Fourth International

Part of the Politics series on Trotskyism

Leon Trotsky Fourth International

Marxism Leninism Russian Revolution Prominent Trotskyists James P. Cannon Ted Grant Joseph Hansen Gerry Healy Alain Krivine Arlette Laguiller Pierre Lambert Livio Maitan Ernest Mandel Nahuel Moreno J. Posadas Peter Taaffe Tony Cliff Max Shachtman Trotskyist groups CMI · CWI · ICFI ICU · IST reunified FI

[[Portal:Communism|Communism Portal]] This box: [ view] • [ talk] • [ edit]

Throughout the better part of its existence, the Fourth International was hounded by GPU agents, repressed by capitalist countries such as France and the United States, and rejected by followers of the Soviet Union and later Maoism as illegitimate (a position these communists still hold today). It struggled to maintain contact under such conditions of both illegality and scorn around much of the world during World War II. When workers' uprisings occurred, they were usually under the influence of Soviet, Maoist, social democratic, or nationalist groups, leading to further betrayals and defeats for Trotskyists.

The FI suffered a split in 1940 and an even more significant split in 1953. Despite a partial reunification in 1963, more than one group claims to represent the political continuity of the Fourth International. The broad array of Trotskyist Internationals are split over whether the Fourth International still exists and if so, which organisation represents its political continuity.

Trotskyism

Soviet portrait of Trotsky.

Trotskyists regard themselves as working in opposition to both capitalism and Stalinism as embodied by the leadership of the Soviet Union after Lenin's death. Trotsky advocated proletarian revolution as set out in his theory of "permanent revolution", and believed that a workers' state would not be able to hold out against the pressures of a hostile capitalist world unless socialist revolutions quickly took hold in other countries as well. This theory was advanced in opposition to the view held by the Stalinists that "socialism in one country" could be built in the Soviet Union alone.Trotsky, [In Defence of October] Furthermore, Trotsky and his supporters harshly criticized the increasingly totalitarian nature of Stalin's rule. They argued that socialism without democracy is impossible. Thus, faced with the increasing lack of democracy in the Soviet Union, they concluded that it was no longer a socialist workers' state, but a degenerated workers' state.[The Transitional Program]. Retrieved February 10, 2005.

Origins

After the rise of Hitler, Trotsky claimed that the Comintern had fallen irreedemably into the hands of the Stalinist bureaucracy. Thus he and his supporters founded the International Communist League in 1933. By declaring themselves the Fourth International, the "World Party of Socialist Revolution", the Trotskyists were publicly asserting their continuity not only with the Comintern, but also with the earlier Socialist International and the International Workingmen's Association, the first International, which had been led by Karl Marx.[Working-class Internationalism & Organisation] Their recognition of the importance of these earlier Internationals was coupled with a belief that they eventually degenerated. Although the Socialist International and Comintern were still in existence, the Trotskyists did not believe they were capable of supporting revolutionary socialism and internationalism.

The foundation of the Fourth International was therefore spurred in part by a desire to form a stronger political current, rather than just being seen as the communist opposition to the Comintern and the Soviet Union. Trotsky believed that its formation was all the more urgent for the role he saw it playing in the impending World War.

The decision to form the International

The foundation of the Fourth International was seen as more than just the simple renaming of an international tendency that was already in existence. It was argued that the Third International had now degenerated completely and was therefore to be seen as a counter-revolutionary organisation that would in time of crisis defend capitalism. It was also argued that the coming World War would produce a revolutionary wave of class and national struggles, rather as the First World War had done.

Stalin, fearing the growing strength of Trotsky's supporters, responded with a major political massacre of people within the Soviet Union, as well as the assassination of Trotsky's supporters and family abroad.[Trotskyists at Vorkuta: An Eyewitness Report] He had agents go through historical documents and photos in order to attempt to erase Trotsky's memory from the history books.[Propaganda in the Propaganda State], PBS According to the journal Revolutionary History, Stalin's supporters even turned to anti-semitism to whip up sentiment against Trotsky.Mario Kessler, [Leon Trotsky's Position on Anti-Semitism, Zionism and the Perspectives of the Jewish Question], What Next? According to Stalin's daughter, his fight with Trotsky laid the foundations for his later anti-semitic campaigns.Arnold Beichman, [How Stalin, the 'breaker of nations,' hated, murdered Jews], Washington Times

Nevertheless, the Fourth International was founded at a World Congress held in 1938.

The Founding Congress and WWII

Emblem of the Fourth International.

The International's rationale was to construct new mass revolutionary parties able to lead successful workers' revolutions. It saw these arising from a revolutionary wave which would develop alongside and as a result of the coming World War. Thirty delegates attended the founding conference, held in September 1938, in the home of Alfred Rosmer just outside Paris. Present at the meeting were delegates from all the major countries of Europe, and from North America, although for reasons of cost and distance, few delegates attended from Asia or Latin America. An International Secretariat was established, with many of the day's leading Trotskyists and most countries in which Trotskyists were active represented."M. S.", [Founding Conference of the Fourth International]

It also adopted the Transitional Programme and other resolutions Socialist Workers Party (US), [The Founding Conference of the Fourth International] The Transitional Programme was the central programmatic statement of the congress, summarising its strategic and tactical conceptions for the revolutionary period that it saw opening up as a result of the war which Trotsky had been predicting for some years. The Transitional Programme is not, however, the definitive programme of the Fourth International — as is often suggested — but instead contains a summation of the conjunctural understanding of the movement at that date and a series of transitional policies designed to develop the struggle for workers' power.Charlie van Gelderen, [Sixty years of the Fourth International] Richard Price [The Transitional Programme in perspective]''

At the outbreak of World War II, in 1939, the International Secretariat was moved to New York City. The resident IEC failed to meet, largely because of the struggle in the US SWP between Trotsky's supporters and the tendency of Max Shachtman, Martin Abern and James Burnham. The secretariat was composed of those members of the International Executive Committee members who happened to be in the city, most of who were co-thinkers of Max Shachtman. http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/fi/1938-1949/emergconf/fi-emerg03.htm See the 1940 resolution of the emergency conference of the FI titled 'Declaration on the status of the resident International Executive Committee' in Documents of the Fourth International, Vol 1, pp 351-355 The disagreement was centered around the Shachtmanites' disagreements with the SWP's internal policyDuncan Hallas, [Fourth International in Decline] and over the FI's defence of the USSR See In Defense of Marxism.

Trotsky opened a public debate with Shachtman and Burnham and developed his positions in a series of polemics written in 1939-1940 and later collected in In Defense of Marxism. Eventually Shachtman and Burnham's tendency resigned from the International in early 1940, alongside almost 40% of the SWP's members, many of whom became founder members of the Workers Party.James P. Cannon, [Factional Struggle And Party Leadership] David Holmes, [James P. Cannon: His Life and Work]

The Emergency Conference

Secretariat members who had supported Shachtman were expelled by the emergency conference, with the support of Trotsky himself.Michel Pablo, [Report on the Fourth International Since the Outbreak of War, 1939-48] While leader of the SWP James P. Cannon later said that he did not believe the split to be definitive and final, the two groups did not reunite. A new IEC was appointed, which came under the increasing influence of the Socialist Workers Party.

The Fourth International was hit hard during World War II, with Trotsky assassinated, many of its European affiliates destroyed by the Nazis and several of its Asian affiliates destroyed by the Empire of Japan. The survivors, in Europe, Asia and elsewhere, were largely cut off from each other and from the International Secretariat. The new secretary, Jean Van Heijenoort (also known as Gerland), was able to do little more than publish articles in the SWP's theoretical journal Fourth International. Despite this dislocation, the various groups sought to maintain links and some connections were kept up throughout the early part of the war by sailors belonging to the US Navy who had cause to visit Marseilles.Rodolphe Prager, [The Fourth International during the Second World War] Contact was also steady, if irregular, between the SWP and the British Trotskyists with the result that the Americans exerted what influence they had to encourage the Workers' International League into the International through a fusion with the Revolutionary Socialist League, a fusion that had been requested by the Emergency Conference.[Resolution On The Unification of the British Section]

In 1942, a debate on the national question in Europe opened up between the majority of the SWP and a current around Van Heijenoort, Albert Goldman and Felix Morrow.[The Fourth International During World War II (immediately afterwards)] This minority anticipated that the Nazi dictatorship would be replaced with capitalism rather than by a socialist revolution, leading to the revival of Stalinism and social democracy. In December 1943, they criticised the SWP's view as underestimating the rising prestige of Stalinism and the opportunities for the capitalists to use democratic concessions.Felix Morrow, [The First Phase of the Coming European Revolution] The SWP's central committee argued that democratic capitalism could not revive, resulting in either military dictatorship by the capitalists or a workers' revolution.[Perspectives and Tasks of the Coming European Revolution] It held that that this would reinforce the need for building the Fourth International, and adhered rigidly to their interpretation of Trotsky's works.

The European Conference

The International Conference

Pablo and Mandel aimed to counter the opposition of the majorities inside the RCP and PCI, initially by encouraging members to vote out their leaderships. They encouraged Gerry Healy's opposition in the RCP, and in France supported elements, including Pierre Frank and Marcel Bleibtreu (also known as Favre), opposed to the new leadership of the PCI for different reasons.Sam Bornstein and Al Richardson, War and the International

The Stalinist occupation of Eastern Europe was the issue of prime concern, and it raised many problems of interpretation. At first, the International held that, while the USSR was a degenerated workers' state, the post-WW2 East European states were still bourgeois entities, because revolution from above was not possible, and capitalism persisted.Alex Callinicos, [Trotskyism] This position was revised later as the economies of the East European states and their political regimes came to resemble that of the USSR more and more. These states were then described as deformed workers states in an analogy with the degenerated workers state in Russia. The term deformed was used rather than degenerated, because no workers' revolution had led to the foundation of these states.Pierre Frank, [Evolution of Eastern Europe]

This issue was not merely an argument over names. Those who argued that the new states amounted to a progressive development, in however limited a fashion, concluded that the Stalinist bureaucracy was not an entirely counter-revolutionary force. To Pablo and Mandel, this meant that they should now undertake long-term entrism of the various sections of the Fourth International into the Stalinist Communist Parties.Michel Pablo, [World Trotskism Rearms]

Another issue that needed to be dealt with was the possibility that the economy would revive. This was initially denied by Mandel (who was quickly forced to revise his opinion, and later devoted his PhD dissertation to late capitalism, analysing the unexpected "third age" of capitalist development). Some leaders of the RCP in Britain, however, anticipated an economic recovery. A polemical article was written in an internal party bulletin by Tony Cliff in 1947, entitled All That Glitters is not Gold. In that article, he argued out that an economic revival was already underway, and that the economic perspectives of Mandel were wrong.Tony Cliff, [All That Glitters is not Gold]

In the sectarian retrospectives, this was naturally total proof of Mandel's analytical ineptitude, once and for all.^{[[Citing sources citation needed]]} However, there was much uncertainty at that time about the future viability and prospects of capitalism, not just among all Trotskyist groups, but also among leading economists. Paul Samuelson had envisaged in 1943 the probability of a "nightmarish combination of the worst features of inflation and deflation", worrying that "there would be ushered in the greatest period of unemployment and industrial dislocation which any economy has ever faced"."Full Employment after the war", in S. Harris (ed.), Post war Economic Problems Joseph Schumpeter for his part claimed that "The general opinion seems to be that capitalist methods will be unequal to the task of reconstruction". He regarded it as "not open to doubt that the decay of capitalist society is very far advanced"."Capitalism in the post-war world", in S. Harris (ed.), Post war Economic Problems

The Second World Congress

The Congress was especially notable for bringing the International into much closer contact with Trotskyist groups from across the globe. These included such significant groups as the Revolutionary Workers' Party (POR) of Bolivia and the Lanka Sama Samaja Party in what was then Ceylon,[The Third World Congress of the Fourth International] but the previously large Vietnamese Trotskyist groups had mostly been eliminated or absorbed by the supporters of Ho Chi Minh.[The Fourth International in Vietnam]'', Revolutionary History

After the Second World Congress in 1948, the International Secretariat attempted to open communications with Tito's regime in Yugoslavia.International Secretariat of the Fourth International, [An Open Letter to Congress, Central Committee and Members of the Yugoslav Communist Party] It differed from the rest of the "Eastern Bloc" because it was established by the partisans of World War II who fought against Nazi occupation, as opposed to by Stalin's invading armies.

The leadership of the British RCP (led by Jock Haston and supported by Ted Grant) were highly critical of this move.

The Third World Congress

James P. Cannon in 1922, later leader of the U.S. section of the Fourth International

The Third World Congress in 1951 envisaged the real possibility of an "international civil war" in the near future http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/fi/1950-1953/fi-3rdcongress/1951-congress06.htm Theses on Orientation and Perspectives. It argued that the mass Communist parties "may, under certain favourable conditions, go beyond the aims set for them by the Soviet bureaucracy and project a revolutionary orientation". Given the closeness of war, the FI thought that the CPs and social democratic parties would be the only significant force that could defend the workers of the world against the imperialist camp in those copies where they were mass forces.[The International Situation and Tasks in the Struggle against Imperialist War] This was strikingly different to Trotsky's prognosis, who had foreseen an independent role for the Fourth International as mass organisation leading the working class.^{[[Citing sources citation needed]]}

In line with this geo-political perspective, Pablo argued that the only way the Trotskyists could avoid isolation was for the tiny forces of the FI (outnumbered by the official communists by 1,000 to 1 or more)^{[[Citing sources citation needed]]} should join the mass Stalinist or Social Democratic parties. This tactic was known as entrism sui generis, to distinguish it from the short-term entry tactic employed before World War Two. For example, it meant that the project of building an open and independent Trotskyist party was shelved in France, because it was regarded as not politically feasible alongside entry into the French Communist Party.

This perspective was accepted within the Fourth International, yet sowed the seeds for the split in 1953. At the Third World Congress, the sections agreed with the perspective of a international civil war. However, the French section disagreed with the associated tactic of entryism sui generis, and held that Pablo was underestimating the independent role of the working class parties in the Fourth International.

The leaders of the majority of the Trotskyist organisation in France, Marcel Bleibtreu (also known as Pierre Favre) and Pierre Lambert, refused to follow the line of the International. The International leadership had them replaced by a minority, leading to a permanent split in the French section.[Letters exchanged between Daniel Renard and James P. Cannon, February 16 and May 9, 1952]

In the wake of the World Congress, the line of the International Leadership was generally accepted by groups around the world, including the U.S. SWP whose leader, James P. Cannon, corresponded with the French majority to support the tactic of entrism sui generis. At the same time, however, Cannon, Gerry Healy and Ernest Mandel were deeply concerned by Pablo's political evolution. Cannon and Healy were also alarmed by Pablo's intervention into the French section, and by suggestions that Pablo might use the International's authority in this way in other sections of the Fourth International that felt entrism "sui generis" was not a suitable tactic in their own countries. In particular, minority tendencies in Britain (around John Lawrence) and the US (around Bert Cochran) that supported entrism "sui generis" hinted that Pablo's support for their views indicated that the International might also demand Trotskyists in those countries adopt that tactic.See International Committee Documents 1951-1954, Vol. 1, Section 4, (Education for Socialists)

Formation of the International Committee of the Fourth International

Sri Lanka's LSSP, then the country's leading workers' party, took a middle position during this dispute. It continued to participate in the ISFI but argued for a joint congress, for reunification with the ICFI.[David North addresses Sri Lankan Trotskyists on the 50th anniversary of the ICFI], World Socialist Web Site

An excerpt from the Open Letter explains the split as follows:

To sum up: The lines of cleavage between Pablo's revisionism and orthodox Trotskyism are so deep that no compromise is possible either politically or organizationally. The Pablo faction has demonstrated that it will not permit democratic decisions truly reflecting majority opinion to be reached. They demand complete submission to their criminal policy. They are determined to drive all orthodox Trotskyists out of the Fourth International or to muzzle and handcuff them.

Their scheme has been to inject their Stalinist conciliationism piecemeal and likewise in piecemeal fashion, get rid of those who come to see what is happening and raise objections.James P. Cannon, [A Letter to Trotskyists Throughout the World]

From the Fourth World Congress to reunification

Parts of the IC were divided over whether the split with Pabloism was permanent or temporary,[Letter from the International Secretariat "to all Members and All Organizations of the International Committee"] and it was perhaps as a result of this that it did not declare itself to be the Fourth International. Those sections that considered the split permanent embarked on a discussion about the history of the split and its meanings.

The sections of the International that recognised the leadership of the IS remained optimistic about the possibilities for increasing the International's political influence and extended the entrism into Social Democratic Parties which was already underway in Britain, Austria and elsewhere.

The 1954 congress emphasised entrism into Communist Parties as well as Nationalist parties in the colonies, pressing for democratic reforms, ostensibly to encourage the left-wing they perceived to exist in the Communist Parties to join with them in a revolution.Michel Pablo, [The Post-Stalin "New Course"] Michel Pablo, [The 4th International: What it is, What it aims at] However, tensions developed between the mainstream around Pablo and a minority that argued unsuccessfully against open work. A number of these delegates walked out of the World Congress, and would eventually leave the International, including the leader of the new British section, John Lawrence, George Clarke, Michele Mestre (a leader of the French section), and Murray Dowson (a leader of the Canadian group).John McIlroy, [The Revolutionary Odyssey of John Lawrence], What Next''

The IS organised a Fifth World Congress in October 1957. Mandel and Pierre Frank appraised the Algerian revolution and surmised that it was essential to reorient in the colonial states and neocolonies towards the emerging guerrilla-led revolutions.Pierre Frank, [The Fourth International: The Long March of the Trotskyists]''

The Sixth World Congress in 1961 marked a lessening of the divisions between the mainstream in the IS and the leadership of the SWP in the United States. In particular, the congress stressed support for the Cuban revolution and a growing emphasis on building parties in the imperialist countries. The supporters of Michel Pablo and Juan Posadas opposed the shift. The supporters of Posadas left the International in 1962.[Trotskyism and the Cuban Revolution: A Debate], What Next

In 1962 the IC and IS formed a Parity Commission to organise a common World Congress. At the 1963 congress, a split in the IC took place, with a significant part centred on the U.S. SWP agreeing to reunify with the IS. This was largely a result of their mutual support for the Cuban Revolution, based on Ernest Mandel and Joseph Hansen's resolution Dynamics of World Revolution Today. This document distinguished between different revolutionary tasks in the imperialist countries, the "workers' states", and the colonial and semi-colonial countries.Ernest Mandel and Joseph Hansen, Dynamics of World Revolution Today In 1963, the reunified Fourth International elected a United Secretariat of the Fourth International, by which name the organisation as a whole is often still referred.

Unity discussions after 1963

Those who largely shared this view inside the US SWP, led by Tim Wohlforth and James Robertson, had formed a "Revolutionary Tendency" in 1962. They argued that the party should have a full discussion of the meaning of Pabloism and the 1953 split. Along with the remainder of the IC, they argued that Cuba's revolution did not prove that the Fourth International was no longer necessary in the colonial countries. However, differences inside the RT developedCall for the reorganization of the minority tendency in the SWP, Trotskyism versus Revisionism, Vol. 4. In 1964, with Wohlforth laying the evidentiary basis for claims of "party disloyalty" against Robertson, the tendency was expelled from the party: in the opinion of Robertson's group, Wohlforth conspired with the SWP leadership to get Robertson's group expelled Harry Turner in Marxism verus Ultraleftism, pp 89.

The IC unsuccessfully repeated its appeal for a deep discussion with the reunified Fourth International at the end of 1963, and on later occasions.Gerry Healy, Letter of 27 September, Trotskyism versus Revisionism, Vol. 4. Its 1966 conference called for a Fourth International Conference. Resolution in Trotskyism versus Revisionism, Vol. 5 The IC approached the USFI again in 1970, requesting "a mutual discussion that might open the way to the Socialist Labour League and its French sister organisation, the Organisation Trotskyiste, reunifying with the Fourth International".[Gerry Healy - Rise and Fall], What Next Similar approaches were rejected in 1973.Jack Barnes letter in Trotskyism versus Revisionism, Vol. 5

After the Lambert's current left the IC in 1971, its Organising Committee for the Reconstruction of the Fourth International opened discussion with the USFI. In May 1973, the OCRFI unsuccessfully requested to take part in the discussions for the USFI's 1974 congress: the USFI did not take the letter at face value and asked for clarification. In September 1973 the OCRFI responded positively and the United Secretariat agreed a positive reply. However, in the rush of preparations for the world congress the United Secretariat's letter was not sent, leading the OCRFI to repeat its request in September 1974 through an approach to the US SWP. The following month the USFI organised a meeting with the OCRFI. However, discussions decellerated after the OCI made a factional attack on Ernest Mandel, which it later acknowledged as an error. In 1976 new approaches by the OCRFI met with success, when it wrote with the aim "to strengthen the force of the Fourth International as a single international organisation". However, these discussions decellerated again in 1977 after the OCI leaders stated that it had members inside the LCR, the USFI's French section.SWP US International Internal Discussion Bulletin, Vol XIV, No. 3, pp 32, 1977.

Other currents with roots in Gerry Healy's ICFI also came towards the reunifed FI at this time: the Workers Socialist League in Britain and the Socialist League in Australia both opened discussions in 1976Mary-Alice Waters in SWP US International Internal Discussion Bulletin, Vol XIV, No. 2, pp 31, 1977. Both currents would eventually merge with the sections of the International in their countries: While the Socialist League merged in 1977, the WSL was to attend the ninth world congress and only joined in 1987, when it was known as the Socialist Group.

Unification was also discussed between the USFI and Lutte Ouvriere. In 1970, LO initiated fusion discussions with the French section of the USFI. After extensive discussions, the two organisations had agreed the basis for a fused organisation. However, the fusion could be not completed. In 1976 discussions between the USFI and Lutte Ouvriere progressed again. The two organisations started to produce a common weekly supplement to their newspapers, common electoral work and other common campaigning.SWP US International Internal Discussion Bulletin, Vol XIV, No. 3, pp 34-5, 1977

Michel Pablo's tendency also raised the question of unity in 1976, with an ambitious proposal that it and the USFI could eventually unify in a new organisation comprising tendencies that were, or were evolving towards, revolutionary Marxism. The USFI felt unable to move ahead with the proposal.Mary-Alice Waters in SWP US International Internal Discussion Bulletin, Vol XIV, No. 2, pp 33, 1977.

The Fourth International today

• The reunified Fourth International presents itself as "the" Fourth International, and is the only current to have done so continuously. The 1963 congress reunified all but two of the national sections. It is the only current with direct organisational continuity to the original Fourth International at an international level. Leaders of some other Trotskyist Internationals occasionally refer to it as "the Fourth International": ICFI secretary Gerry Healy, when proposing reunification discussions in the 1970s, described it as "the Fourth International";Gerry Healy, Letter to the Fourth International in Marxism vs. ultraleftism : the record of Healy’s break with Trotskyism. Edited by Joseph Hansen the International Socialist Tendency also usually refers to it in this way but does not accept that the FI can claim political coninuity with the FI of Trotsky. [REGROUPMENT, REALIGNMENT, AND THE REVOLUTIONARY LEFT], Alex Callinicos

• The ICFI member groups customarily describe themselves as sections of the Fourth International, and the organisation as whole describes itself as the "leadership of the Fourth International".[About the International Committee of the Fourth International] However, the ICFI presents itself as the political continuity of the FI and Trotskyism, not as the FI itself. It clearly dates its creation as 1953, rather than from 1938.[Meetings on 50 years of the International Committee of the Fourth International], Peter Schwarz

• Some tendencies argue that the FI had dislocated politically by 1953, and consequently work to "reconstruct", "reorganise" or "rebuild" it. This view originated with Lutte Ouvriere and the international Spartacist tendency and is shared by others who diverged from the ICFI. For example, the Fourth International (ICR) reproclaimed the Fourth International at a congress attended by its sections in June 1993.[The Fourth International], Socialist Organizer

• Other Trotskyist groups argue that the Fourth International is dead. They call for the establishment of a "workers' international" or a Fifth International.[Forward to the Fifth International!], League for the Fifth International

See also

• List of left-wing internationals
• List of Trotskyist internationals

References

Alternative viewpoints

• Robert J. Alexander. International Trotskyism, 1929-1985: A Documented Analysis of the Movement. Duke Univerity Press, 1991.
• Alan Benjamin. [A Short History of the Fourth International in the U.S.] Retrieved 2004.
• League for a Revolutionary Communist International. [The Death Agony of the Fourth International]. 1983.
• Ernest Mandel. [The Reasons for Founding the Fourth International And Why They Remain Valid Today].
• Francois Moreau. Combats et débats de la Quatrième Internationale. Québec, Vents d’Ouest, 1993.
• David North. The Heritage We Defend. Detroit, Michigan, 1988.
• David North. [Leon Trotsky and the Fate of Socialism in the 20th century]. 1998.
• Quatrieme International. [The Third World Congress of the Fourth International].
• Jean van Heijenoort. [The Origins of the Fourth International]

From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.