close ally of the LCR] not only refused to join in this fight for unity with the LCR but used its disagreements with this initiative as a pretext for rejecting an electoral accord with the LCR. Such an agreement was possible, and in fact had been reached in many preceding elections.
As for the International Communist Party (PCI, the Lambert current, which also identifies with Trotksyism), it engaged in a project of its own, launching the Movement for a Workers Party (MPPT). It showed no interest whatever in any move to unite forces. It continued to make sacrifices to its household gods of sectarianism and manipulation.
In March 1986, the far left, therefore, is going to offer a lamentable spectacle of greater than ever division, which will be totally incomprehensible for the great majority of workers. When the workers are drawing the balance sheet of the failure of the left government, they are going to have
One L vor lutre mars 86 Pour
LICUE "Another voice for March 1986"
to sort out appeals for votes from competing slates put up by LO, the LCR, the MPPT, the Greens or various "alternative" slates.
Such a situation cannot be explained only by the sectarianism or irresponsibility of various forces. It is the result of a general crisis of orientation which has not - far from it - spared the far left. This is why it was essential to put forward a clear policy that could offer perspectives for overcoming this disorientation. And this could in no way be done in a sectarian way. It was necessary to demonstrate a desire for unity, which was the only thing that would convince activists and workers plagued by discouragement that it was possible to fight and to get out of the present ruts.
This is what the LCR has done and what it will continue to do throughout the election campaign.
The LCR is campaigning in around 40 departments [out of around 100, including those overseas], with more than 23 million voters. Despite everything the campaign has borne fruit. In around half of these departments, the LCR is running on united slates or slates put up by local collectives, or on the basis of accords with other organizations (such as the Union Democratique Bretonne, a Breton nationalist group; the PSU; the FGA; the PAC and some local environmentalist groups). It is also running a common slate with LO in the Maine-et-Loire department.
Moreover, the LCR is running 20 slates in the most important departments where it has not been possible to form united slates. This will give the organization a national presence in these elections. (The LCR slates for the legislative elections are made up 50 per cent of men and 50 per cent of women. The average age of the candidates is 34. The over whelming majority of them are wage workers in industry, the public services and commerce. Four of the slates are in the Paris region and 16 are in the provinces.)
Thus, the LCR is putting up a fight on a considerable scale.
La riposteun bon gauche, a droite une vraie gauché
K.O. vouge: ICR COMMUNISE REVOLUTIONNAIRE "The right means the end" - see Red International Viewpoint 10 March 1986 cestle K.o. !