Yes of course, that is a standard Trotskyist position. And with the muddle as we try to pick up the pieces of marxism, it would be quite sectarian to refuse to discuss with serious people from a Trotskyist background, and you are not sectarian, Doug.
What is your recipe for blocking capital flight from South Africa while the socialist struggle takes place?
But the credibility of the SACP is less contentious in the past than the present. Most readers will know it was part of the tripartite coalition with the ANC and COSATU. Most people know that militant organisations in South Africa appealed repeatedly for international action including sanctions. And most people know of the major financial sanctions especially banking sanctions in which campaigners in the US plaid a major part.
All of this was predicated on an assumption that millions of people internationally would support the movement, as they did.
Now the SACP issues a call for an international campaign, and addresses individuals as well as progressive governments, bodies and associations. Yoshie and Carrol have argued for political solipsism: that it is an ideologically fatal trap in correspondence on a list like this even to start thinking one might (even indirectly) affect reality.
Perhaps they are fast losing that one, since a surprising coalition seems to have broken out in favour of economic sanctions on Indonesia. Maybe I can help them by point out that the net effect of these, if successful, will be to weaken the Indonesian national bourgeoisie and strengthen the Indonesian comprador bourgeoisie, and accelerate the triumph of neo-liberalism.
The trouble is that everything is connected to everything else. There is no such thing as a policy of non-intervention. Doing nothing and supporting doing nothing, in the present situation in East Timor and Indonesia clearly has a political significance. All positions are tainted in some way or another.
Chris Burford
London