Facebook Instagram Twitter YouTube

Socialists Need Organizations, Even if They’re Small

“From Little Things Big Things Grow”: Mick Armstrong of the organization Socialist Alternative in Australia has written a book about strategies for building revolutionary organizations. A former member of the ISO reviews it and investigates the debates about the “micro-sect.”

Steve Leigh

August 30, 2019
Facebook Twitter Share
The Socialism Conference last weekend in Sydney, hosted by Socialist Alternative.

Revolutionary socialist organizations have recently come on rough times in many parts of the world. Ironically, as the support of socialism has risen, many Marxist groups have had trouble shifting to the new more open atmosphere. In the United States, the largest revolutionary socialist organization, the International Socialist Organization, voted to dissolve in March.

This crisis on the revolutionary left has reopened debates on how best to build a socialist movement. Some have questioned or abandoned the Leninist goal of building a revolutionary socialist vanguard party. This term, while it might sound off-putting to some, means nothing other than the most revolutionary section of the working class uniting in a political party with the aim of leading the working class as a whole to take political power and begin the transition to socialism.

Among those who still defend the goal of a Leninist party, an old debate has broken out again. In the early 1970s, longtime Marxist activist Hal Draper, a former member of the International Socialists, put argued against building “micro-sect” formations. He sharply distinguished between small socialist groups and large working-class parties. Instead of building small socialist groups on a national scale with a defined set of politics, Draper called for the creation of “political centers.” These would be publishing houses for socialist literature. Local groups of socialists would be free to loosely affiliate or not with whatever center they wanted to. He felt this would cut down on factional arguments within socialist groups.

This book by Mick Armstrong is a timely refutation of Draper’s attack on the “micro-sect.” Draper’s thesis was that no small socialist organization has ever grown into or helped create a revolutionary workers’ party.

 As Armstrong points out, however, it is obvious that the best way to win people to a set of ideas is to do so in an organized way. Armstrong gives many examples of small groups operating first as discussion groups, then becoming propaganda groups, and then laying the foundations for large parties. Clarity of ideas actually helps in this process.

For Marxists in the Leninist tradition, the best case is the Bolshevik Party itself. The Emancipation of Labor Group started as a small group focused on propaganda. Other such groups formed across Russia. Lenin’s intervention in 1902 was to fuse these already-existing groups into the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party, an actual party that could intervene in the class struggle. Draper’s analysis—that Lenin’s goal was to establish a political center, not a membership organization—is just wrong. If that was Lenin’s goal, why did he fight so vigorously over the requirements for party membership at the 1903 party congress?

Besides this obvious and crucial example, Armstrong examines the experience of Marx and Engels as well as that of revolutionaries in Poland and France before World War I. He also looks at communism in Vietnam and China, concluding with a discussion of events from the 1970s in Italy and Britain. The earlier examples are not well known among leftists and add substantially to his case.

The examination of Britain is very important. Armstrong does not extend his analysis beyond the mid-1970s, but he does present the International Socialists (IS) of Britain as a good example of how a small group numbering dozens can grow into a small party of thousands (the Socialist Workers Party, SWP) that can intervene in the class struggle. There is a lot to learn, both positive and negative, from the experience of the British SWP. It is clear, however, that the group’s problems did not come from its start as a propaganda organization. Its transition to a larger, more agitational organization, while not smooth, was successful.

In the final chapter, Armstrong refutes Draper’s “micro-sect” thesis, after first examining failed attempts to substitute broader left parties—such as Podemos in Spain, Communist Party Refoundation in Italy and the Workers’ Party in Brazil—for clear revolutionary organization. Armstrong does not oppose participating in broader parties as long as Marxists clearly put forward their politics:

Revolutionaries need to intervene in such parties as organized revolutionary tendencies with their own publications and meetings, arguing a clear alternative road forward to that of the reformist or centrist leadership. The success of such an intervention could well depend on whether revolutionaries have previously built a cohesive propaganda group capable of such work.

Armstrong points out that the Draper model is undemocratic:

The core members of the political center are a totally self-selecting group, effectively a clique, which is not subject to any democratic control or accountability.

This means that the supporters of the political center are passive recipients of whatever the center puts out, with at most the ability to choose another unaccountable center instead. Another problem is that

Draper’s schema effectively downplays the importance of revolutionaries clarifying their ideas and drawing sharp lines of demarcation. The life and death votes, faction fights, splits and internal disputes that Draper so decries … are an inevitable and necessary element in the building of a mass revolutionary party. … If these disagreements are not clarified and debated out, then … confused or reformist ideas will win out.

Revolutionaries today are seriously considering questions of organization. Armstrong’s contribution, based on the actual history of how revolutionary parties have been built in the past is a very important contribution to this debate.

Armstrong is a member of Socialist Alternative in Australia. Socialist Alternative is a revolutionary organization in Australia in the Trotskyist tradition which sees the Stalinist states as examples of state capitalism. It has been active in student and labor struggles and lately in electoral politics.

Mick Armstrong, From Little Things Big Things Grow: Strategies for Building Revolutionary Socialist Organizations, Socialist Alternative Publications, 2nd ed., 2018.

Facebook Twitter Share

Guest Posts

CUNY Workers Should Support the Five Demands of the Student Encampment

As the PSC CUNY Delegate Assembly prepares to debate a vote to endorse the five demands of the CCNY Gaza Solidarity Encampment, some members of CUNY on Strike penned the following rebuttal to the bureaucratic union leadership that has been trying to distance itself from the struggle against the genocide in Gaza. 

Victory for the UAW at Volkswagen Plant in Chattanooga Represents a Potential Turning Point for Labor

Following a year of strong union struggles, a Volkswagen plant in Tennessee has voted to unionize with the UAW. This victory, in the traditionally anti-union South, shows that the terrain of labor struggle in the U.S. is shifting.

Joey Eichler

May 17, 2024

University of Michigan Campus Protestors Are Keeping the Focus on the Genocide in Gaza

For the past two weeks, the encampment at the University of Michigan has been a site for collective learning and broad public information campaigns.

Ryan McCarty

May 8, 2024

Statement: The People’s Art Institute Denounces Chicago Police Attack on Student Encampment

On May 4, the administration of the School of the Art Institute of Chicago (SAIC) and Art Institute of Chicago (AIC) sent Chicago Police Department (CPD) and SWAT police to attack a student encampment. We republish the encampment’s statement recounting the events and denouncing the repression.

MOST RECENT

Activists in Detroit speaking at a press conference condemning repression of the pro-Palestine movement on May 20, 2024.

Detroit Activists Hold Press Conference to Condemn Repression of Pro-Palestine Protesters

Detroit Will Breathe organized a press conference to discuss the police violence and repression against pro-Palestine protesters. The movement must stand in solidarity and unite to combat the increase of repression.

Kyle Thibodeau

May 23, 2024
A sign for the University of California at Santa Cruz with a line of UAW signs in front of it

Dispatch from Day One of the UC Santa Cruz Picket Line for Palestine

Left Voice member and City University of New York worker Olivia traveled to Santa Cruz for UAW 4811’s historic strike to talk to workers. This is her dispatch from the first day of the strike.

Olivia Wood

May 22, 2024
A Russian tank fires toward Kharkiv on the May 10 offensive against Ukraine.

Russia’s Offensive in Ukraine May Be a Turning Point in the War

Russia’s May 10 offensive in Ukraine may be a turning point in the dynamics of the war, and the specter of Ukraine’s defeat is exposing the cracks that divide the Western powers.

Claudia Cinatti

May 21, 2024
Signs and banners at the picket line in front of the UC Santa Cruz in May, 2024. UC student workers are beginning a historic strike for Palestine, against genocide.

University of California Student Workers Begin Historic Political Strike against Repression and Genocide

This week, student and postdoctoral workers at the University of California began a historic strike in response to the brutal, violent repression of students, faculty, and staff protesting for Palestine. The action marks an important escalation of the labor movement’s struggle in defense of Palestine and the right to protest.

Olivia Wood

May 21, 2024