Third World Congress of the Fourth International, Paris, late August–early September 1951 Submitted by: the delegation of the POR (Partido Obrero Revolucionario, Argentina)
---
Chapter I. General considerations.
Third paragraph: "through the first imperialist war (...) in Uruguay, in Chile."
1. Delete Mexico: given that 50% of the peasant population has only a small involvement in the market, as sellers and buyers.
2. Amend the wording to show how, before the imperialist war of 1914-1918, capitalist relations were already predominant in Argentina (most of the largest meat-packing plants had already been built, as had the Argentine espadrille factory, the large electricity companies, the breweries, many metallurgical and grain-processing plants, and the main railway lines already existed; the life of capitalism revolved entirely around the banks and financial enterprises). Starting from "capitalist relations of production (...)," change as follows: "they accelerated the predominant role of capitalist relations of production in all these countries (...)."
Fourth paragraph: "At the same time (...) to characterize them as capitalist countries." Delete and change as follows: "During this process of capitalist development, of transformation in favour of indigenous capitalism, and of industrialization, the following phenomena could be observed:
a) a mass inflow of Yankee capital, invested preferentially in Latin American industry;
b) the emergence of indigenous capital, which slightly altered the capital invested in industry in favour of national capital (approximately 70 to 80% of the capital currently invested in Argentine industry is imperialist);
c) economic and technical ties, growing daily more important, between the stronger national capitals and the imperialist sectors;
d) the terrible economic crisis of European imperialism and of imperialism in general, enormously accelerated by the last imperialist war, together with the weakness of the indigenous bourgeoisie, forced the European imperialisms and imperialism in general to transfer to the Latin American countries the railways and other large enterprises which brought them no profits, only losses, in order to lighten the weight of the crisis. This has appreciably altered the existing ratio of what is invested in the Latin American countries in favour of national capitalism.
Chapter I.b. The historical causes of this structure.
First paragraph: "This combined and varied structure (...) to that of Portugal." Delete: "(...) feudal and clerical Spain (...)" and replace with "A Spain and a Portugal insufficiently developed from the capitalist point of view; and it is thus that these countries, their kings and their bourgeoisies, would play the role of intermediaries — first between Mediterranean capitalism, and then between English and French capitalism." This amendment is essential, because both Spain and Portugal, at the time of the conquest of America, acted under the influence of the capitalist development of Western Europe, and after having liquidated the influence of the feudal lords of their own countries. But the contradiction lay in the fact that Spain and Portugal had not attained the development of national capitalism, nor a great development of production; their most important capitalist sectors were the wool exporters of northern Spain, and the merchants and financial houses of Barcelona, Valencia, southern Spain, and Lisbon (Portugal), who were intimately linked to Genoa and to the Fuggers.
Paragraph 2: "The Spanish conquest fragmented (...) and above all imperialism."
a) Add to the landed oligarchs the merchants, who were in reality the class that had initiated liberation and the ties with British imperialism, before being subsequently replaced by, or obliged to share with, the landed oligarchy this relationship and this domination.
b) Amend the whole paragraph to specify: "The Spanish and Portuguese colonizations resemble one another; they do not have a feudal character but a formally capitalist one — that is to say, they carried out conquests and colonizations not in order to implant feudalism but in order to link these regions to the world market and make them work towards this end, and this with the best technicians of the period; but they were unable to establish capitalist relations of production, given the prior conditions. From the very beginning of colonization, the conditions for a very advanced combined development existed, together with labour for the world market undertaken for the sole purpose of obtaining profit. But these conditions were based on slave or semi-slave labour relations and did not create an internal market. The essential difference between the Portuguese and the Spanish colonization lies in the fact that the former, having neither indigenous labour nor mining operations, had to resort to Black labour and agricultural work. For Spain, the opposite was true. The backwardness of Latin America, its division — even in the case of Brazil, given that this country was only formally a colony and afterward a unified country — is due to the close relationship with, and dependence on, the world market, and not to the feudal character of the colonization. This is why the Portuguese and Spanish regions of America revolve around ports linked to Europe and around the kinds of production needed for that market. The role of the great exporters and of producers for export is characteristic of the Latin American countries from the beginning of colonization and continues throughout the whole of Latin American history. This does not eliminate feudal characteristics, but they are dependent on the region's ties to world capitalism. For these reasons — which are in general the same as in the southern United States — neither a great internal market nor a great Latin American industrial bourgeoisie arose, which allowed the rebellions against dependence on Spain and Portugal that characterized the nineteenth century to be recuperated by the landed oligarchs and the Creole merchants, and above all by imperialism."
Chapter I, section d.: "The class struggle and the motive forces of the revolution in Latin America."
Paragraph 2: "Within the ruling class (...) commercial and industrial." Add: "(...) an important layer of landowners (...) and of great capitalist producers linked to the land and to the country's basic enterprises."
Paragraph 3: "Between these layers (...) in the more industrialized countries." Add at the end: "as a consequence of the development of the internal market."
Paragraphs 4 and 5: "Furthermore (...), a resistance to it." Amend as follows: "The relations of the various layers of the national bourgeoisie with imperialism, and with each of the imperialist sectors, change according to the attitude adopted by imperialism, or by an imperialist sector, towards them, and with mass mobilization. There is thus no permanent attitude on the part of any one sector — for example, the industrial bourgeoisie — that would struggle constantly against imperialism; there is a relative attitude, which depends on the relationship existing at a given moment.
"National bourgeois production (for the internal and world markets) and the internal market depend in Latin America substantially and firmly on exports and on production oriented towards this end. This is the difference between the Latin American countries and other colonial or semi-colonial countries in Asia, such as China or India. Furthermore, industrial production specially devoted to the internal market — textiles, metallurgical products, etc. — depends on machinery, spare parts, and imperialist raw materials, that is to say, on imperialist capital.
"The development of the internal market constitutes a necessary condition not only for the industrial bourgeoisie but also for the capitalists linked to land production, who replace, or tend to replace, the imperialist markets, with their restrictions and their crises, in the sale of their products.
"The old European imperialisms were, and still are, good buyers of Latin American products and poor sellers: competitive manufactured products of national production, machinery, and heavy-industry products are far more expensive. Yankee imperialism is a poor customer, but it sells better: it does not compete as directly with the light industry of the Latin American countries, and its heavy-industry products are more cheaply priced; moreover, it is the only imperialism that has capital to offer to the national bourgeoisies.
"The Latin American countries with a significant industrial development, and with agricultural, livestock, and mining production destined for the world market, are directly linked to imperialism; their purchases damage national industry and the internal market, as do their demands for capital. Furthermore, it is precisely the bourgeoisies of these countries, with fairly significant industrial development, that have the best opportunities to speculate with imperialism.
"The bourgeoisie controls the national production of these countries (agricultural, livestock, industrial), above all its strongest sector, agriculture, and has frictions with imperialism, notably Yankee imperialism, but these frictions take on a genuine character of struggle against imperialism only when the bourgeoisie's own existence is in danger."
Chapter III. "General and specific tasks of the revolutionary Marxist proletarian movement in Latin America."
General tasks. Paragraphs 4, 5, and 6: "As for socialism (...) a position further to the left." Replace with: "The living conditions of the masses under the present regime will push them to polarize around the parties that appear to them to be furthest to the left. This is why, in Latin America, in the present period of polarization and of growing workers' and popular struggles, Stalinism will gain reinforcement, for it appears as a party which, in its programmes, opposes pacts with imperialism, and appears more to the left."
Paragraphs 4 and 5 continue: "Only the prolonged absence of genuine revolutionary Marxist proletarian parties can favour the development of Stalinism or of other petty-bourgeois parties in these countries."
Specific tasks. Sub-chapter Argentina, paragraph 2, add: "democratization of the trade unions" and "independence from the state."
Sub-chapter Chile, paragraph 2, add in the first sentence: "We shall study, given the weakness of our penetration into the workers' movement, the advantages of carrying out preliminary work in circles that are distant from, or have weak ties to, Stalinism, with the aim of using these very sectors in the general work indicated by the resolution."