November 2025
Filippo Turati, where is the critique?
Submitted by Noa on Sat, 2019-05-11 20:50
I have assembled literature of and about Turati (the founder of the Italian Socialist Party) here, for your interest: revleft.space
Although Italian leftcoms are aware that Turati at least still felt compelled to theoretically justify parliamentarism, they make no effort to engage his texts (despite Lenin in LWC writing that Turati caused Bordiga's anti-parliament position to have some ground). I checked some Italian leftcom sites in the hope to find some engagement– but found next to nothing. The title of one article says that Turati after WW1 is more socialist than the West European CPs after WW2: 'Il Turati 1921 avrebbe espulso per arcirevisionismo il Togliatti 1956' ('The Turati of 1921 would have dismissed the arch-revisionism of Togliatti 1956'). Also a note saying that Turati's marxism is more orthodox than Gramsci's.
We rely (more or less by necessity – mostly) on Lenin's and Trotsky's criticisms of Kautsky on Soviet Russia and the dictatorship of the proletariat, but where is the specific 'Bordigist' criticism of Turati's parliamentarism? I think this is a shocking gap in our knowledge, that ICT or other Italian leftcoms need to fill. The best way to fortify one's own position is in polemic with opponents. Turati was an opponent of a high calibre, therefore a critique of his views on parliamentarism would be very valuable. It is necessary to know the enemy.
Forum:
Start here...
- Navigating the Basics
- Platform
- For Communism
- Introduction to Our History
- CWO Social Media
- IWG Social Media
- Klasbatalo Social Media
- Italian Communist Left
- Russian Communist Left
The Internationalist Communist Tendency consists of (unsurprisingly!) not-for-profit organisations. We have no so-called “professional revolutionaries”, nor paid officials. Our sole funding comes from the subscriptions and donations of members and supporters. Anyone wishing to donate can now do so safely using the Paypal buttons below.
ICT publications are not copyrighted and we only ask that those who reproduce them acknowledge the original source (author and website leftcom.org). Purchasing any of the publications listed (see catalogue) can be done in two ways:
- By emailing us at uk@leftcom.org, us@leftcom.org or ca@leftcom.org and asking for our banking details
- By donating the cost of the publications required via Paypal using the “Donate” buttons
- By cheque made out to "Prometheus Publications" and sending it to the following address: CWO, BM CWO, London, WC1N 3XX
The CWO also offers subscriptions to Revolutionary Perspectives (3 issues) and Aurora (at least 4 issues):
- UK £15 (€18)
- Europe £20 (€24)
- World £25 (€30, $30)
Take out a supporter’s sub by adding £10 (€12) to each sum. This will give you priority mailings of Aurora and other free pamphlets as they are produced.
ICT sections
Adverts
Swansea Bookfair
SWANSEA RADICAL COMMUNITY FESTIVAL
There will be an NWBCW stall at the Swansea Radical Community Festival.
When: Saturday, 22 November 2025
Where: Elysium, 210 High St, Swansea SA1 1PE
IWG Meetings
IWG MEETINGS
The IWG will be holding regular in-person meetings where sympathizers are encouraged to come and get in contact.
New York: Last Saturday of every month. Please contact to get in touch.
Philadelphia: Last Saturday of every month. Please contact to get in touch.
Columbus: Last Sunday of every month. Please contact to get in touch.
Los Angeles: Please contact to get in touch.
Means of contact:
Email: us@leftcom.org
Instagram: @iwg.official
Facebook: @iwgusa
Twitter: @IWGOfficial
Recent publications
Aurora is the broadsheet of the ICT for the interventions amongst the working class. It is published and distributed in several countries and languages. So far it has been distributed in UK, France, Italy, Canada, USA, Colombia.
Mutiny Fall 2025
Mutiny is the bulletin of Klasbatalo. Mutinerie est le bulletin de Klasbatalo.
Out now!
Journal of the Communist Workers’ Organisation -- Why not subscribe to get the articles whilst they are still current and help the struggle for a society free from exploitation, war and misery? Joint subscriptions to Revolutionary Perspectives (3 issues) and Aurora (our agitational bulletin - 4 issues) are £15 in the UK, €24 in Europe and $30 in the rest of the World.
November 2024
- Editorial
- Indigenous Radicalism Pursues Reconciliation with Capital
- Sahel : Locus of Imperialism in Africa?
- Return of Inflation: A Review
- Populism, Trumpism, and Democracy - How About Communism?
- Capitalism's Environmental Destruction & Imperialism
1919 is the journal of the two North American affiliates of the ICT, Klasbatalo and Internationalist Workers' Group.
Written by Jock Dominie. £12, 276pp.
The Russian Revolution remains a landmark event in history. For the bourgeois historians, the October Revolution is thought to be a tragedy that set back the achievements of the “democratic” February Revolution, and allowed the Bolsheviks to wreak havoc on their citizens and the world. For the Stalinists, the events of 1917 paved the way for the birth of the USSR, which they point to as a prototypical example of “socialism in one country”. In reality, the February and October Revolutions were both part of the same proletarian revolution.
The book can be ordered by emailing us at uk@leftcom.org and asking for our banking details, or by donating the cost of the publications required via Paypal using the “Donate” button. Postage charges should be added. If in the UK, and paying direct to our bank account, first class postage is free. If via Paypal add £2. For Europe cost of a copy with postage is €20 (EUR), for Australia it is $42 (AUD) and for the USA and anywhere else in the world it is $27 (USD).
User login
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
There is a logical flaw to
There is a logical flaw to your argument, Who apart from incorrigible intellectuals and trainspotters has today heard of Turati? Why therefore engage with it? Let the social democrats argue for him and we might have to argue against him.
Like I quote Bordiga in my
Like I quote Bordiga in my linked thread, Turati is considered among the calibre of a Jaures and a Bebel (or I would add, a Keir Hardie, an Emile Vandervelde, or a Morris Hillquit). So as is typical, there's a research foundation named after him: fondazionestudistoriciturati.it
The social democrats don't need to "argue for him", or for any of these figures, which are historical founders: probably every school child in a boring history lesson at school has once run across them.
They don't need to argue for Turati and justify parliamentarism, because they face no leftcom challenge, unlike Turati at the time of the rise of the early communists (with Bordiga).
They also don't study their own history, because they're opportunists who have no interest in "intellectual" stuff like historical memory. If there's a few social-democratic intellectuals who praise Turati, or even if there was a whole academic industry promoting Turati (which would perhaps be an improvement over Gramsci), then you could still argue that it would not be a political priority to oppose them; after all, their journals are behind paywalls, their conferences demand large fees, and their books are too expensive to buy for an ordinary worker.
Bordiga and the early communists didn't need to remind their audience who Turati was. Turati was who they opposed and defined themselves against. Just like Lenin didn't need to remind workers in Germany (or even world-wide) who Kautsky was. The ICT acknowledged the importance of debate topics such as parliamentarism, for example when it debated with the SPGB (even though SPGB is a tiny organisation). I would say the ICT, as defender of Italian leftcom tradition, has a special responsibility here.
Have the CWO already seen
Have the CWO already seen this recent piece by Martin Thomas on the AWL's site: workersliberty.org
As its title suggests, it's just a historical survey of 'left communism', not really a polemic, so there is perhaps no need for a response by the CWO. I can't find much arguments in it, besides the usual, ie that left communist groups are tiny sects who live in a "bunker" awaiting the glorious day.
However, I think this example of 'engagement' proves my point, namely that we can't expect political activists that are part of, or work in, the Labour Party (or social democratic parties) to defend their stance (on electoral participation) in a serious theoretical way. They don't feel the need for it. They can even comfortably discuss the history of left communism (Bordiga etc.) in a detached manner. Therefore, like I said, I think it is necessary to take the offensive, not against some particular person today (such as Martin Thomas), however smart they may be, but against the highest proponents of parliamentarism, historically, such as Turati. And that's where the CWO (or its Italian partner) have a particular responsibility.
In the text which ICT
In the text which ICT published two days ago, 'Parliamentary Democracy and Fascism: The Two Faces of the Bourgeoisie (Two Speeches by Onorato Damen from 1925)', I again see the lack of principled opposition to/critique of electoral participation. Some comrades, like Cleishbotham above, or Zanthorus (see on the old Redmarx-thread 'The Trap of Electoral Politics'), don't seem to think it is useful to mount a principled critique of electoral participation.
I repeat that it is of importance for Marxist theory to criticise the view (as eg held by Turati) in favour of electoral participation, and I suggested some comrades who can read Italian actually make the effort of reading Turati's own writings, which are online (and now can be translated as whole books into English by one click thanks to improvements in ai-translation). Here's an archived version of my Turati page with book titles on the defunct revleft-forum: web.archive.org
Read Turati's arguments in favour electoral participation, in order to criticise them.
We probably are aware that Kautsky wrote theoretical arguments in favour of electoral participation, right? And can we say what his argument was, hmm? It wasn't just an appeal to the authority of Marx/Engels. In fact, (as I tried to argue on the mentioned redmarx-thread), for Marx/Engels the issue of electoral participation was a matter of tactics (eg the practical benefit of parliamentarians then was that they enjoined freedom of speech), and there's no a proof for their principled endorsement of electoral participation, although iirc in a letter Engels apropos Liebknecht once dismissed even such alleged practical side-benefits as proper reasons for electoral participation, and insisted that the sole real purpose of it is solely negative: to be able to block the budget (if a majority is won in elections).
So Kautsky felt the need to come up with his own arguments for a principled (not just circumstancial) endorsement of electoral participation. Iirc, it was about national elections as an opportunity for agitation/progaganda for higher, ie general society-wide issues, which are above trade-union consciousness, or above local (district, department, province), sporadic issues that concern just a few people sometimes. That is, participation in the electoral campaign allows socialists not just to spread propaganda/raise class consciousness, but necessitates them to formulate their propaganda on a higher level, of broader generality. However important practically the matters of a certain wage/hour-schedules in a particular company or even industry are for those workers involved, they are not a nation-wide matter. They don't affect all capitalists, and so don't sharpen the class antagonism, they don't force the capitalist class to come out as one group opposed to the workers. I'm just going from my memory, but at least you got that Kautsky put some efforts in/arguments for his position.
Likewise, Turati would have articulated a deeper justification for electoral participation. Surely it would worth to know and evaluate who the main socialist opponent was of Bordiga (for we cannot expect to find among Gramscians a critique of electoral participation as embodied in and justified by Turati).