[Marxism] NZ fusion

Philip Ferguson plf13 at student.canterbury.ac.nz
Wed Jun 16 18:37:18 MDT 2004


Jose:

>I think this development in New Zealand --the fusion of post-Trotskyist
and post-Maoist (or New Communist Movement, as U.S. terminology has it)
groups, along with a number of individual activists-- is a very
important achievement that should serve as an inspiration to
revolutionaries in other countries, and especially in the United States.

>I hope the documents of the founding of the RWL soon become available
on line, and I, for one, would urge the comrades to include their
*organizational* provisions, if possible. 


It's the first fusion in NZ in ten years.  The last one was between the
IS and the remnant of the CPNZ, which had just dumped Enver Hoxha and
Stalin and taken up Tony Cliff.  That fusion fell apart in less than two
years, although on paper there was pretty much total political
agreement.

The Revo-WP fusion is of a different order.  We don't have total
political agreement, there are significant differences over some major
historical issues.  There are also some disagreements over current
issues, although these cut across Revo/WP lines.

What we have achieved is an extremely good working relationship on the
ground, strong unity around *basic principles* and *concrete issues in
the class struggle in NZ*, which has created a wholly different
framework for the discussion of politics, including differences.  

Neither WP nor Revo had a 'party line' on how the revolution should be
conducted in Venezuela, India, the Philippines or anywhere else, so that
bizarre minefield of differences which keeps left groups apart doesn't
exist.  Indeed, we are united around the idea that no-one in NZ can work
out a 'line' for any other country, only people building revolutionary
activity elsewhere can do this.

Neither of our groups were part of any bogus 'international', so that's
another minefield of differences which artificially divide left currents
in each country which we didn't have to contend with.

At the same time, because our unity is around a very *hard core of basic
principles*, it is not some loose, soft and fuzzy unity, which is the
other error the left can fall into.

Our organisational rules are very few.  Members are obliged to pay dues
(not especially high ones, as we are not trying to leech our
membership), take part in basic activity (stalls, internal and external
education, and also wider campaigning work), and that's about it.

Our press is open for the expression of different viewpoints within the
organisation.

It's early days, but two years of close collaboration, which meant we
have pretty much functioned as one group anyway, gives me a lot of
optimism (and enthusiasm).

At the same time, we are continuing to build the Anti-Capitalist
Alliance as a broader left current, and most RWL activity will take
place within that framework. 

The next major ACA event is a national workers conference in Wellington
in October, called Workers Resistance.  It will feature a range of
panels and talks and debates on key issues facing workers in NZ, drawing
on the impressive set of experiences of our new, young comrades in
workplace organising (overwhelmingly among manual workers), as well as
more seasoned veterans inside and outside the RWL and ACA.  

I don't think any other left group in NZ could organise something like
what we are proposing with WR.

All this has happened in two years.

Of course, I should point out that we are still tiny, and the NZ far
left as a whole is one of the tiniest far lefts in the world (even per
capita).

Phil  



















More information about the Marxism mailing list