YS/LJS Anti-War Resolution (1969)
Draft Anti-War Resolution submitted by the Central
Executive Council of the Young Socialists / Ligue des Jeunes Socialistes
to the 1969 Convention of the YS/LJS. Published in YS/LJS Discussion
Bulletin, Vol. 5 No. 2
The war in Vietnam stands today as the central focus of
the world confrontation between socialism and imperialism. The Vietnamese
people have shown that the mighty imperialist military machine can be
stopped in its tracks and thrown back by the struggle of a determined
people. This fact has underlined the revolutionary character of this
decade and has been the central factor behind the wave of youth
radicalization sweeping the world. Defense of the Vietnamese revolution
stands as the paramount duty of every revolutionary today. Since the
Vietnamese are struggling and defeating our common enemy, imperialism,
proletarian internationalism demands that we do everything we can to aid
them. It is this fundamental understanding that motivates our consistent
defense of the Vietnamese revolution.
The war in Vietnam has not lessened in intensity and
ferocity. The much heralded "withdrawal" of troops by the Nixon
administration is nothing but a fraud intended to cut across popular
opposition to the war. The imperialists cannot withdraw substantial
numbers of troops without losing the war—and Nixon has not given up his
long term objective of rolling back the Vietnamese revolution and carrying
counter-revolution into China. At the same time, however, each of Nixon’s
maneuvers whets the appetite of the American people and the troops for
more withdrawals. The feeling of distrust of Americans towards the
government has increased, as has the determination of the Vietnamese to
carry the struggle forward to victory,
The Vietnam war has given rise to an international
movement against the war on every continent. This development has been
particularly profound in the heartland of imperialism, the United States,
where the first mass movement against a war in progress has grown up. This
movement is now being joined by growing numbers of GI’s who are organizing
against the war and demanding their civil rights in doing so. The
international anti-war movement has been second only to the heroic efforts
of the Vietnamese in thwarting the designs of imperialism. This
international movement has also reflected the world wide radicalization
around the question of Vietnam and has had the effect of deepening and
broadening this radicalization, particularly among the youth.
Arms continue to flow from Canadian manufacturers to the
American military. Canadian diplomats act as spies and apologists for the
Pentagon on the International Control Commission. Canadian scientists are
helping to develop chemical and biological weapons for the arsenals of
world imperialism. Canadian troops are now being trained in anti-riot and
counter-insurgency techniques—with the intent to use them to crush
revolutions throughout the world. The Canadian military is being groomed
to play and important role internationally—that of "peace-keeper" or
undercover agent, running interference for American imperialism when the
going gets rough.
Slogans
The basic slogan of the anti-war movement internationally
is ‘Withdraw U.S. Troops Now". This slogan is based on the fundamental
right of nations to self-determination. The withdrawal of U.S. and allied
troops from Vietnam is essential to guarantee the Vietnamese this right.
The revolutionary socialists have gone through a long struggle to
establish this slogan as the main slogan of the anti-war movement.
Conservative forces in the anti-war movement have attempted to steer the
movement behind demands such as "negotiations" " stop the bombing"
"recognition of the NLF" etc. These slogans have been counterposed to the
withdrawal demand as the basis for building the anti-war movement. Such
slogans, however, by omitting the essential anti-imperialist thrust of the
withdrawal position, have not and can not be the basis for effective
action. They do not call for, explicitly or otherwise, the
self-determination of the Vietnamese, and leave the anti-war movement open
to disorientation by minor concessions from the ruling class. The
bankruptcy of the negotiations slogan has become quite evident, especially
to the GI’s who are fighting and dying in Vietnam while the negotiations
in Paris drag on.
The ultra-lefts have attacked the withdrawal slogan as a
"liberal" demand which does not openly denounce imperialism. They tell us
that what is needed is an openly anti-imperialist movement with slogans
like "Smash Imperialism" or "Victory to the NLF." They make a serious
error in not understanding that "Withdraw U.S. Troops Now" would mean a
smashing defeat for U.S. imperialism—a victory for the NLF. "Smash
Imperialism" and "Victory to the NLF," while commendable sentiments, do
not offer a programmatic basis for building a mass movement, in concrete
opposition to the war. Such slogans are not directed at making demands of
the American and Canadian governments, and counterposing a solution to the
war policy, as the withdrawal slogan does. The great strength of our
slogan is that at a time when the majority of people, including students,
are not consciously anti-imperialist, it can mobilize masses of people
against an imperialist war, and in the process many will become conscious
of the nature of imperialism.
A specific test of the correctness of our slogan occurred
in Toronto on October 26, 1968 and in Vancouver on April 5, 1969 when the
ultra-lefts, organized in opposition to the anti-war movement with their
own slogans, were able to mobilize only 1/6 to 1/10 of those on the
Withdrawal demonstrations. It is interesting to note that the Canadians
for the NLF, which was dominated by a Maoist sect, no longer exists since
they came to the conclusion that the NLF has "sold out" and become
"revisionist."
Another key demand on which the anti-war movement has been
built has been "End Canadian Complicity." This demand directly indicts the
Canadian government for its aid in the imperialist assault on Vietnam. It
mobilizes opposition to this aid and educates people about the nature of
the Canadian government. We must tear the mask away from the so-called
"peace-keeping" being contemplated by the Trudeau government and expose
its imperialist character. "No Canadian troops for foreign wars of
aggression!" We must continue to make opposition to Canada’s complicity in
the war the focal point for opposition to the entire foreign policy of the
Trudeau government, including its participation in the imperialist war
alliances, NATO and NORAD. Opposition to Canadian complicity, organized by
the anti-war movement, has played a role in preventing more overt support
for American imperialism by the government and has already played a role
in raising the level of consciousness about the character of the Canadian
imperialist government.
Single Issue
The anti-war movement has been built around the single
issue of Vietnam through Committees to End the War in Vietnam and united
front committees. This single-issue approach has proven itself, but we
have had to fight hard to establish the principle. Other tendencies in the
anti-war movement (New Left, C.P., Maoists, Liberal pacifists) have tried
at various times to turn the movement into a multi-issue appendage of
their own movement. We know that the imposition of a multi-issue political
program would tend to limit the size and effectiveness of the movement.
Exclusionism
We have consistently attempted to bring all the forces
opposed to the war together on a united front basis around the principled
demands of withdrawal and ending complicity. Mobilization or coordinating
committees which unite or attempt to unite all forces against the war are
now the basic vehicle for anti-war organizing across the country. At this
time, the Vietnam Mobilization Committee in Toronto, founded March 2,
1968, is the leading anti-war committee in Canada. It is a coalition of
revolutionary socialists, NDPers, independent activists, and on a somewhat
less stable basis, CPers and pacifists. It was the first committee to
establish a full time office and staffer.
There have been many attempts to exclude other tendencies
from the anti-war movement, most often the Trotskyists. We have always
opposed this strongly. We have defended and won the right of all
tendencies to take part in the movement, to distribute their literature
freely, and to be able to carry their own slogans on demonstrations.
The withdrawal tendency was excluded from coordinating
committees in Toronto and Vancouver in the summer of 1966, on the grounds
that it supported a single issue movement and wanted to link it up with
the American and world wide anti-war movement. It was not until after the
successful Student Day of Protest on November 11, 1966, organized by the
withdrawal tendency, that the coalition came back together again. Another
split occurred in Toronto after October 21, 1967, when the CPers and
pacifists of the Toronto Coordinating Committee pulled out because a
spokesman for the withdrawal student wing of the movement insisted on his
right to speak at the demonstration.
Mass Action
Revolutionary socialists have consistently carried the
position that it is necessary to go out into the streets and organize mass
demonstrations. This position ran counter to the orientation of the right
wing to make reformist appeals to the government, and the tendency of the
ultralefts towards individual heroic confrontations with the police. We
have pointed out that the only effective action is mass action, that can
force a change in government policy and raise the level of consciousness
of Canadian workers.
Growth and Prospects
The growth of the anti-war movement has largely been a
result of the conscious intervention of the revolutionary socialists in
influencing its direction. The movement has taken great steps forward both
in terms of its politics and its numbers since it was initiated in the
latter half of 1965. The movement is now based firmly on the demand for
immediate withdrawal and ending Canada’s complicity. There is wide
rejection of any peace-keeping role for the Canadian government. The
movement is now able to mobilize thousands in the major cities (10,000 in
Toronto on April 6, 1969). It has played an important role in the
international antiwar movement by making the Canadian government's aid to
imperialist aggression very difficult.
On the other hand, while the majority of Canadians
undoubtedly oppose the war, only a small minority have been mobilized. The
bulk of the demonstrations have been student youth with little
representation from the unions. While there has been formal endorsation by
the NDP and some important unions, this has resulted in little rank and
file participation. Formal endorsation is of course very important, but we
must continue to challenge the NDP and the unions to give some muscle into
the anti-war movement by mobilizing their rank and file.
To date the government has had some success in hiding its
real intentions in that Canada is somewhat removed from the war. However,
with the increasing crisis of world imperialism, we can expect that:
-
the imperialist nature of the Canadian government will
become more evident as it is forced to commit troops in Vietnam or
elsewhere, and
-
that social struggles in general will increase, making
workers more responsive to the anti-war movement.
The prospects are for a growing anti-war movement,
broadening its support among students and workers. The November 15
International Day of Protest will be an important landmark in this
process.
Role of the
Tendencies
The war has been a crucial test, for the left tendencies.
Only the revolutionary socialists have consistently defended the
Vietnamese revolution, and consequently have been able to recruit from the
thousands of youth radicalized on that issue. The Communist Party has
broken away from the anti-war movement a number of times over the
withdrawal demand, and has consistently tried to introduce exclusionism
into the movement. The reformists have shown no desire to mobilize the
forces of the NDP and the labour movement, and have even offered
justification for Canada’s complicity by accenting the idea that the
government can "peace-keep." The ultra-lefts—both the spontaneist and
Maoist varieties—have refused to participate in the anti-war movement on
the grounds that Vietnam is not an issue, or that the movement is not
anti-imperialist, or that the NLF has sold out.
We can safely say that without the work of the Trotskyists
there would be no anti-war movement as it exists today. Of course we
cannot rest on our laurels—we have to continue to build the movement until
every soldier is brought home.
Quebec
Vietnam has been a key radicalizing factor in Quebec and a
great inspiration to the Quebec struggle, but it has not found the same
response as in English Canada in terms of mass demonstrations or a
widespread development of conscious internationalism. A more immediate
question has been the national oppression which the Quebecois feel every
day of their lives.
This has found its reflection also in the role or various
left tendencies which have sprung to life around the national question.
They feel little obligation to work consistently on the Vietnam question.
When the Union Generale des Etudiants du Quebec (UGEQ) called
demonstrations on November 18, 1967, more than 5000 students responded,
but this has been the exception to the general lack of participation in
the anti-war movement.
This makes the role of revolutionary socialists even more
important. We are the only ones who understand the importance of the
Vietnamese revolution, and the contribution an anti-war movement can make
to the development of political consciousness. Past actions have shown the
possibilities of an anti-war movement in Quebec. In the future we shall
continue to mobilize the largest possible participation in anti-war
activities. Consistent work around the Vietnam issue is bound to bear
fruit as the deepening of national consciousness leads to solidarity with
other national struggles.
The Students
The student anti-war movement has played the key role in
building the movement across Canada. Students have been represented on
demonstrations far out of proportion to their numbers. Particularly
impressive have been the high school contingents. Students have done the
bulk of the work for the mass mobilizations. Single-issue,
non-exclusionist membership committees have been vital in building the
student anti-war movement. Initially these committees functioned on a
day-to-day basis with regular educational and business meetings. With the
widespread dissemination of information on Vietnam and the rise of other
campus struggles, they have lost this character. They have become instead
mobilization committees, bringing together anti-war forces around the
major demonstrations.
The Student Association to End the War In Vietnam (SAEWV)
played a key role in coordinating anti-war activities of students from its
foundation in March 1967. It was able to gather together the only
cross-Canada assemblies of anti-war activists during its period of
existence. Early in 1968 its role of coordinating the cross-country
movement was taken over by the Vietnam Mobilization Committee, and it
passed from the political scene.
It is far more effective to mobilize students as
students both in terms of their response and in terms of making
long-term contacts for the anti-war movement. It is thus important to
maintain and strengthen the student committees as the bulwark of the
withdrawal tendency of the anti-war movement.
Opposition to campus complicity has great potential both
in terms of bringing the war issue home to students, but also in raising
the broader question of the role of the university in capitalist society.
We demand an end to war company recruitment, an end to all military
financed research including that of the Canadian government, an end to
campus recruitment by the Canadian army, and the removal of directors of
war companies from the campus. All these demands are part of a strategy to
free the university from the hold of the capitalist class so that it can
serve the workers.
In carrying such a campaign, we have to be very careful to
pose the issues so that students can understand them. What is in question
is the right to use campus facilities for recruitment—something that
should be under the control of the students. No one is being denied the
right of free speech or the right to get a job. We must call on the
administration to stop the recruiters—they are complicit in the war, not
the students. In certain conditions we should call for a referendum on the
question. Above all, we must be sensitive to the engineers. They are being
affected by the general student radicalization. We never pose that an
individual working for a war company is a criminal or that individual acts
such as refusing to work for such companies are effective. We pose to
engineers that they join us in opposition to the war and campus complicity
in it.
Solidarity actions by Canadian students with the November
14 American Student Strike against the war will demonstrate the depth of
anti-war feeling on the campuses, as will student participation in the
mass demonstrations on Nov. 15.
Conclusion
The slogans and perspective advanced since the beginning
by revolutionary socialists, have been carried out in the Canadian
anti-war movement. The task before us is the broadening of the movement.
The radicalization of students means that there is a wider audience than
ever before. We must rise to this challenge. While more people support the
right of the Vietnamese to self-determination, we should attempt to
develop this basic understanding info an anti-capitalist consciousness. We
must try to win anti-war activists to the fight against all wars—to the
fight against capitalism and for socialism.
The anti-war movement has been a tremendous example of
mass action. It has shown many people the effectiveness of mass struggle
and the possibility of making a real impact on the course of history. It
has also been a great training ground for revolutionary leaders who will
play a key role in the future mass struggles. But, above all, the anti-war
movement throughout the world has been tremendous and effective defense of
the Vietnamese revolution.
[ Top ] [ Documents Index ]
