After the election circus in Iran, which resulted in confrontation between bourgeois gangs, political currents took different positions dependent on which class they belong. The left of capital as always tried to play its roll as good as possible. Tudeh Party, Fedaian Majority became directly mouthpiece to the Moussavi. The radical phrase part of the left, in the head “Worker”-“Communist” party of Iran proclaimed beginning of the revolution even presented the leader of revolution (Hamid Taqvaee) and on another ways supported the struggling bourgeois gangs.

In Iran a worker must have two or three job to support his family and IBRP points correctly: ”The working class of that area are also subject to attacks on living conditions brought on by the entire world bourgeoisie.” There is a general dissatisfaction within the working class and in the last years working class has been radicalised gradually. But in the absence of an established internationalist positions in the Iranian political milieu, the protest of working class brutally represses without to indicate protests of a social class. Internationalist positions are very weak in Iran and its militants very isolated. They must try to break down this isolation and establish connection and collaboration with other internationalists. Of course internationalists with more established positions have more responsibility in this point.

IBRP entirely correct points to “Bourgeois rivalries” in the events of Iran. But IBRP forgets its roll as, an avant-garde of proletariat; *a revolutionary organization and it resulted in a passive politic.* IBRP have been one of the most important currents within Left Communism and militants outside IBRP have had great expectations on it. IBRP, ICC and The Bordigists stand for positions and traditions, which make these currents the true defenders of proletarian positions, i.e. the tradition of the communist left.

Workers of Iran Khodro (Iran’s car industry) stroked in 30 minutes to support people’s protest. The revolutionary organization should say to these workers, instead of supporting slogan “down with dictator” expand your struggle, independent of all bourgeois gangs, against capitalism, with slogan “down with wage slavery”. The avant-garde of the proletariat must try to avoid working class acting as canon fodder for any of the struggling bourgeois gangs. The *compass* of proletariat; the IBRP should show the road of class struggle, for our class, the working class. IBRP missing this important points in its analyze.

Internationalists in their analyze must describe for workers, why die for democracy? Capitalist democracy and capitalist dictatorship are two sides of the same coin. Capitalist democracy is not a paradise. You that want die for democracy, you could see, how the workers of Volvo cried in the factories of Volvo when they became unemployed! A passive practice avoids the revolutionary organization of its very important task, contributing to developing and generalizing of class-consciousness.

If the IBRP (or the ICC) is going to play an important role in its historical task as one valuable avant-garde of the proletariat it must understand its roll the leading role of the revolutionary organization.

Long live Left Communism

Internationalist June 23, 2009