of the I-CL itself.
According to the I-CL press statement of 4 October, the Workers Power leaders were originally suspended from the Political Commuce Dy a accision or Ene Secretariat — The suspensions were ratified by a PC, which of course the suspended members had no right to attend (I-CL press statement. 4 October). In olner words tne cb leadersmp openly admits that it used the decision of a lower body (the Secretariat) to overturn the composition of a higher one (the Political" Committee).
Sectarian On that basis. not merelv have the leadership of the I-CL, even from a formal point of view, carried out an 'infringement' of democratic centralism, but they have destroyed its very basis - the cecuon oral bodies ane me suporenna. tion of lower ones to higher ones is one of the basie organisational expressions of democranc centralismn.
Much more inportant than the formal The letters received by Red Weekiv following the split in the International-Communist League — notably that from Maxine Landis on behalf of the I-CL Political Committee (Red Weekly, 21 October) - fully confirm the analysis which we made of this split: that their sectarianism and refusal to recognise other forces on the left as revolutionary inevitably led the leadership of the I-CL to the suppression of democracy within their own organisation. Furthermore. the most damning indictment of the -CL's methods come: not from nose wno lert tne i-ce our trom the account given or tne sput Dy the leadersip by the I-CL leadership. Instead of recognising that they have made a gross sectarian error in refusing to recognise Workers Power as revolutionaries with whom they have ditterences refusing to recognise organisations such as the IMG. the RCG and other Trot skyist forces as revolutionary - te -CL continues with its absurd attempt to deelare that these organisations are not revolutionary but are 'centrist obstacles', are formica or bonuca suMacs ce The I-CL attempts to provide pseudojustification of this by utilising famous words of Trotsky about calling things by their right name'. However, the things by their right name but by wrong names and has a wrong analysis.
To show the consequences of this for internal democracy, we need only consider one of the most famous of all statements or mmemna demoerac or trotsky in aescribing ine leadersnip methods of Lenin. He said:
The entire history of Bolshevism was one of the free struggle of tendencies and