{"id":635,"date":"2019-09-12T14:08:27","date_gmt":"2019-09-12T12:08:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/marxistworkersparty.org.za\/?page_id=635"},"modified":"2019-12-05T15:00:12","modified_gmt":"2019-12-05T13:00:12","slug":"about-us","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/?page_id=635","title":{"rendered":"The Founding of the Marxist Workers Party"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\u2026and the split in the CWI and WASP<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

6 September 2019<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Today we\nannounce the formation of the Marxist Workers Party and the re-founding of the\nCommittee for a Workers International (CWI) in South Africa. At the same time,\nthis is an announcement that the Workers and Socialist Party (WASP) has split.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a different\nperiod of world capitalist crisis, Leon Trotsky, alongside Lenin the leader of\nthe workers 1917 Russian Revolution said that \u201cthe world political situation as\na whole is chiefly characterised by a historical crisis of the leadership of\nthe proletariat [working class].\u201d This description is equally true of today\u2019s\nworld capitalist crisis. The struggle to forge a leadership \u2013 a revolutionary\nparty \u2013 on a principled Marxist programme remains the historical bottleneck\nwhich frustrates the progress of society towards the bright socialist future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Over the past\nten months a political struggle over the ideas needed to build such a party has\ntaken place within the CWI and its 35+ national affiliates, including its\n(until now) South African affiliate, WASP. Unfortunately, in the course of the\ndebate, fundamental political differences were confirmed which make it\nimpossible for the CWI to continue as a single organisation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

World situation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

These\ndifferences did not of course appear overnight, but developed over recent years\nreflecting the complications of the world situation. The capitalist system has\nbeen in a profound crisis since the 2007\/8 financial collapse and the 2009\nworld recession which followed in its wake. In South Africa one million jobs\nwere lost and the economy has never recovered, creating the foundations for the\npolitical instability that we see today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But, whilst\nthere have been explosions of anger, mass struggles, and even revolutions\nworldwide, the working class has not yet consciously placed itself at the head\nof such movements, organised in mass working class parties conscious of the\nneed to take power, overthrow capitalism and build socialism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Broadly, this\nhas been the situation in South Africa too. The current wave of xenophobic\nviolence is a negative confirmation that society is a powder keg of frustration\nand anger but the working class has no clear way forward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even where \u2018new\nleft\u2019 parties have been created, or have been propelled forward by the crisis,\nthey have proved incapable of leading a serious working class challenge to\ncapitalism. In Greece, the SYRIZA party, despite overwhelming support from the\nGreek population, capitulated to imperialist pressure instead of leading a\nfightback that could have transformed the balance of forces in the class\nstruggle in Europe and worldwide. SYRIZA was not armed with a revolutionary\nprogramme that could lead the Greek working class in the struggle for a\nsocialist alternative. The result was betrayal at the decisive hour and the\nSYRIZA government led the capitalist class\u2019s attack on the living standards of\nthe Greek working and middle class.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In South Africa,\nthe splitting of Cosatu and the resulting realignment of the trade union\nmovement which has seen the founding of Saftu has been of enormous significance.\nBut the creation of a new mass workers party in South Africa, which would\nrepresent an enormous step forward by generalising the economic struggle onto\nthe political plane, has remained elusive. (See The Struggle for a Socialist\nMass Workers Party section of our website).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even amongst the more active layers of the working class in the trade unions, there is still a lack of ideological clarity which limits the forward march of the movement. For example, a recent statement by the leadership of the metalworkers\u2019 union NUMSA, in effect calls for a policy of class collaboration to combat the growing number of job losses. At the centre of the approach they put forward is pressuring the Ramaphosa government to convene a meeting of \u201csocial partners\u201d, i.e. the workers and the bosses, to find solutions to the jobs crisis \u201ctogether\u201d. Likewise, the main alternative in the Saftu leadership\u2019s statement in response to finance minister Tito Mboweni\u2019s economic strategy plan are reforms of the tax system and a reduction in interest rates! The workers movement must fight for all reforms that can improve the lives of workers and their families, but if this is not linked to the struggle for a root-and-branch alternative to capitalism such a programme does nothing to prepare the working class for the struggle for socialism, which is the only way out of society\u2019s dead-end. It is reformism, pure and simple.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The working class will continue to draw conclusions from its experiences, including its frustration at the snail\u2019s pace of developments towards the formation of a mass working class political movement. But, in the meantime, in the absence of such a movement, ideologies belonging to other social classes can fill the vacuum. Disproportionately, the middle class can \u2018set the tone\u2019 of the opposition to capitalism in crisis. But despite its pretensions, the middle class is incapable of an independent political position. Ultimately, they will defend the capitalist status quo (however much they may cry about its failings and condemn its \u2018excesses\u2019) if the working class does not offer a decisive lead in the struggle for a socialist alternative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This has been the general situation in which the forces of the CWI have been operating worldwide. It has posed real difficulties for building a revolutionary party on a principled Marxist programme and with a principled Marxist method. The tiny revolutionary minority has been under enormous pressure to retreat from a socialist programme under hostile class influences. Unfortunately, instead of standing firm against this, some in the CWI have succumbed to these pressures and made political and ideological retreats. Marxists have a name for this: opportunism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Opportunism<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Concessions to identity politics by some affiliates was a central feature of the struggle in the CWI. Originating in the universities of the United States, identity politics reflects the individualism and atomisation of the middle class. In a divisive and exclusionary way, these ideas emphasise, and in doing so try to harden, divisions based on race, gender and sexuality. At the same time, as is characteristic of middle class ideologies, identity politics consciously glosses over society\u2019s class contradictions (see Identity Politics and the Struggle Against Oppression<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With South\nAfrica\u2019s history of racism, tribalism, and the current crisis levels of\nviolence against women, it is absolutely crucial that the struggle against\noppression is rooted in the maximum unity of the working class. The common\nexperience of united struggle embracing all sections of the working class is\nthe most effective way to change unacceptable attitudes and behaviours. But\nmore, building a mass class based movement is necessary to transform the social\nconditions which give rise to prejudice and oppression, rooted as they are in\nthe class inequalities of capitalism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But identity\npolitics is a threat to the unity of the workers\u2019 movement. These ideas would\npit black workers against white, women workers against men, and LGBTQ workers against\n\u2018straight\u2019, even though we all belong to one exploited working class. The\nreactionary political consequences that can flow from these ideas would encourage\nexploited women workers to identify with a war-mongering capitalist politician\nlike Hilary Clinton in the United States; or encourage black workers to rally in\nsupport of the presidency of the billionaire \u2018butcher of Marikana\u2019, Cyril\nRamaphosa, because he, too, is black.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Revolutionaries\nhave always fought for maximum working class unity and stood firm against\ntendencies within the working class towards separatism Even before the Russian\nRevolution, Lenin and the Bolsheviks refused to accept the separate\norganisation of Jewish workers in The Bund, insisting instead on one united\nrevolutionary party. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As well as naked\nracism, the apartheid regime used the identity politics of tribalism as part of\ntheir policy of divide and rule against the liberation struggle. The reactionary\nBantustans (or \u2018homelands\u2019) were built on the basis of sharply defining and\nencouraging tribal identities to weaken the power of a united movement of the\noppressed black working class majority. The Inkatha Freedom Party and other\nconservative elites with their roots in the homelands supported the apartheid\nregime as the defender of their relative privileges. They even allowed\nthemselves to be used as a violent \u2018third force\u2019 against the liberation\nstruggle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The struggle\nagainst apartheid demanded an approach that would overcome divisions. The ANC\nadopted the principle of non-racialism and non-tribalism early on. In the 1980s,\nthe then militant Cosatu did likewise. If white workers chose to stand aside\nfrom the struggle it would not be because they were excluded on the basis of\nrace. The hand of class solidarity was extended.  Even the preceding Black Consciousness\nMovement defined \u2018black\u2019 in a way that embraced the Coloured and Indian\npopulations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Identity politics pulls in the other direction \u2013 in the direction of separatism and division. Unfortunately, some CWI affiliates were starting to adapt to this approach. For example, the Irish and Brazilian CWI affiliates ran election campaigns under the slogans \u201ca socialist feminist voice for Europe\u201d (contributing to disastrous election results for the CWI in May) and \u201cdown with the cis-tem\u201d respectively. These slogans were clearly incapable of appealing to the whole working class or even of answering issues of gender oppression from a working class standpoint (see In Defence of Socialist Feminism<\/a>). So far had the adaptation gone in the Swedish CWI affiliate that internal<\/em> party documents were being written in the language of identity politics!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These affiliates\ntried to gloss-over their ideological retreat by portraying those defending a\nMarxist approach as \u2018soft\u2019 on issues of sexism and gender oppression and as old\nand out of touch with \u2018new\u2019 moods. However, the debate was never whether or not\nto take part in such movements, but how<\/em>\nto intervene in them in a revolutionary way, raising class demands, socialist\nideas and reinforcing the unity of the working class.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These examples reflected\na broader retreat from a cornerstone of genuine Marxism \u2013 the use of a transitional<\/em> programme that seeks to connect\nimmediate struggles to the need for the working class to take power and build\nsocialism.  Especially in material used\nfor mass distribution, rather than attempting to raise working class\nunderstanding, there was a growing tendency in some CWI affiliates to simply\nreflect back the limitations of existing consciousness. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Irish CWI\naffiliate failed to even raise a socialist programme during their participation\nin Ireland\u2019s 2018 abortion referendum. This was a repeat of the approach they\ntook to the 2016 Irish general election, where the most \u2018radical\u2019 demand raised\nwas for greater taxation on the rich, with the question of which class owns and\ncontrols the economy ignored. In the election campaign currently underway in\nthe United States, the former CWI supporters limit their description of\nsocialism to \u201ca fundamentally different kind of society, based on democracy,\nequality, sustainability and solidarity.\u201d The softest middle class reformists\ncould agree with this description!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Workers in South\nAfrica, with experience of the ANC, SACP and Cosatu leaderships know very well\nthe phenomenon of forces that swear allegiance to revolutionary ideas at\nWorkers Day rallies whilst failing to fight for them in practice \u2013 reducing\n\u201csocialism\u201d, \u201crevolution\u201d and \u201cMarxism\u201d to empty phrase-mongering.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Another area of\npolitical retreat was on the question of the trade unions. Both the Irish and\nGreek affiliates consciously dropped the systematic work of building a base for\nMarxist ideas in the trade unions. The Irish affiliate had, in their own words,\ntaken a \u201cdetour\u201d from the unions. Likewise the Greek affiliate planned to\nreturn to the unions \u201cat a later stage, under better conditions\u201d. The existence\nof conservative bureaucracies in many unions was repeatedly given as an excuse\nfor limiting this work. But this is not a new problem. In both Ireland and\nGreece, trade union density is over 20%, and in all countries the decisive\nsectors of the working class in transport, mining, manufacturing and the public\nsector continue to be well organised giving these workers a far greater social\nweight than any number alone suggests. Systematic trade union work by\nrevolutionaries is central to preparing the class for the struggle for power. For\nworkers a \u2018detour\u2019 from the unions \u2013 whether or not they are led by\nconservative bureaucracies \u2013 would in practise mean surrendering the first line\nof defence against the exploitation of the bosses. This retreat from systematic\ntrade union work reflected a weakening of the central place of the organised working\nclass in the perspective of these affiliates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To struggle against\nthis political and ideological retreat, an international faction was formed in\nNovember 2018 at the CWI\u2019s International Executive Committee meeting. The\nfaction was determined to ensure that an open and organised debate on these fundamental\nissues would take place and to defend the principled Marxist programme of the\nCWI. The comrades who have today founded the Marxist Workers Party were the supporters\nof this faction in South Africa.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Marxism and unity<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was not\nautomatic that these serious differences would lead to a split in the CWI. That\ndepended on the course of the debate which would reveal the possibilities for\nrebuilding principled<\/em> unity. Unfortunately,\nthis quickly became the least likely outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before describing\nsome of the features of the debate that doomed it, a word on the Marxist\napproach to unity is necessary. Trotsky once said that \u201c\u2026the instinctive urge\nto unity is quite often an urge peculiar to the masses; but a conscious\nstriving for unity on a revolutionary basis is peculiar to the vanguard of the\nproletariat\u2026\u201d For the mass of the working class the unity of the greatest\nnumber in action is always a decisive question in the struggle with the bosses\n\u2013 numbers pressure the bosses; numbers win strikes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But in a\nrevolutionary party, unity is first and foremost a political question \u2013 a\nquestion of unity around a clearly defined revolutionary programme. This flows\nfrom the Marxist understanding of the class struggle and revolution \u2013 the task\nfor which such a party exists. The class struggle is fought out regardless of\nthe presence of conscious revolutionaries \u2013 it is not the task of\nrevolutionaries to create revolutions but rather to prepare for them. Central\nto this is building a cadre within the advanced layer of the working class,\nwhich, as revolutionary situations mature out of the contradictions in class\nsociety, is prepared to lead the mass of the working class in the struggle for\npower.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Especially when\nthe basic task remains the assembly of the initial cadre, a revolutionary\nparty\u2019s success will not be determined by its ideological diversity but its\nideological clarity \u2013 its \u201cgranite hardness\u201d in the phrase of Trotsky. Unfortunately,\nvastly more revolutions have been defeated than won, and vastly more\nrevolutionary opportunities lost than seized, because the revolutionary\ncharacter of parties had already been compromised for short term gain in more\ndifficult periods. Splits, fusions and other realignments are an unavoidable\npart of the process of preparing a revolutionary cadre and a revolutionary party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But this understanding\ndoes not contradict relentlessly striving for the maximum unity of the working\nclass in struggle. In South Africa, as elsewhere, the forces of the CWI have\nbeen the foremost champions of broad working class unity. We defend the unity\nof the workers movement in struggle, and wherever possible the co-existence of\ndifferent political trends within single democratic trade unions. We have been tireless\ncampaigners for mass workers parties able to unite the struggles of the class,\nincluding bringing together the different left, socialist and revolutionary\npolitical groups. What we refuse to do as part of this, however, is to\nsurrender our own organisation, whose borders, first and foremost are the\ndefences for the foundations of the revolutionary programme we believe the\nworking class must be armed with in order to transform society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

The debate<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Refusing to form a faction themselves on the basis of clear political positions, the opposition to the faction took the classic form of an unprincipled bloc. The use of the word \u201cunprincipled\u201d is not intended as an insult, but to describe the fact that the opposition was not united by openly declared political positions, but the organisational objective of dominating the leadership, the result of which would be to shift the political foundations of the CWI in a rightward and opportunist direction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A decisive\ncontributor to the polarisation in the CWI was a serious abuse against party\ndemocracy by a group in the Irish leadership. This was carried out to uncover,\nin their own words, a \u201csecret oppositional grouping\u201d which simply did not\nexist. Even if it had existed, any grouping should have been confronted politically<\/em>, not manoeuvred against\nbureaucratically. The changing character of the Irish affiliate is part of the\nexplanation for how this could happen. Over time they had become highly\ndependent on state money to fund an apparatus of full-timers who increasingly\ndominated the party and were no longer dependent upon its membership. But this incident\nwas defended or downplayed as \u201csecondary\u201d by the leaders of a number of affiliates\nwhen it was brought to their attention at the November 2018 IEC meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The opposition repeatedly\ndenounced the formation of the faction as the \u2018original sin\u2019 in the dispute and\nlabelled it a threat to the unity of the CWI. They forgot their own history.\nThe formation and dissolution of factions is a time-honoured method in the\nMarxist tradition for managing political differences and sharpening ideological\nclarity. The Bolsheviks themselves were a faction \u2013 their name nothing other\nthan the Russian word for \u2018majority\u2019! Fear against a split was consciously\nwhipped-up with the effect of suppressing any serious political debate \u2013 the\nonly basis upon which principled unity could have been rebuilt. In its place\nwas substituted scaremongering and emotion. Almost every political criticism\nand point raised by the faction was dismissed as an \u201cexaggeration\u201d, a \u201cfactional\nattack\u201d, or even a \u201cwitch hunt\u201d. The very right to criticise, the life blood of\nparty democracy, was effectively suppressed in the demand for a false unity. In\npractise such a method would lead to the de\nfacto<\/em> introduction of federalism into the CWI \u2013 where a united political\nprogramme is replaced by an \u2018anything goes\u2019 approach. The opposition\u2019s approach\nto the debate was the clearest indication that there was absolutely no\npossibility of them changing course.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eventually, the\ndepth of the political differences was admitted by the opposition. In a\ndocument produced some five months into the debate, whilst still denying they\nwere a faction organised around certain ideas, they said:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Differences have arisen over the issue of how to work in the trade unions; in relation to the women\u2019s movement and erroneous claims that some sections have made concessions to identity politics; the national question and the united front; in relation to new movements like the youth movement against environment change and the way such movements should orient to the working class; and over the issue of the transitional programme and method. It also seems that there are differences over the issue of consciousness, though the faction has not clearly stated this. And there are certainly differences in the way the work of the sections was approached by the [international leadership]…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Shockingly the opposition insisted that these differences were \u201cnot evolving around fundamental Marxist positions and principles\u201d. This in itself underlined the ideological and political retreat underway. For any serious revolutionary, this list sums-up the entire tool-kit for how we intervene in the class struggle and position ourselves in the workers movement. To expect a single organisation to accommodate disagreement on all<\/em> of these points was a call, again, for a de facto<\/em> federal CWI and, in reality, the abandonment of a revolutionary perspective. At the same time it again revealed the opportunist pressure the opposition had succumbed to. They would prefer to huddle together for warmth rather than wage a serious struggle for ideological clarity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To accept unity\non this basis would have been to agree to the destruction of the CWI as a\ndemocratic centralist revolutionary international. With the unfolding of the\nstruggle in effect creating two organisations in one, an international faction conference\nin July took the decision to re-found the CWI on its original programme and\nprinciples and to continue the struggle to build a world party of socialist\nrevolution.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

The Split in WASP<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfortunately, support\nfor the opportunist international opposition belatedly crystallised in WASP,\nrecreating the polarised situation that existed internationally within the\nSouth African affiliate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WASP was no less immune to opportunist pressures than any other CWI affiliate. Under the pressure to \u201cget results\u201d for workers on the most immediate issues, a pressure was created on a layer of WASP members with positions in the trade unions to speak with<\/em> the bureaucracy, especially in Saftu, in one political voice, rather than remaining focused on the need to sharply draw the ideological lines between WASP\u2019s revolutionary programme and the various reformist and neo-Stalinist trends, assisting in the ideological clarification of workers. In GIWUSA, where WASP had a small but important base, routine work was pushing out any systematic revolutionary<\/em> work amongst the rank-and-file. The question of \u201cdeployments\u201d to paid posts became of greater concern than the political work of building support for WASP\u2019s programme. Tension had been building on this issue for a period, with leading members increasingly pulling in different directions. We do not think it is an accident that the two WASP Executive Committee members most directly under these pressures \u2013 Mametlwe Sebei and Lebohang Phanyeko \u2013 became determined supporters of the international opposition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The organisation (more accurately \u2013 imposition!) of support for the international opposition within WASP followed a tortuous path. This underlined its political foundations of sand. Mametlwe Sebei, unhappy with the formation of the international faction, but unable to find any solid political ground to oppose it from, started a proxy campaign against a suddenly discovered \u2018party regime\u2019 in WASP of \u201cbullying and blackmail\u201d \u2013 directed of course against leading representatives of the international faction, especially general secretary Weizmann Hamilton. All efforts by faction supporters to organise a structured discussion on these issues in order to resolve them came to nothing. Rather, over several months a campaign of gossip took place that denied its targets the right to defend themselves. This campaign was supported and encouraged by the international opposition, in particular the Swedish leadership, in a mirror of their methods at an international level. But the reality was this campaign was deeply unpopular.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In June a three\nday WASP Special National Committee was organised to take a position on the\nstruggle in the CWI. The faction won the debate and the vote decisively. This\nsent supporters of the international opposition into a panic. They cobbled-together\na so-called \u2018Caucus\u2019 on an unprincipled basis to undermine the decision. A\nnumber of members who had voted with the faction on the political issues at the\nSpecial NC were manipulated into signing-up to the Caucus in the name of party\nunity with the Caucus leaders claiming to only want more time for debate and\ndiscussion \u2013 something which the faction had never refused. However, by in\neffect creating parallel party structures, the creation of the Caucus instantly\nsplit WASP. Not a single structure functioned thereafter. The Caucus had created\nthe split they claimed to want to avoid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In reality the\nCaucus was established with a clear but undeclared political agenda  to place WASP under the leadership of the\ninternational opposition. This was vehemently denied by the Caucus leaders. But\nin July, lo and behold, a document was produced by the Caucus declaring its\nfull political solidarity with the international opposition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Forward!<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Caucus claims to have a majority in WASP. But a majority built on these politically dishonest methods is completely hollow. But even if it were true, it would be politically meaningless \u2013 being a majority is not a ruling on the correctness of your politics. We have no more time to waste on an unprincipled opposition of this character. We had hoped to organise an amicable separation in WASP that would avoid a \u2018winner takes all\u2019 scenario. Unfortunately, the leaders of the Caucus effectively sabotaged these negotiations. This has left us no choice but to unilaterally declare the split. Even so, we are willing to honour our initial offer that the Caucus takes the name \u201cWASP\u201d. But let everyone be clear that the WASP that is born today is a new WASP. The only members of the Executive Committee that remain behind are Mametlwe Sebei and Lebohang Phanyeko.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For our part, we\nhave full confidence in our programme and have no concerns about \u2018starting\nafresh\u2019. Indeed, we are eager to draw the lessons of this split and return to\nthe task of winning the working class to genuine Marxism. We welcome the\nopportunity that launching the Marxist Workers Party gives us to make a clear\nstatement of our political ideas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The organisation\nof the working class on a global scale by the development of the world economy\nmeans that a revolutionary orientation must start with a correct international perspective.\nIn the re-founded CWI we have that. The Marxist Workers Party will be the fifth\nincarnation of the CWI in South Africa. The founding affiliate, the Marxist\nWorkers Tendency of the ANC, existed from the 1970s up until 1996. At that\nstage, in a different world situation, the small forces of genuine Marxism in\nSouth Africa could only have one serious revolutionary orientation \u2013 towards\nthe working class pushing forward the organisation of a new trade union movement\nin the struggle against capitalism and apartheid. Following the adoption of the\nneo-liberal GEAR programme by the ANC government, we formed an open and\nindependent organisation which was briefly called Socialist Alternative, before\nbecoming the Democratic Socialist Movement, a name that was wound-up only in\n2015 in favour of WASP. Our new name reflects and reconnects with our founding\ntraditions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Notwithstanding\nthe complications of the current conjuncture of the class struggle, the world\nin general is one full of revolutionary opportunities. We will continue with the\npainstaking task of building a revolutionary leadership within the working\nclass. The Marxist Workers Party will build a powerful base in South Africa for\nthe ideas of Marxism as part of the struggle for the world socialist\nrevolution. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u2026and the split in the CWI and WASP 6 September 2019 Today we announce the formation of the Marxist Workers Party and the re-founding of […]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-635","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"acf":[],"_hostinger_reach_plugin_has_subscription_block":false,"_hostinger_reach_plugin_is_elementor":false,"brizy_media":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/635","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=635"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/635\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":956,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/635\/revisions\/956"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=635"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}