Abstract
One cannot take part in left-wing politics in Britain without encountering Trotskyism in some form. Every leftist in Britain will have some familiarity with groups like the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and the Socialist Party (SP), as well as British Trotskyist writers like Alan Woods and Alex Callinicos. In Contemporary Trotskyism, John Kelly has written the most comprehensive scholarly work on the Trotskyist movement in Britain. He gives detailed information on the major British Trotskyist organisations, their approach to the trade unions and their views on entryism into the Labour Party. Because there are over 30 Trotskyist organisations in Britain, Kelly provides helpful charts that show the origin of each British Trotskyist group, its particular tendency and the years in which it was active. Kelly is particularly attentive to the recruitment strategies of Trotskyist organisations and how they make use of their membership.
In Contemporary Trotskyism, Kelly shows how the British Trotskyist movement developed out of two groups, Tony Cliff’s Socialist Review Club and Ted Grant’s Marxist Tendency. Kelly demonstrates that the two major issues that have historically divided British Trotskyist groups are entryism and the nature of the Soviet Union. British Trotskyist organisations, according to Kelly, were less divided over the theory of permanent revolution and the transitional method. For those unfamiliar with Trotskyist politics, entryism is where a group of Trotskyist militants join a mainstream party such as Labour, develop a concentration and split the organisation at a strategic moment in order to win positions of leadership and influence. Kelly shows that the central political question for Trotskyists was whether entryism in Labour was a viable strategy, and whether it should be long-term or short-term. Ted Grant, who helped found the Militant Tendency, argued that Trotskyists should carefully develop a long-term concentration in the Labour Party and could embark on a peaceful transition to socialism. On the other hand, Tony Cliff, who helped found the International Socialists, argued that Trotskyists should openly operate through their own organisation and fight for a socialist revolution through the mobilisation of the masses. Kelly shows that all British Trotskyist organisations fall into either the Grant position or Cliff position on the question of entryism, and that this continues to characterise Trotskyist organisations today.
According to Kelly, the other major political question that divided British Trotskyist groups concerned the nature of the Soviet Union. In The Revolution Betrayed, Trotsky argued that the Soviet Union had a socialist economy base, but a ‘Stalinist’ political leadership that prevented the development of a socialism. He called it a ‘deformed workers state’ in order to distinguish it from a capitalism, which he thought was absent in the Soviet Union. Kelly points out that the major disagreements in British Trotskyism on the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) was whether Trotsky’s characterisation of the Soviet Union as a deformed workers state was correct. Gerry Healy, who was the leader of the Workers Revolutionary Party, agreed with Trotsky that the Soviet Union was a socialist country, and urged his members to side with the Soviet Union even if it was a ‘deformed workers state’. Tony Cliff, on the contrary, argued that the USSR was not socialist, but state capitalist and that the workers in the Soviet Union were exploited by the Soviet political leadership. Even though the Soviet Union no longer exists, Trotskyists continue to either directly follow Trotsky or take a position similar to Cliff.
Although Contemporary Trotskyism provides an incredible wealth of information on membership statistics, recruitment strategies and fundraising tactics of Trotskyist groups, it has a few major problems. First, Kelly characterises Trotskyist groups as having three traits that often conflict with each other: they are political parties, but also sects and social movements. Kelly tends to treat Trotskyist groups as if they were not that different from mainstream left-wing parties, such as Labour or the Scottish National Party (SNP). He says that this is because Trotskyist organisations sometimes participate in elections and seek to win votes. To explain how they are different from mainstream parties, he argues that Trotskyist groups are sects and compares them to religious groups. He defines a sects as a group that follows some doctrine (i.e. Marxism) with a compelling vision (i.e. revolution), strict membership policies and a centralised leadership. Treating Trotskyist organisations as sects, even if they sometimes engage in sectarian behaviour, makes it very difficult to analyse their politics. Kelly does not explore Lenin’s theory of the revolutionary vanguard party, which explains how a communist organisation differs from a mainstream left-wing party. For Lenin, a revolutionary vanguard party adheres to the principles of Marxism as a guide to action, in order to provide revolutionary leadership to the working class and fight for a socialist revolution. They are not ‘sects’ as Kelly argues, and they are not identical to mainstream leftist parties. What distinguishes the Labour Party from a communist organisation (whether Trotskyist, Maoist, etc.) is that the latter believes itself to be such a revolutionary organisation. Such an organisation will not necessary contain a huge membership and seek instead to recruit ‘professional revolutionaries’ who work as dedicated cadres. Kelly is clearly unaware of this, as he devotes a large portion of the book to discussing membership statistics of Trotskyist groups and their recruitment strategies. A large portion of Contemporary Trotskyism attempts to explain the poor electoral performance of Trotskyist groups, which Kelly believes arises from their ‘sectarian’ nature. Kelly does not perceive how Trotskyist organisations sometimes run in elections in order to bring out contradictions in the capitalist political system rather than in order to get votes. Because Kelly does not properly evaluate the nature of Trotskyist organisations, he is unable to properly evaluate their politics. Kelly is only able to view the surface-level differences between Trotskyists, such as their views on permanent revolution, entryism, the USSR and so on, but does not perceive how these matters relate to a political line. As a result, Kelly is unable to make any meaningful judgements about the real strengths and weaknesses of Trotskyism.
Although the political analysis of Contemporary Trotskyism is disappointing, it is still a very good overview of the development of the British Trotskyist movement. While one will not learn the intricacies of Trotskyist debates, Contemporary Trotskyism is full of good information on Trotskyist organisations. If read in conjunction with other works on Trotskyism, it can make an excellent introduction to British Trotskyism and a fantastic reference.