Acceso usuarios
Andrey Schelchkov
[Artículo evaluado por pares] En los treinta, los grupos comunistas disidentes vinculados a León Trotsky se organizaron en la Oposición Internacional de Izquierda. Ello hizo necesario un órgano de coordinación: el Secretariado Internacional (SI) se encargó de formar el movimiento trotskista internacional y luego la IVª Internacional. Con escasos recursos financieros y un admirable esfuerzo, el SI buscó montar un movimiento de alcance mundial que competiera con la gigante y stalinista Komintern. El artículo analiza la agenda para Latinoamérica del SI. Su base documental es el Archivo Henk Sneevliet. Éste es resguardado en el archivo moscovita RGASPI y abarca de 1932 a 1936, años en que Sneevliet fue secretario del SI. La hipótesis del artículo es que el SI fracasó en la unificación del movimiento trotskista porque se empeñó en eliminar la heterogeneidad ideológica y política de los grupos desde una voluntad centralizadora heredada de la intolerancia del bolchevismo y la Komintern.
[Peer reviewed article] With the formation of the international movement of supporters of Leon Trotsky expelled from the USSR and the growth of dissidents in the communist parties that sought communication and coordination outside national borders and an ideological message justifying their own dissent, the need arises to a coordinating and leading body of the recently created International Left Opposition (OII). So was created the International Secretariat (SI) that assumed the task of forming the international Trotskyist movement and then the Fourth International. It was an admirable effort by a very small group of people with few resources to mount a movement of world dimensions in competition with the giant rival that was the Stalinist Comintern of Moscow. This text aims to describe the agenda of the International Secretariat in relation to Latin America, its Trotskyist groups and parties. The source base serves the collection of the Archive Henk Sneevliet, one of the secretaries of the SI, kept in the Moscow archive RGASPI which covers only 1932-1936, while Sneevliet remains in the SI. The author starts from the hypothesis that the relative failure of the international Trotskyist movement lies in its initial ideological and political heterogeneity combined with the commitment to centralization and ideological unification, loaded with political intolerance, inherited from Russian Bolshevism and the Comintern. The SI was unable to promote the unification of diverse and heterogeneous Trotskyist groups into a single solid movement, condemning it to marginal political existence.
