Neither Revolutionary nor Communist

Critical remarks on the IMT’s “Manifesto of the Revolutionary Communist International”


By Michael Pröbsting, Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT), 23 May 2024,




The International Marxist Tendency (IMT), led by Alan Woods, has announced that it “will be launching a new Revolutionary Communist International” for which is has published a draft Manifesto. [1] Alan Woods calls this a “bold step”. Bold it certainly is – as bold as a man claiming to be a new Pavarotti just because he likes to sing under the shower. In fact, there is no justification for the IMT’s renaming – neither from a programmatic nor from a political-organisational point of view.


But let us start with something positive. We fully agree that the new name which the IMT wants to adopt – Revolutionary Communist International – is an excellent choice. This is why we decided to call ourselves Revolutionary Communist International Tendency when we launched our organisation 13 years ago. However, the IMT – in contrast to us and in contrast to what it did until now – wrongly imagines that it has reached a new stage in party building which would allow itself to proclaim a new world party, the successor of the first four Internationals which have been associated with the names of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky.




Propaganda group or party?




As a matter of fact, the IMT lacks size, roots in the working class and – most importantly – a revolutionary tradition which could justify such a “bold step”. Organisationally, it is hardly larger than it was 15 years ago when a series of splits began which weakened it massively. In two major splits (in 2010 and 2016) it lost about ¾ of its Pakistani section which again represented 2/3 of their whole international membership at that time. In addition, it lost its strongest section in Europe (Spain), most of its Latin American members as well as several other sections (or parts of it).


It is true that the IMT could win new members in Europe in the last few years. But it is doubtful that this would have make up for all the losses before. And it certainly has not resulted in a qualitative jump forward in terms of membership numbers.


More importantly, the IMT confines itself mostly to abstract propaganda but plays no role in the class struggle. On its website, they present boasting reports about “successful camps” and “congresses”. But one will rarely read anything about the role of IMT sections in the class struggle, in strikes or mass movements. Why? Because there is little to report as they are, by and large, outsiders to the struggle of the masses with only few roots in working class and the oppressed.


In fact, the substantial changes in the IMT membership – its severe losses since 2009/10 and its renewed growth in the last years – have resulted in a massive deterioration of its class composition since the vast majority of its new members are university students in Western Europe (and Northern America). It is certainly no exaggeration to say that 90-95% of the IMT membership is located in the richest regions of the world.


Trotsky once noted: “It may be regarded as a law that the ‘revolutionary’ organization which in our imperialist epoch is incapable of sinking its roots into the colonies is doomed to vegetate miserably.[2] This was said already in the 1930s when the majority of the global working class was still located in the imperialist countries. How much more is it true today?!


This is a shameful balance sheet for an international organisation which exists for six decades – first as the CWI and then, after the split in 1991-92, as the IMT – that its membership is concentrated not in those regions where more than 85% of the world proletariat is located (the Global South and China) but in the Western imperialist countries. This is even more the case since the IMT membership is dominated by university students and not by workers and youth from the lower strata of the masses in these imperialist countries.


It is therefore particularly grotesque when Woods arrogantly denounces other Trotskyist organisations as “myriad of splits and sectarian groups, each one more bizarre than the other.” In fact, a number of these are not only larger in numbers but also have much stronger roots in the working, lead trade unions (or sectors of such), have parliamentary representatives and play a leading role in class struggles. As examples we refer to FT, the UIT-CI, the LIS-ISL or the PO – international organisations with each of them having thousands of members, numerous trade union leaders as well as local and national deputies in Argentina. Or take LIT-CI whose mother section – the PSTU in Brazil – leads Conlutas, a large opposition current within CUT, the most important trade union federation in the country. In fact, it is the IMT which is “a sect at the fringe of the labour movement” (a favourite saying of the Grantites) compared with such sizeable Trotskyist organisation!


Essentially, the IMT remains a propaganda group, i.e. an organisation whose main task is to spread ideas via propaganda. There is nothing wrong with this, quite the opposite, propaganda is a crucial task of communists and absolutely necessary step for every revolutionary organisation in order to become a party with strong roots in the workers vanguard, as Trotsky explained repeatedly. But a change of name does not transform a group into a party – even if the IMT might now rename its sections as “Revolutionary Communist Party”.


In any case, the precondition for propaganda which plays a progressive role in the education of workers and youth is that such an organisation is based on a Marxist program, that it is capable to understand the main contradictions of world capitalism today and that it can translate this program into correct tactics for the global class struggle. Unfortunately, both the IMT’s politics in recent years as well as its “Manifesto of the Revolutionary Communist International” shows that it lacks also such qualities.




Abstract principles vs. program for struggle




The draft Manifesto, which the IMT wants to adopt at its founding congress of its “RCI” in June, starts from a correct point of departure – the character of the current historic period as one of capitalist decay. “The 2008 financial crisis was a major turning point. The truth is that world capitalism has never recovered from that crisis.” It states that this crisis “is not a normal cyclical crisis of capitalism. It is an existential crisis, expressed not only in the stagnation of the productive forces, but also in a general crisis of culture, morality, politics and religion.


We have always pointed to the catastrophic and revolutionary character of the period which started in 2008 and this issue was a key question when we founded the RCIT at the onset of the Arab Revolution.


From such a correct assessment, the IMT comrades draw an important conclusion which their leader, Alan Woods, points out in an article explaining their decision to found the “RCI”. “For decades we have been obliged to swim against the current. But now the tide of history has begun to turn. Everywhere, beneath the superficial veneer of calm and tranquillity, there is a seething undercurrent of rage, indignation, discontent and above all frustration at the existing state of affairs in society and politics. (…) We are now swimming together with the current of history.


This is basically correct and such an assessment is positively different from all those demoralised centrists who whine since years that “the masses are so backward”, that “the world is constantly shifting to the right” and, anyway, “everything was better before”. The RCIT has always explained that the capitalist decline and the acceleration of contradictions between states and classes must inevitably result in an intensification of the class struggle and a shift of the consciousness of sectors of the masses. We have seen this in the Arab Revolution – which experienced ups and downs since 2011 –, [3] the global wave of popular uprisings in the second half of 2019 [4] and, recently, with the emergence of the unprecedented international pro-Palestine solidarity movement in protest against Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza. [5]


However, for the masses to win in these gigantic struggles, they need a revolutionary program and a leadership fighting for it. It is the task of a communist organisation to provide such a strategy and to help building a party on such a basis. Unfortunately, the IMT Manifesto fails in this.


Basically, the Manifesto is an assembly of abstract principles but not a program for struggle. When Friedrich Engels once said, „To them it is a credo, not a guide to action,[6] he had exactly such a type of document without concrete conclusions in mind. The IMT Manifesto describes the crisis-ridden state of the capitalist system, but it does not provide the vanguard with an orientation for the main issues of the world situation and the international class struggle.


While it is to be welcome that the IMT recognizes now the imperialist character of Russia and China, it does not elaborate what are the consequences of such an assessment. It is one of the most important features of the historic period which started in 2008 that the world situation is characterized by an acceleration of inter-imperialist rivalry between the Western and the Eastern Great Powers (U.S., China, Russia, Western Europe and Japan). Global Trade Wars, sanctions, armament, etc. – these are key features of the world situation and will remain so for the coming years. If the masses don’t succeed to overthrow the ruling class via an international socialist revolution, humanity faces the danger of World War III.


Which program does the IMT offer the masses to fight against this danger? One will search in vain in the Manifesto. The RCIT has analysed in various documents the emergence of China and Russia as new imperialist powers. We have emphasized that Marxists have to consistently fight against all Great Powers and apply the program of revolutionary defeatism. This program – elaborated by Lenin and defended by Trotsky – is characterized by intransigent opposition of socialists against both their “own” as well as any other imperialist bourgeoisie (no support for military efforts or for non-military means of aggression like economic sanctions or chauvinist campaigns, for fraternisation between the workers and soldiers of both camps, transform the reactionary war into a civil war against the ruling class, etc.).


It is no accident that the program of revolutionary defeatism is missing from the IMT Manifesto. First, Woods and Ted Grant – the founder of the CWI and IMT – have always criticized Lenin’s approach as “exaggeration“. [7] Secondly, Woods and the IMT repeatedly differentiated between U.S. and Russia by calling the former “the most counterrevolutionary force on the planet” while downplaying the imperialist character of the latter. [8] However, as we said repeatedly, it is impossible for Marxists to find a correct orientation in the current world situation without understanding the crucial importance of inter-imperialist rivalry between the Western and Eastern Great Powers and the program of revolutionary defeatism in the struggle against such.




Anti-Imperialism and national liberation wars




Such ignorance of Russia’s (and China’s) imperialist character has served as justification for the IMT leadership to oppose the defence of the Ukraine against Putin’s invasion since 2022. They effectively deny the semi-colonial character of the Ukraine and the imperialist nature of the Kremlin’s war.


In contrast, the RCIT and its section in Russia – Socialist Tendency – have recognised the dual character of the war, i.e. that it is both a national liberation struggle of the Ukraine against Russian imperialism as well as an inter-imperialist conflict between the Western powers and Russia. Hence, we advocated a dual tactic. We have supported the Ukraine’s just war of national defence since the very beginning and (co-)organised three solidarity convoys. We combined such support with an uncompromising political opposition against the bourgeois Zelensky government.


At the same time, socialists are obliged to take a revolutionary defeatist position against all imperialist powers – the U.S., Russia, China, Western Europe and Japan. Such a stance includes intransigent opposition against the chauvinist-militarist policy of all Great Powers (e.g. armament, sanctions, etc.). We have summarised our internationalist and anti-imperialist program in the slogan: “Defend the Ukraine against Putin’s invasion! Against Russian and against NATO imperialism![9]


The IMT’s refusal to defend the Ukraine was closely linked with their opportunist policy towards the KPRF – a Stalinist and Great Russian chauvinist party, led by Gennady Zyuganov, which supports the Putin regime. In fact, its Russian section has a long-standing record of collaboration with this reactionary party. At the last municipal elections in September 2022, the IMT section did call for a vote for Zyuganov’s party. Worse, in two districts in Moscow City, they even stood candidates on the KPRF list and in one of these, their member Boris Israelev got elected. [10]


Such capitulation to social-imperialism is not an isolated example. In fact, the whole tradition of Ted Grant – which includes international organisations like the IMT, the CWI and the ISA – is characterised by a failure to defend oppressed people and to side with national liberation struggles. As we elaborated in a special pamphlet, this was the case in the Malvinas War between Argentina and Britain in 1982, in Iraq in the two wars 1991 and 2003 (and the subsequent occupation) against U.S. imperialism and its allies, in Afghanistan during the imperialist occupation in 2001-21; in Northern Ireland where the nationalists resisted against the British occupiers, etc. [11]


It is therefore no accident that the IMT Manifesto shamefully ignores the Palestinian liberation struggle and the ongoing genocide in Gaza (in fact, it is pretty silent on all national liberation struggles despite the documents length of more than 11,000 words). While it is true, and to their credit, that IMT comrades participate in pro-Palestine demonstrations – during the past Gaza Wars they were invisible at such demonstrations – they have failed to take an unambiguous revolutionary position of supporting the Palestinian resistance against the Zionist army and to apply the anti-imperialist united front. [12] Our comrades in the Internationalist Socialist League – the RCIT’s section in Israel / Occupied Palestine – were part of the IMT in the 2000s but had to split with them because of their failure to side with the Palestinian resistance (and other resistance forces in Arab and Muslim countries) against the Zionist state. [13]


In contrast, the RCIT and all authentic Marxists unconditionally support the heroic resistance, currently led by Hamas, against the Zionist state. Likewise, we fully side with other forces fighting the Israeli or the Western imperialists (like the Houthis in Yemen). In all these conflicts we advocate the military victory of the Palestinian and pro-Palestinian forces and the defeat of the Zionist and imperialist enemies. At the same time, we do not lend political support to such forces. [14]


As we said in a recently published article about the IMT, “one cannot be a communist without being an anti-imperialist.” [15] If it really wants to be a revolutionary and communist organisation, it must break with its decades-long tradition of betraying national liberation struggles!




Strategic orientation to left Stalinists




The IMT Manifesto has a merit in that it openly reveals the current strategic orientation of its leadership. In the past – and this is still the case in various countries –, it stayed as a “loyal opposition” within Europe’s social democratic and labour parties for years and decades. In other countries like Pakistan, it has been even part of reactionary bourgeois-populist parties like Bhutto’s PPP for decades. [16] And, as mentioned above, in Russia it has orientated itself to the Great Russian Stalinist KPRF.


For some time now, the IMT has made a certain turn to left Stalinist parties. In Russia, their section has fused with forces which split from the arch-Stalinist RKRP. In Brazil, they hope to repeat a similar project with the “Brazilian Communist Party – Revolutionary Reconstruction” – a split from the Stalinist PCB.


Currently, the Grantites hope to get closer to the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) and its international allies. Such says the IMT Manifesto: “The Greek Communist Party (KKE) has undoubtedly taken important steps in rejecting the old discredited Stalinist-Menshevik idea of two stages. It adopted a correct internationalist stand on the Ukrainian war, which it characterises as an inter-imperialist conflict. It led a movement of workers to boycott the shipment of arms from Greek ports to Ukraine. This will be welcomed by all genuine communists. However, while it is clearly of great importance, it is too early to conclude that the progress made by the Greek communists has been completed. In particular, it is necessary to break completely from the anti-Marxist theory of socialism in one country and to adopt a Leninist united front approach. The KKE is attempting to build links with other Communist Parties that share its position on the Ukraine war as an inter-imperialist conflict. That is a step in the right direction.


In the past two years, the international Stalinist movement underwent a deep crisis. As we did analyse somewhere else, this resulted in various splits. And, it is true, there is a current around the Greek KKE which – in contrast to Zyuganov’s KPRF and others – is not openly Great Russian social-imperialist. [17] While it is certainly welcome if the KKE and their friends stop collaborating with Putin’s bootlickers (as we did show above, the Russian IMT has also been on very friendly terms with the KPRF), this is hardly sufficient to make a party communist.


This is even more the case as the KKE remains a deeply social-chauvinist party in its own country. It preaches “the struggle for the defence of the borders and for the sovereign rights of Greece” – against the supposed threats by Türkiye and Macedonia. At a public rally, its General Secretary, Dimitris Koutsoumbas, literally threatened these countries: “We communists will, as we have always done in our century-long history, stand in the front row defending our territorial integrity and our sovereign rights. We are doing this so that any foreign intruder who dares to attack Greece will be annihilated.[18]


So, while the IMT Manifesto presents its differences with the KKE as merely theoretical issues (the theory of socialism in one country and united front tactic), there is in fact an abyss between authentic communism and Stalinism not only in theory but also in strategy and tactic!


Alan Woods and his friends don’t see it this way because in their politics they are not so far away from the left Stalinists. Like the KKE, they want to weaken the Ukraine by sabotaging its national defence. Similar to them, they don’t support national liberation struggles against Russian imperialism like that of the Syrian rebels who have resisted the Russian forces supporting Assad the butcher. Worse, the KKE and their friends praised the Syrian Stalinist parties which are part of the tyrannical regime. [19] Another capitulation of the IMT leadership to Stalinism was its shameful support for the brutal bonapartist COVID policy of the Chinese dictatorship in spring 2020. [20] In summary, the IMT’s strategic orientation to the left Stalinists has an objective basis in the politics which they share.


It is certainly true that authentic communists shall be open to discuss with all kinds of forces including Stalinists if they move to the left. But it is impermissible to approach them on the basis of accommodation to social-chauvinism and refusal to support legitimate national liberation struggles!


The struggle to build a revolutionary communist international does not start by proclaiming it but by defending a Marxist program for the current class struggle and by carrying such a program into the working class and the oppressed masses. Trotsky liked to say: „It is not the party that makes the program; it is the program that makes the party.[21] The IMT’s Manifesto and its politics determines its political physiognomy. Unfortunately, it is neither revolutionary nor communist.



* * * * *



Alan Woods, IMT and the Objective Conditions of the Emergence of past Internationals

An addition from the Editors of the Socialist Tendency


Alan Woods points to the history of the creation of the four previous internationals of the working class, while, in a favourable light for himself, ignoring the main objective conditions in which they were created.

1. The First International of Marx and Engels was organized soon after revolutions which swept across most of Europe - from France and Prussia to Austria and its Slavic and Italian provinces – and in which the proletariat occupied a key position. After the period of reaction, the situation began to change with the onset of the world crisis in 1857. It was followed by major revolutionary actions of the working class and all the oppressed - for example, the revolutionary war in Italy in 1859 and the national liberation uprising in Poland in 1863. It was these objective conditions that constituted the basis for the First International.

2. The Second International was organized in that historical period when workers' parties in many European countries counted millions of members in their ranks and entered parliaments. Such parties needed international unification and leadership. Without these pre-conditions, the creation of the International was practically impossible and meaningless.

3. The Third International was created in even more favourable conditions for the working class and the labouring masses - in 1919, at a time when the Bolsheviks seized and strengthened their power in Russia, the greatest European empires were destroyed, and the revolution raged and gained momentum. In this period, the proletariat seized power wherever it was possible to do so – from Hungary and Slovakia to Bavaria and Bremen, from Alsace to Irish Limerick. Have there ever been better conditions for the emergence of an international workers' party than in those days?

4. The creation of the 4th International was announced by the International Left Opposition in the context of an approaching world war, the results of which, according to the forecasts of the leaders of the organization, would lead to new socialist revolutions in all "civilized" countries. These forecasts were not made on empty grounds but based on the mass workers' and trade union movements in all parts of the world, as well as on recent attempts to produce social revolutions, for example, in China, Spain, Germany, France, and so on.

It was precisely under these conditions that Trotsky announced that the crisis of humanity ultimately boils down to a crisis of proletarian leadership, when Stalin's "Comintern" everywhere consciously or unconsciously betrayed the cause of the working class, concluding strategic alliances with the liberal bourgeoisie (China, Spain, France) or isolating itself from the movements and struggles of the social democratic masses (Germany).

In short, the conditions for the creation of the previous Internationals in the imperialist era can be characterized as a revolutionary situation on a global scale. In the pre-imperialist period of capitalism, the communist internationals were created in conditions of mass revolutionary unrest among the proletariat and the working classes in most of developed Europe.

It is precisely these conditions that Alan Woods overlooks when he loudly declares that he and his students are creating a new, full-fledged International, that is, an international workers' revolutionary party.

In the current conditions, which are still far from a revolutionary situation on a global scale (although such a situation may come to light quite soon, judging by the growth of national liberation movements and workers' protests throughout the world, as well as by the looming world financial crisis, which in scale may surpass the financial crisis of 2008), it would be a vile deception of ourselves and the working masses to tell the entire world (or, rather, a few thousand students in the most developed imperialist countries of the West) about the creation and emergence of an International instead of a propaganda organization. However, if we assume that the revolutionary situation in the world is already an objective fact, will Alan Woods be right in declaring his propaganda organization an International? No, he will not. For an International to emerge, deep roots of communist organization in the working class are necessary.

Compare the IMT with the 4th International in 1938. Their American section had already led important mass workers' strikes. Their section in Vietnam was the strongest force among the working class in Saigon and other industrial centres of the country. They had in their ranks historic revolutionary leaders, tested in major class battles (e.g. in China, the Netherlands), not to mention their sections working in extremely difficult situations in the underground (e.g. in Spain, Poland). Add to all this Trotsky, Sedov and all the Trotskyist heroes in Stalin's camps! The IMT has nothing of the sort.

Of course, critics at this point may point out to us that nothing of the kind described above exists not only in the IMT, but in no other Marxist propaganda organization in the world. And this is a correct observation. But no other organization declares itself a new world International, and to one degree or another soberly assesses its strength and influence on the struggle of the working class.

We are in no way opposed to the creation of an International, but we look the truth in the eye and soberly assess the objective political, ideological and economic world conditions.

[1] Alan Woods: Why we need a communist international, 5 April 2024; IMT: Manifesto of the Revolutionary Communist International, 11 March 2024

[2] Leon Trotsky: A Fresh Lesson (October 1938), in: Writings of Leon Trotsky, 1938-39, p. 74

[3] Our documents on the Arb Revolution are compiled at

[4] See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: Are We Nearing a New “68 Moment”? A massive upsurge of global class struggle in the midst of a dramatic shift in the world situation, 22 October 2019,

[6] Friedrich Engels: Letter to Friedrich Adolph Sorge, 29 November 1886, in: MECW Vol. 47, p. 532

[7] For a more detailed critical discussion of the Grantites distortion of Lenin’s and Trotsky’s approach to revolutionary defeatism see e.g. the book by Michael Pröbsting: The Great Robbery of the South. Continuity and Changes in the Super-Exploitation of the Semi-Colonial World by Monopoly Capital Consequences for the Marxist Theory of Imperialism, RCIT Books, 2013,, pp. 357-365

[8] See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: Russia and the Theory of “Lesser-Evil” Imperialism, On some Stalinists and “Trotskyists” who formally recognize Russia’s class character but reject the political consequences, 28 July 2022,

[9] We refer readers to a special page on our website where more than 150 RCIT documents on the Ukraine War and the current NATO-Russia conflict are compiled: In particular we refer to the RCIT Manifesto: Ukraine War: A Turning Point of World Historic Significance. Socialists must combine the revolutionary defense of the Ukraine against Putin’s invasion with the internationalist struggle against Russian as well as NATO and EU imperialism, 1 March 2022,

[10] See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: Cynical Doubletalk. How the opportunist IMT tries to hide their collaboration with Russian Stalinists supporting Putin’s war against the Ukraine, 2 March 2023,

[11] See on this e.g. the pamphlet by Michael Pröbsting: The Poverty of Neo-Imperialist Economism. Imperialism and the national question - a critique of Ted Grant and his school (CWI, ISA, IMT), January 2023, For a thoughtful critique of the IMT see also a pamphlet from the Italian PCL: The International Marxist Tendency: an opportunist and sectarian current, February 2024, For an overview about our history of support for anti-imperialist struggles in the past four decades (with links to documents, pictures and videos) see e.g. an essay by Michael Pröbsting: The Struggle of Revolutionaries in Imperialist Heartlands against Wars of their “Own” Ruling Class. Examples from the history of the RCIT and its predecessor organisation in the last four decades, 2 September 2022,

[12] For the RCIT’s analysis of the liberation struggle in Palestine see e.g. two books by our comrade Yossi Schwartz, a Jewish Anti-Zionist since nearly six decades living in Occupied Palestine, who has dealt extensively with the Zionist state and the Marxist program: The Zionist Wars. History of the Zionist Movement and Imperialist Wars, 1 February 2021,; Palestine and Zionism. The History of Oppression of the Palestinian People. A Critical Account of the Myths of Zionism, RCIT Books, Vienna 2019,; see also a pamphlet by Michael Pröbsting: On some Questions of the Zionist Oppression and the Permanent Revolution in Palestine, May 2013,

[13] See on this e.g. The ISL’s Break with the IMT (August 2009),

[14] Michael Pröbsting: From Zionist War on Gaza to Israeli-American War against Arab Peoples. Stop the genocide of the Palestinian people! Defeat Israel! Kick the US/UK forces out of the Middle East! Victory to the resistance! 16 January 2024,

[15] Michael Pröbsting: One Cannot Be a Communist Without Being an Anti-Imperialist. The IMT about the Houthis’ struggle against Israel and Western imperialism, 23 January 2024,

[16] See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: The Pro-Bourgeois Opportunism of LIS/MST (Part 2, Pakistan). On the Pakistani section of LIS/MST and its praise for the capitalist dictator Z. A. Bhutto and his PPP, 15 June 2023,

[17] See on this e.g. e.g. the pamphlet by Michael Pröbsting: Putin’s Poodles (Apologies to All Dogs). The pro-Russian Stalinist parties and their arguments in the current NATO-Russia Conflict, 9 February 2022,; by the same author: Great Power Rivalry: Deepening of Differences between Stalinist Parties. Notes on the XXII International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties in Havana (and the so-called “Paris Declaration”), 10 November 2022,

[18] See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: Greece: Social-Patriotic KKE Calls for the Defence of “Our Country’s Sovereign Rights”, 30 September 2022,

[19] See on this e.g. the pamphlet by Michael Pröbsting: Syria and Great Power Rivalry: The Failure of the „Left“. The bleeding Syrian Revolution and the recent Escalation of Inter-Imperialist Rivalry between the US and Russia – A Marxist Critique of Social Democracy, Stalinism and Centrism, 21 April 2018,; On the reactionary position of other Stalinist parties see e.g. by the same author: Stalinism: Assad’s Best Friends Forever. A commentary on a joint international initiative of Stalinist parties, 3 July 2019,

[20] See on this e.g. chapter V of our book by Michael Pröbsting: The COVID-19 Global Counterrevolution: What It Is and How to Fight It. A Marxist analysis and strategy for the revolutionary struggle, RCIT Books, April 2020, All RCIT documents on the COVID-19 crisis are compiled at a special sub-page on our website:

[21] Quoted in John G. Wright: Trotsky's Struggle for the Fourth International (1946), in: Towards a History of the Fourth International (Part II), Pathfinder Press, New York 1973, p. 6


Ni revolucionario ni comunista

Comentarios críticos sobre el “Manifiesto de la Internacional Comunista Revolucionaria” de la CMI


Por Michael Pröbsting, Corriente Comunista Revolucionaria Internacional (CCRI), 23 de mayo de 2024,




La Corriente Marxista Internacional (CMI), liderada por Alan Woods, ha anunciado que “lanzará una nueva Internacional Comunista Revolucionaria” para la cual ha publicado un borrador de Manifiesto. [1] Alan Woods llama a esto un “paso audaz”. Ciertamente es audaz, tan audaz como un hombre que dice ser un nuevo Pavarotti sólo porque le gusta cantar bajo la ducha. De hecho, no hay ninguna justificación para el cambio de nombre del IMT, ni desde un punto de vista programático ni político-organizativo.


Pero comencemos con algo positivo. Estamos totalmente de acuerdo en que el nuevo nombre que la TMI quiere adoptar –Internacional Comunista Revolucionaria– es una excelente elección. Por eso decidimos llamarnos Corriente Comunista Revolucionaria Internacional cuando lanzamos nuestra organización hace 13 años. Sin embargo, la CMI –a diferencia de nosotros y de lo que esta hacía hasta ahora– imagina erróneamente que ha alcanzado una nueva etapa en la construcción del partido que le permitiría proclamar un nuevo partido mundial, sucesor de las cuatro primeras Internacionales que Se han asociado con los nombres de Marx, Engels, Lenin y Trotsky.




¿Grupo o partido de propaganda?




De hecho, la CMI carece de tamaño, de arraigo en la clase trabajadora y –lo más importante– de una tradición revolucionaria que pueda justificar un “paso audaz” tan grande. Desde el punto de vista organizativo, apenas es mayor que hace 15 años, cuando comenzaron una serie de escisiones que lo debilitaron enormemente. En dos grandes divisiones (en 2010 y 2016) perdió alrededor de ¾ de su sección paquistaní, que nuevamente representaba 2/3 de toda su membresía internacional en ese momento. Además, perdió su sección más fuerte en Europa (España), la mayoría de sus miembros latinoamericanos, así como varias otras secciones (o partes de ella).


Es cierto que la TMI podría ganar nuevos miembros en Europa en los últimos años. Pero es dudoso que esto hubiera podido compensar todas las pérdidas anteriores. Y ciertamente no ha resultado en un salto cualitativo en términos de número de miembros.


Más importante aún, la TMI se limita principalmente a la propaganda abstracta pero no desempeña ningún papel en la lucha de clases. En su sitio web presentan informes jactanciosos sobre “campamentos exitosos” y “congresos”. Pero rara vez se lee algo sobre el papel de las secciones de la CMI en la lucha de clases, en las huelgas o los movimientos de masas. ¿Por qué? Porque hay poco que informar ya que son, en general, ajenos a la lucha de las masas con pocas raíces en la clase trabajadora y los oprimidos.


De hecho, los cambios sustanciales en la membresía de la CMI –sus severas pérdidas desde 2009/2010 y su renovado crecimiento en los últimos años– han resultado en un deterioro masivo de su composición de clase, ya que la gran mayoría de sus nuevos miembros son estudiantes universitarios en Occidente. Europa (y América del Norte). Ciertamente no es exagerado decir que entre el 90% y el 95% de los miembros de la CMI se encuentran en las regiones más ricas del mundo.


Trotsky señaló una vez: “es prácticamente una ley que la organización “revolucionaria” incapaz de penetrar en las colonias está destinada a vegetar miserablemente”. [2] Esto ya se dijo en la década de 1930, cuando la mayoría de la clase trabajadora mundial todavía estaba ubicada en los países imperialistas. ¿Cuánto más es cierto hoy?


Este es un balance vergonzoso para una organización internacional que existe desde hace seis décadas –primero como CIT y luego, después de la división en 1991-1992, como CMI–, que sus miembros no se concentran en aquellas regiones donde más del 85% del proletariado mundial está ubicado (el Sur Global y China) sino en los países imperialistas occidentales. Esto es aún más cierto ya que la membresía de la CMI está dominada por estudiantes universitarios y no por trabajadores y jóvenes de los estratos más bajos de las masas en estos países imperialistas.


Por lo tanto, resulta particularmente grotesco cuando Woods denuncia con arrogancia a otras organizaciones trotskistas como “una miríada de escisiones y grupos sectarios, cada uno más extraño que el otro”. De hecho, varios de ellos no sólo son más numerosos, sino que también tienen raíces mucho más fuertes en los trabajadores, dirigen sindicatos (o sectores de ellos), tienen representantes parlamentarios y desempeñan un papel dirigente en las luchas de clases. Como ejemplos nos referimos al FT, la UIT-CI, la LIS-ISL o el PO, organizaciones internacionales cada una de las cuales cuenta con miles de miembros, numerosos dirigentes sindicales y diputados locales y nacionales en Argentina. O tomemos el caso de la LIT-CI, cuya sección madre –el PSTU en Brasil– lidera Conlutas, una gran corriente de oposición dentro de la CUT, la federación sindical más importante del país. De hecho, ¡es la CMI la que es “una secta al margen del movimiento obrero” (un dicho favorito de los grantistas) en comparación con una organización trotskista tan importante!


En esencia, la CMI sigue siendo un grupo de propaganda, es decir, una organización cuya tarea principal es difundir ideas a través de la propaganda. No hay nada de malo en esto, todo lo contrario, la propaganda es una tarea crucial de los comunistas y un paso absolutamente necesario para que toda organización revolucionaria pueda convertirse en un partido con fuertes raíces en la vanguardia obrera, como explicó Trotsky en repetidas ocasiones. Pero un cambio de nombre no transforma a un grupo en un partido, incluso si ahora la CMI cambiara el nombre de sus secciones a “Partido Comunista Revolucionario”.


En cualquier caso, la condición previa para una propaganda que desempeñe un papel progresista en la educación de los trabajadores y de los jóvenes es que dicha organización se base en un programa marxista, que sea capaz de comprender las principales contradicciones del capitalismo mundial actual y que pueda traducirlas este programa en tácticas correctas para la lucha de clases global. Desafortunadamente, tanto la política de la CMI en los últimos años como su “Manifiesto de la Internacional Comunista Revolucionaria” muestran que también carece de esas cualidades.




Principios abstractos versus programa de lucha




El borrador del Manifiesto, que la TMI quiere adoptar en su congreso fundacional de su “RCI” en junio, parte de un punto de partida correcto: el carácter del actual período histórico como de decadencia capitalista. “La crisis financiera de 2008 fue un importante punto de inflexión. La verdad es que el capitalismo mundial nunca se ha recuperado de esa crisis”. Afirma que esta crisis “no es una crisis cíclica normal del capitalismo. Es una crisis existencial, expresada no sólo en el estancamiento de las fuerzas productivas, sino también en una crisis general de la cultura, la moral, la política y la religión”.


Siempre hemos señalado el carácter catastrófico y revolucionario del período que comenzó en 2008 y esta cuestión fue una cuestión clave cuando fundamos la CCRI al inicio de la Revolución Árabe.


De una evaluación tan correcta, los camaradas de la CMI sacan una conclusión importante que su líder, Alan Woods, señala en un artículo en el que explica su decisión de fundar la “ICR”. “Durante décadas nos hemos visto obligados a nadar contra corriente. Pero ahora la marea de la historia ha comenzado a cambiar. En todas partes, bajo el barniz superficial de calma y tranquilidad, hay una corriente subyacente de rabia, indignación, descontento y, sobre todo, frustración por la situación actual en la sociedad y la política. (…) Ahora nadamos junto con la corriente de la historia”.


Esto es básicamente correcto y tal evaluación se diferencia positivamente de todos esos centristas desmoralizados que se quejan desde hace años de que “las masas están tan atrasadas”, que “el mundo se desplaza constantemente hacia la derecha” y, de todos modos, “antes todo era mejor”. La CCRI siempre ha explicado que el declive capitalista y la aceleración de las contradicciones entre estados y clases deben resultar inevitablemente en una intensificación de la lucha de clases y un cambio de conciencia de sectores de las masas. Lo hemos visto en la Revolución Árabe –que experimentó altibajos desde 2011–, [3] la ola global de levantamientos populares en la segunda mitad de 2019 [4] y, recientemente, con el surgimiento del movimiento internacional de solidaridad pro Palestina sin precedentes en protesta contra el gobierno de Israel. Guerra genocida en Gaza. [5]


Sin embargo, para que las masas ganen en estas luchas gigantescas, necesitan un programa revolucionario y una dirección que luche por él. Es tarea de una organización comunista proporcionar esa estrategia y ayudar a construir un partido sobre esa base. Desafortunadamente, el Manifiesto de la TMI falla en esto.


Básicamente, el Manifiesto es un conjunto de principios abstractos, pero no un programa de lucha. Cuando Friedrich Engels dijo una vez: "Para ellos es un credo y no una guía para la acción", [6] tenía exactamente ese tipo de documento sin conclusiones concretas en mente. El Manifiesto de la TMI describe el estado de crisis del sistema capitalista, pero no proporciona a la vanguardia una orientación para los principales problemas de la situación mundial y la lucha de clases internacional.


Si bien es positivo que el TMI reconozca ahora el carácter imperialista de Rusia y China, no detalla cuáles son las consecuencias de tal evaluación. Una de las características más importantes del período histórico que comenzó en 2008 es que la situación mundial se caracteriza por una aceleración de la rivalidad interimperialista entre las grandes potencias occidentales y orientales (Estados Unidos, China, Rusia, Europa occidental y Japón). Guerras comerciales globales, sanciones, armamento, etc.: estas son características clave de la situación mundial y seguirán siéndolo durante los próximos años. Si las masas no logran derrocar a la clase dominante mediante una revolución socialista internacional, la humanidad enfrenta el peligro de una Tercera Guerra Mundial.


¿Qué programa ofrece la CMI a las masas para luchar contra este peligro? Se buscará en vano en el Manifiesto. La CCRI ha analizado en diversos documentos el surgimiento de China y Rusia como nuevas potencias imperialistas. Hemos enfatizado que los marxistas tienen que luchar consistentemente contra todas las grandes potencias y aplicar el programa del derrotismo revolucionario. Este programa –elaborado por Lenin y defendido por Trotsky– se caracteriza por la oposición intransigente de los socialistas tanto contra “la propia” como contra cualquier otra burguesía imperialista (ningún apoyo a los esfuerzos militares o a medios no militares de agresión como sanciones económicas o medidas chauvinistas). campañas de confraternización entre los trabajadores y soldados de ambos campos, transforman la guerra reaccionaria en una guerra civil contra la clase dominante, etc.).


No es casualidad que el programa de derrotismo revolucionario falte en el Manifiesto de la CMI. En primer lugar, Woods y Ted Grant –el fundador del CIT y de la CMI– siempre han criticado el enfoque de Lenin como “exageración”. [7] En segundo lugar, Woods y la CMI diferenciaron repetidamente entre Estados Unidos y Rusia al llamar al primero “la fuerza más contrarrevolucionaria del planeta”, mientras restaban importancia al carácter imperialista del segundo. [8] Sin embargo, como hemos dicho repetidamente, es imposible para los marxistas encontrar una orientación correcta en la situación mundial actual sin comprender la importancia crucial de la rivalidad interimperialista entre las grandes potencias occidentales y orientales y el programa de derrotismo revolucionario en la lucha contra tales potencias.




Antiimperialismo y guerras de liberación nacional




Tal ignorancia del carácter imperialista de Rusia (y de China) ha servido de justificación para que los dirigentes de la CMI se opongan a la defensa de Ucrania contra la invasión de Putin desde 2022. En la práctica niegan el carácter semicolonial de Ucrania y la naturaleza imperialista de la guerra del Kremlin.


Por el contrario, la CCRI y su sección en Rusia, la Tendencia Socialista, han reconocido el carácter dual de la guerra, es decir, que es a la vez una lucha de liberación nacional de Ucrania contra el imperialismo ruso y un conflicto interimperialista entre las potencias occidentales. y Rusia. Por tanto, propugnábamos una táctica dual. Hemos apoyado la guerra justa de defensa nacional de Ucrania desde el principio y (co)organizamos tres convoyes de solidaridad. Combinamos ese apoyo con una oposición política intransigente contra el gobierno burgués de Zelensky.


Al mismo tiempo, los socialistas están obligados a adoptar una posición del derrotismo revolucionario contra todas las potencias imperialistas: Estados Unidos, Rusia, China, Europa occidental y Japón. Tal postura incluye una oposición intransigente contra la política chovinista-militarista de todas las grandes potencias (por ejemplo, armamento, sanciones, etc.). Hemos resumido nuestro programa internacionalista y antiimperialista en el lema: “¡Defender Ucrania contra la invasión de Putin! ¡Contra Rusia y contra el imperialismo de la OTAN![9]


La negativa de la CMI de defender Ucrania estuvo estrechamente relacionada con su política oportunista hacia el KPRF, un partido estalinista y chovinista gran ruso, dirigido por Gennady Zyuganov, que apoya al régimen de Putin. De hecho, su sección rusa tiene un largo historial de colaboración con este partido reaccionario. En las últimas elecciones municipales de septiembre de 2022, la sección de la CMI convocó a votar por el partido de Zyuganov. Peor aún, en dos distritos de la ciudad de Moscú incluso presentaron candidatos en la lista del KPRF y en uno de ellos, su miembro Boris Israelev fue elegido. [10]


Esta capitulación ante el socialimperialismo no es un ejemplo aislado. De hecho, toda la tradición de Ted Grant –que incluye organizaciones internacionales como la CMI, el CIT y la ISA– se caracteriza por no defender a los pueblos oprimidos ni ponerse del lado de las luchas de liberación nacional. Como explicamos en un folleto especial, este fue el caso en la Guerra de Malvinas entre Argentina y Gran Bretaña en 1982, en Irak en las dos guerras de 1991 y 2003 (y la posterior ocupación) contra el imperialismo estadounidense y sus aliados, en Afganistán durante la ocupación imperialista en 2001-2021; en Irlanda del Norte, donde los nacionalistas resistieron contra los ocupantes británicos, etc. [11]


Por lo tanto, no es casualidad que el Manifiesto del TMI ignore vergonzosamente la lucha de liberación palestina y el genocidio en curso en Gaza (de hecho, guarda bastante silencio sobre todas las luchas de liberación nacional a pesar de que los documentos tienen más de 11.000 palabras). Si bien es cierto, y hay que reconocerlo, que los camaradas de la CMI participan en manifestaciones pro Palestina (durante las pasadas guerras de Gaza fueron invisibles en tales manifestaciones), no han logrado adoptar una posición revolucionaria inequívoca de apoyo a la resistencia palestina contra el ejército sionista y aplicar el frente único antiimperialista. [12] Nuestros camaradas de la Liga Socialista Internacionalista –la sección de la CCRI en Israel/Palestina Ocupada– formaban parte de la CMI en la década de 2000, pero tuvieron que separarse de ellos debido a que no se pusieron del lado de la resistencia palestina (y otras fuerzas de resistencia en países árabes y musulmanes) contra el Estado sionista. [13]


En contraste, la CCRI y todos los marxistas auténticos apoyan incondicionalmente la heroica resistencia, actualmente liderada por Hamás, contra el Estado sionista. Del mismo modo, nos ponemos totalmente del lado de otras fuerzas que luchan contra los imperialistas israelíes u occidentales (como los hutíes en Yemen). En todos estos conflictos abogamos por la victoria militar de las fuerzas palestinas y pro palestinas y la derrota de los enemigos sionistas e imperialistas. Al mismo tiempo, no prestamos apoyo político a esas fuerzas. [14]


Como dijimos en un artículo publicado recientemente sobre la CMI, “uno no puede ser comunista sin ser antiimperialista”. [15] ¡Si realmente quieren ser una organización revolucionaria y comunista, deben romper con su tradición de décadas de traicionar las luchas de liberación nacional!




Orientación estratégica hacia los estalinistas de izquierda




El Manifiesto de la TMI tiene el mérito de revelar abiertamente la actual orientación estratégica de su dirección. En el pasado –y este sigue siendo el caso en varios países–, permaneció como una “oposición leal” dentro de los partidos socialdemócrata y laborista de Europa durante años y décadas. En otros países como Pakistán, incluso ha sido parte de partidos populistas burgueses reaccionarios como el PPP de Bhutto durante décadas. [16] Y, como se mencionó anteriormente, en Rusia se ha orientado hacia el KPRF estalinista gran ruso.


Desde hace algún tiempo, la TMI ha dado un cierto giro hacia los partidos estalinistas de izquierda. En Rusia, su sección se ha fusionado con fuerzas que se escindieron del archiestalinista RKRP. En Brasil, esperan repetir un proyecto similar con el “Partido Comunista Brasileño – Reconstrucción Revolucionaria” – una escisión del PCB estalinista.


Actualmente, los grantistas esperan acercarse al Partido Comunista de Grecia (KKE) y sus aliados internacionales. Así lo dice el Manifiesto de la CMI: “El Partido Comunista Griego (KKE) sin duda ha dado pasos importantes para rechazar la vieja y desacreditada idea estalinista-menchevique de las dos etapas. Adoptó una postura internacionalista correcta sobre la guerra de Ucrania, que caracteriza como un conflicto interimperialista. Lideró un movimiento de trabajadores para boicotear el envío de armas desde los puertos griegos a Ucrania. Esto será bienvenido por todos los verdaderos comunistas. Sin embargo, si bien es claramente de gran importancia, es demasiado pronto para concluir que los avances logrados por los comunistas griegos se han completado. En particular, es necesario romper completamente con la teoría antimarxista del socialismo en un solo país y adoptar un enfoque leninista de frente único. El KKE está intentando establecer vínculos con otros partidos comunistas que comparten su posición sobre la guerra de Ucrania como un conflicto interimperialista. Ese es un paso en la dirección correcta”.


En los últimos dos años, el movimiento estalinista internacional atravesó una profunda crisis. Como analizamos en otra parte, esto resultó en varias escisiones. Y, es cierto, hay una corriente en torno al KKE griego que –a diferencia del KPRF de Ziuganov y otros– no es abiertamente socialimperialista gran ruso. [17] Si bien sería ciertamente bienvenido que el KKE y sus amigos dejaran de colaborar con los lamebotas de Putin (como mostramos anteriormente, la CMI ruso también ha mantenido relaciones muy amistosas con el KPRF), esto no es suficiente para convertir a un partido en comunista.


Esto es aún más cierto porque el KKE sigue siendo un partido profundamente socialchovinista en su propio país. Predica “la lucha por la defensa de las fronteras y por los derechos soberanos de Grecia” –contra las supuestas amenazas de Turquía y Macedonia. En una manifestación pública, su secretario general, Dimitris Koutsoumbas, amenazó literalmente a estos países: “Nosotros, los comunistas, como siempre lo hemos hecho en nuestro siglo de historia, estaremos en primera fila defendiendo nuestra integridad territorial y nuestros derechos soberanos. Estamos haciendo esto para que cualquier intruso extranjero que se atreva a atacar a Grecia sea aniquilado”. [18]


Así, mientras el Manifiesto de la CMI presenta sus diferencias con el KKE como cuestiones meramente teóricas (la teoría del socialismo en un solo país y la táctica del frente único), en realidad existe un abismo entre el comunismo auténtico y el estalinismo no sólo en teoría sino también en estrategia y ¡táctica!


Alan Woods y sus amigos no lo ven así porque en su política no están tan lejos de los estalinistas de izquierda. Al igual que el KKE, quieren debilitar a Ucrania saboteando su defensa nacional. Al igual que ellos, no apoyan las luchas de liberación nacional contra el imperialismo ruso como la de los rebeldes sirios que han resistido a las fuerzas rusas que apoyan al carnicero Assad. Peor aún, el KKE y sus amigos elogiaron a los partidos estalinistas sirios que forman parte del régimen tiránico. [19] Otra capitulación de la dirección de la CMI ante el estalinismo fue su vergonzoso apoyo a la brutal política bonapartista sobre el COVID de la dictadura china en la primavera de 2020. [20] En resumen, la orientación estratégica de la CMI hacia los estalinistas de izquierda tiene una base objetiva en la política que comparten.


Es ciertamente cierto que los auténticos comunistas estarán abiertos a discutir con todo tipo de fuerzas, incluidos los estalinistas, si se mueven hacia la izquierda. ¡Pero es inadmisible acercarse a ellos basándose en la acomodación al socialchovinismo y la negativa a apoyar las luchas legítimas de liberación nacional!


La lucha por construir una internacional comunista revolucionaria no comienza proclamándola sino defendiendo un programa marxista para la lucha de clases actual y llevando dicho programa a la clase trabajadora y a las masas oprimidas. A Trotsky le gustaba decir: “No es el partido el que hace el programa; es el programa el que constituye el partido”. [21] El Manifiesto de la CMI y su política determinan su fisonomía política. Lamentablemente, no es ni revolucionaria ni comunista.


[1] Alan Woods: Por qué necesitamos una Internacional Comunista, 5 de abril de 2024,; CMI: Manifiesto de la Internacional Comunista Revolucionaria, 11 de marzo de 2024,

[2] León Trotsky: Una lección reciente (1938), en

[3] Nuestros documentos sobre la revolución árabe están compilados en

[4] Ver sobre esto en Michael Pröbsting: ¿Nos estamos acercando a un nuevo “momento 68”? Un aumento masivo de la lucha de clases global en medio de un cambio dramático en la situación mundial, 22 de octubre de 2019,

[5] Remitimos a los lectores a las páginas especiales de nuestro sitio web donde se compilan todos los documentos de la CCRI sobre la Guerra de Gaza de 2023-2024, y

[6] Fiedrich Engels: Carta a Adolph Sorge, 29 de noviembre de 1889,

[7] Para una discusión crítica más detallada sobre la distorsión de los grantistas del enfoque de Lenin y Trotsky sobre el derrotismo revolucionario, véase, por ejemplo, el libro de Michael Pröbsting: The Great Robbery of the South. Continuity and Changes in the Super-Exploitation of the Semi-Colonial World by Monopoly Capital Consequences for the Marxist Theory of Imperialism, RCIT Books, 2013,, pp. 357-365.

[8] Ver en esto, p. Michael Pröbsting: Russia and the Theory of “Lesser-Evil” Imperialism. On some Stalinists and “Trotskyists” who formally recognize Russia’s class character but reject the political consequences, 28 de julio de 2022,

[9] Remitimos a los lectores a una página especial en nuestro sitio web donde se compilan más de 150 documentos de la CCRI sobre la guerra de Ucrania y el actual conflicto OTAN-Rusia: En particular nos referimos al Manifiesto de la CCRI: Guerra de Ucrania: un punto de inflexión de importancia histórica mundial. Los socialistas deben combinar la defensa revolucionaria de Ucrania contra la invasión de Putin con la lucha internacionalista contra el imperialismo ruso, la OTAN y la UE, 1 de marzo de 2022,

[10] Ver en esto, p. Michael Proebsting: Cynical Doubletalk. How the opportunist IMT tries to hide their collaboration with Russian Stalinists supporting Putin’s war against the Ukraine, 2 de marzo de 2023,

[11] Ver en esto, p. el folleto de Michael Pröbsting: The Poverty of Neo-Imperialist Economism. Imperialism and the national question - a critique of Ted Grant and his school (CWI, ISA, IMT), enero de 2023, Para una crítica reflexiva del TMI, ver también un folleto del PCL italiano: The International Marxist Tendency: an opportunist and sectarian current, February 2024, Para obtener una descripción general de nuestra historia de apoyo a las luchas antiimperialistas en las últimas cuatro décadas (con enlaces a documentos, fotografías y videos), consulte, por ejemplo, un ensayo de Michael Pröbsting: La lucha de los revolucionarios en el corazón imperialista contra las guerras de su “propia” clase dominante. Ejemplos de la historia de la CCRI y su organización predecesora en las últimas cuatro décadas, 2 de septiembre de 2022,

[12] Para el análisis de la CCRI de la lucha de liberación en Palestina, véase, por ejemplo, dos libros de nuestro camarada Yossi Schwartz, un judío antisionista que lleva casi seis décadas viviendo en la Palestina ocupada y que ha tratado extensamente el estado sionista y el programa marxista: The Zionist Wars. History of the Zionist Movement and Imperialist Wars, 1 February 2021,; Palestine and Zionism. The History of Oppression of the Palestinian People. A Critical Account of the Myths of Zionism, RCIT Books, Vienna 2019,; see also a pamphlet by Michael Pröbsting: On some Questions of the Zionist Oppression and the Permanent Revolution in Palestine, May 2013,

[13] Ver p. ej. The ISL’s Break with the IMT (August 2009),

[14] Michael Pröbsting: De la guerra sionista contra Gaza a la guerra israelí-estadounidense contra los pueblos árabes. ¡Alto al genocidio del pueblo palestino! ¡Derrota para Israel! ¡Expulsar a las fuerzas estadounidenses y británicas de Oriente Medio! ¡Victoria a la resistencia!, 16 de enero de 2024,

[15] Michael Pröbsting: One Cannot Be a Communist Without Being an Anti-Imperialist. The IMT about the Houthis’ struggle against Israel and Western imperialism, 23 January 2024,

[16] Ver, p. ej. Michael Pröbsting: The Pro-Bourgeois Opportunism of LIS/MST (Part 2, Pakistan). On the Pakistani section of LIS/MST and its praise for the capitalist dictator Z. A. Bhutto and his PPP, 15 June 2023,

[17] Ver p. ej. el folleto de Michael Pröbsting: Putin’s Poodles (Apologies to All Dogs). The pro-Russian Stalinist parties and their arguments in the current NATO-Russia Conflict, 9 February 2022,; por el mismo autor: Great Power Rivalry: Deepening of Differences between Stalinist Parties. Notes on the XXII International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties in Havana (and the so-called “Paris Declaration”), 10 November 2022,

[18] Ver, p. ej. Michael Pröbsting: Greece: Social-Patriotic KKE Calls for the Defence of “Our Country’s Sovereign Rights”, 30 September 2022,

[19] Ver sobre esto p. ej. el folleto de Michael Pröbsting: Syria and Great Power Rivalry: The Failure of the „Left“. The bleeding Syrian Revolution and the recent Escalation of Inter-Imperialist Rivalry between the US and Russia – A Marxist Critique of Social Democracy, Stalinism and Centrism, 21 April 2018,; Sobre la posición reaccionaria de otros partidos estalinistas, véase, por ejemplo, del mismo autor: Stalinism: Assad’s Best Friends Forever. A commentary on a joint international initiative of Stalinist parties, 3 July 2019,

[20] Ver sobre esto p. ej. el capítulo V de nuestro libro por Michael Pröbsting: La Contrarrevolución del COVID-19: Qué es y Cómo Combatirla. Un análisis y una estrategia marxistas para la lucha revolucionaria, RCIT Books, April 2020, Todos los documentos de la CCRI sobre la crisis de COVID-19 están recopilados en una subpágina especial de nuestro sitio web:

[21] Citado en John G. Wright: Trotsky's Struggle for the Fourth International (1946), in: Towards a History of the Fourth International (Part II), Pathfinder Press, New York 1973, p. 6


Nem revolucionário nem comunista