Now that he admits it Iinvolyes scmething broader than the tiny Posadas group, Blas Reca seeks to ridicule the Trotskyist movement by saying that in it such tonfuesinn reigna “that aqme Trotskyista dony that ether Tretakyista are Tmtskyists-" The argument cnly makee its author look ridiculous. Ultrareactionaries likewise sneer at some Communista denying that other Comeunlets are Communists; and thay point to the pelemica, which are not always modela of comradelinass, between the Krushcheyista, Maciats, Titeista and..+-Pideligtas.
k.
What would an independent-rinded reveluticnist, who knews the positicns of the leaders of the Cuban Reyelution, say if someone argued like Sleas Roca and ceplly ¢old an audience that the Guban leaders were "imperialist sgente," the proof being the avident confusion and mutual recriminations because of different positions taken om crucial issues by the Communist capitals - euch as Felsrade's friendly attitude teward the Betanocurt-Leoni government in fontrost tc Havana's hostility, Mesoow's class collaborationist attitude towarda (-3. imperialiam in enntrast to Peking's intransigence, and Paking's sectarian rejection of a united front in defense ef the Vietnamase Revyoloticn in contrast to the appeals of all the others for a ccamon front? The ravolutfoniet would shout that this igs utter nonsense and that the Cubans have their own praitiona = very good pesiticns, as can be determined by reading their declarationa and judging their actions- To which the orator would respond in the crushing style of Blas Roca: "What a joke! Everyone in this medlay claims to be a Gommunist, whatever they call sach other. I repast what I said about the Cuban leaders, no matter how much you squirm, ard as proof I have scrupulously oopied down the following stupidities from Hsinhua on the united front." Sera at
The truth is that Bles Roca belongs to thea Stalinist. school which oon= eiders any critical opposition to the monclothis line handed down from the unchallengeable leader to be a reflection of imperialist preasure, if not 4 direct plot fomented by such agencies as the CIA. That the revolution should really be gs “school of unfettered thought" is inconceivable to such oasified bureaucrats, for in a revolutionary party this involves the right to fcrm tendencies and factions; and in 4 workers atate it moans the right cf tha pro-= letarist to form a multiple party system so long as the various parties remain basically loyal to the rewoluticn and its conquests» Democratic sentralim Beans demooracy in reaching declsions as well as scentralism in carrying them out-
To rise to the level of the great tasks it faces, a revolutionary party before and after coming ta power requires the frea play cf? thought, not only because thia ta the boat way to develop and Lift the intellectual Level eof its members and leaders, but becsusa it is the moat efficient way of exploring all possible political variants and of reaching solid decisiona that truly reflect reslity and thereby enable the revolutionary party to intervene in the national and international clasa struggle most effectively. This view ia mt peculiar to Trotskyiam; it is as cold as acientific socislism and oonatituted the assence of Lonin's method of party bullding.
That serious differences appeared in the world Communist movemont efter decades cf Stalinist monolithiam was in itself a progresaive development. Arising fundamentally from the vietory of the Soviet Union over German Imperdalism, the postwar. advance of the ookenital revolution, and & balanee of world fortes favoring the socialist camp, these differsnces have helped pare the way for a resurgence of revolutionary Marxism. What is bad is tha abaenoa of Provisions, customs and instituticns to carry the disoussicn of the differences forward tc a democratic ernclugicn- And that lack reflects the oontinued existence of narrow, self=<seryving burasucrstica interests that deliberately bloak 8 normal reanlution of tha differences thmugh the process of free discugsion-
The Trot¢skyiat movement did not remain unaffected by the advance cf the eclonial revolution, by the commencement cf de-Stalinigation, by the differ= ences revolving around the Sine-Seviet conflict, and by cther eventae In fact the differential consequences of these dovelopmenta can easily be found in the positions advocated by the yaricus tendencies claiming adherence to Trotakylan.
A first-rate example of this was the impact cf the Cuban Revclution. The overwhelming majority of the Trotskyists throughout the world considered this tc be the opening of the socialist revolution in tha Western Hemispheres. The appearance cf a new leadership, generated in the very process of a ravolution, untainted by Stalinism and imbued with ravclutionary detersinaticn, wae hailed with immense enthusiasm. In the United States, the Bceislist Workers Party tock up the oause of the Cuban Revolution aa its own and its Oandidates put defense cf revolutionary Cube as the first forelen-poliay plank in their national election platform in 1960 and 1944. ‘The Fourth Intemational as a whole responded in the seme enthusiastic way. This common satimate provided ene of the main grounda fer the healing of a major aplit in the world Trtskyist movement in 1963 - a split that nad lasted almost ten yeara-