Documents 3 to 17 and 19 to 24 originally published in Internal Bulletins of the SWP and the International Bulletins of the International Committee
Dear Friend
Following the editorial board meeting last week, Burns has told me, there was a blow-up at the executive meeting on Wednesday. J. L. appeared there with an organized faction and wanted to put him 'under IS discipline.' He proposed an NC meeting at which he would report on the draft documents, Burns would keep quiet and go along, and a favourable vote would be taken. Just like that. Furthermore they wanted no 'American agents' there, and there was to be no discussion of Clarke's views or anything 'American.' There were protests from the others and nothing conclusive was agreed on except to hold a meeting late in September. But there were threats about what the IS would do.
After this meeting Burns was approached by several others who indicated they now understood what was going on quite thoroughly, were prepared to discuss a common political line and a grouping. Burns expects a slim majority in the present small committee (EC) but a very comfortable one in the broader NC, which will then re-organize the EC accordingly.
J. L.'s attempt to 'discipline' Burns indicates a line of action no doubt inspired in Paris. The premise for it is that Burns voted for the drafts under discussion. There was an understanding on my part that Burns was to record reservations on these ever since May. Apparently, for reasons I tried to explain previously, he did not do so formally, although he raised the issues; and in each case voted for with the vague understanding that there would be editorial revisions. Now they think they have him over a barrel. But of course they have another think coming.
I don't know of any precedent for attempted gag-laws of this type, and I don't think anybody serious here will go for that.
Since then there has arrived a copy of the August 10 letter to you signed by MP, EG and PF. Following this there was an August 21 letter by the latter summoning Burns for September 2 to discuss 'a very serious situation' for which it is desired to adopt a'common line.' Burns believes the matter of the letter to Tom is involved. He is probably tight. After talking it over in a group, it was decided that the best thing to do is to ask for two weeks' postponement and to request particulars (agenda, drafts, proposals, etc.) before going. A letter to this effect has gone out.
We ate waiting to hear what action you took on the August 10 letter. And, of course, we want to know what suggestions you have on procedure, which may quickly be forced to a head.
Politically, opinion here is developing along the lines of the suggested amendments sent to you in the caucus of the majority which is the majority which is taking shape.
You will probably hear soon from Burns at greater length on some of these matters.
All the best,
Harry
Trotskyism Versus Revisionism Document Index | Toward a History of the Fourth International | Trotsky Encyclopedia Home Page
Last updated 13.2.2005