”The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.” Marx

Concerning the workers’ protests in Iran, which in the course of its evolution in the autumn of 2018, at some point out of defence and taking on an offensive form, the Internationalist Voice published a leaflet on 30 December 2018, entitled “Lessons from strikes, labour struggles and internationalist tasks”, which was a balance sheet of these struggles.

In response to another text from the Internationalist Voice, entitled “Street protests amid the barbarity of capitalism: the only alternative is class struggle”, which was a criticism of the position of the ICC concerning popular street protests in Iran, Iraq and Jordan, the ICC has published a text, entitled “Internationalist Voice and protests in the Middle East”. The Internationalist Voice responded to the ICC in a pamphlet entitled “Polemic with the International Communist Current: working class or the masses?”.

Following the publication of this pamphlet, the ICC published a text dated 1 June 2019, entitled “Response to Internationalist Voice on strikes in Iran” [1], although the text was dated 4 April. It is important to note that, in our summary of workers’ struggles and in our pamphlet, which was published in the form of a balance sheet, there is not the slightest mention of the ICC and its responses to the Internationalist Voice. The text of the ICC is not a criticism of the pamphlet of the Internationalist Voice (“Lessons from strikes, labour struggles and internationalist tasks”), but is it basically a criticism or a response to a text or a pamphlet on labour protests? Indeed, what does the text (response) of the ICC express?

After our criticism that the ICC ignored not only the news and dissections of the class struggle but also the class struggle itself, it hastily published a text saying that such a boycott was not underway. But the text of the ICC itself clearly states the legitimacy of the positions of the Internationalist Voice.

In this text, we will, first of all, consider whether or not the ICC assumes an avant-garde role for itself in the class struggle, secondly, in practice, ask whether it reduces its role to the level of a revolutionary publisher and, thirdly, question why it was not even able to play the role of a revolutionary publisher.

This text is only for internal consumption; it is written for members and supporters of the ICC, which wants to tell its members and supporters that it has responded to the Internationalist Voice.

Every current or political tendency is trying to spread its positions and ideas at a wider level, and this is quite logical. But the question that is posed here is, why does the ICC not publish its critique of Internationalist Voice in Farsi on its website? The ICC has its critiques in Farsi, non-publication in Farsi in this case is deliberate. The ICC consciously wants, for as long as possible, only a few to be aware of its text, because the content of it clearly reveals to those who are familiar with developments in the region the confused position of the ICC.

Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Again, the Culture Of Debate
• Ideological Commitment
• Reducing Its Role to the Level of Revolutionary Publishing
• The Excuses of Revolutionary Publishing
• Reversing the Positions of the Internationalist Voice
• Workers’ Self-management Means the Continuation of Wage Slavery
• Workers’ Councils
• Independent Workers’ Struggle
• Notes:
• Basic Positions:

Download az PDF