What's the point of a Transitional Programme?
Article originally published in Issue 8 of Rupture, Ireland’s eco-socialist quarterly, buy the print issue:
By Diana O’Dwyer
“What we say to you, give to you as a general slogan, as a general orientation is, not to counterpose yourselves to the proletariat in all the struggles which the masses undertake, but to sharpen, to extend the struggles of the masses for their practical necessities, and to teach them to have greater necessities: the necessity to conquer power.”, Karl Radek (1928) [1]
That revolutionary organisations should be armed with a transitional programme has been an article of faith for most of the Trotskyist left for decades - the International Socialist Tendency being an exception. Ever since Trotsky wrote The Transitional Programme [2] in 1938, Trotskyist organisations both small and less small have laboured over their own versions. For some that has meant only minor tweaks to Trotsky’s programme, treating it as a virtual religious text. For others, including ourselves in RISE, it means attempting to seriously grapple with the transitional method, which Trotsky developed but did not invent, and apply it to today’s problems.
The standard definition of a transitional programme is a set of demands that help to bridge the gap between current consciousness and revolutionary class consciousness. To quote Trotsky,
“the bridge between present demand and the socialist program of the revolution…should include a system of transitional demands, stemming from today’s conditions and from today’s consciousness of wide layers of the working class and unalterably leading to one final conclusion: the conquest of power by the proletariat.” [3]
In other words, a transitional programme involves putting forward a series of demands that attempt to expand the understanding people currently have of the various problems they face - be it climate change, poverty, inequality, racism, sexism or transphobia - towards a revolutionary consciousness that recognises the need for the working class and oppressed to take power and abolish capitalism to resolve them. Transitional demands typically require the working class to be in power to realise and so often include demands for working class ownership and control of major means of production like banks and large industries, democratic planning of key sections of the economy, for instance as part of an Ecosocialist Green New Deal, or for democratic popular assemblies with real power.
Common criticisms of the transitional method are that it involves a kind of magical thinking: if you hit on the “right” set of demands, workers can be transformed into dedicated revolutionaries overnight! And that it’s a distraction from looking outward and winning struggles in the here and now, towards an internally-focused, self-regarding ideological purity. In RISE, we don’t agree with either of those criticisms. We think that developing a relevant, living transitional programme is vitally important and - like Karl Radek quoted above - we don’t accept that this has to be at the expense of connecting with and winning real struggles. Why? To answer that we need to go back further in time, prior to Trotsky in 1938, to Lenin, Gramsci, Thalheimer, Radek, Marx and Engels and a core problem they all identified for revolutionaries to tackle.
Higher states of consciousness…
For as long as socialists have existed, so has discussion and debate around the question of consciousness by which we mean how people’s general understanding of their interests and of how the world works. In What is to be Done (1901), Lenin wrote of the difficulty of workers advancing from what he called a “trade union consciousness” - “the conviction that it is necessary to combine in unions, fight the employers, and strive to compel the government to pass necessary labour legislation, etc.” towards a socialist consciousness [4] “of the irreconcilable antagonism of their interests to the whole of the modern political and social system”. It followed that a central task of an organised revolutionary workers’ party, itself made up of and led by workers, was to build on the existing disenchantment of workers and other marginalised groups with this or that aspect of the existing order and broaden it out to recognising the need to overthrow the whole wretched system.
Lenin was addressing the same problem that the transitional programme seeks to address - that the disparate demands that emerge organically from workers’ movements - and from movements of the exploited and the oppressed in general - tend not to address the system as a whole but only parts of it. In other words, what emerges organically from movements is usually a reformist rather than a revolutionary consciousness and “partial” rather than transitional demands. It’s not enough simply to echo and amplify movement demands, revolutionary organisations must seek out every opportunity to extend them to their utmost, anti-systemic conclusions.
Gramsci and hegemonic consciousness
The Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci elaborated on the idea of differing levels of consciousness in a way that’s useful for developing a transitional programme today. In his Prison Notebooks, he differentiates among: a narrow economic-corporate or trade union consciousness; a revolutionary working class consciousness; and, finally, a hegemonic consciousness that seeks not only to promote working class interests but as the leading class in the new socialist society to genuinely internalise the interests of all the other groups subordinated under capitalism as its own [5].
This perspective developed out of easily the most famous quote from Marx and Engels’ The German Ideology (1845-6) [6], that “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force”. Translating this into Gramscian terminology, we could say that ruling class ideas are hegemonic. Although they primarily serve the interests of the dominant class, they are portrayed as in the interests of society as a whole and often contain within them some concessions to the interests of subordinate groups. In this way, the ruling class does not rule solely through force - a “democratic” element that is part of what distinguishes bourgeois (capitalist) democracy from autocratic rule.
Inspired by Lenin’s efforts to build working class hegemony in Russia, Gramsci theorised how a new democratic hegemony of the working class could be developed. It would be similar to capitalist hegemony in that its ruling ideas would primarily serve the interests of a (new) leading class. The crucial difference would be that the “concessions” made to other subordinate groups - such as the peasants in early 20th century Russia, or self-employed people or non-working class members of oppressed groups today - would be made not with the purpose of continuing their subordination to a dominant class but to enable a genuine universal emancipation.
““The Russian revolutionary slogans of ‘Peace, Land and Bread’ and ‘all power to the Soviets’ encapsulated all the
above.””
In demanding that the economic interests of both workers and peasants be fulfilled through collective self-rule, the Russian revolutionary slogans of “Peace, Land and Bread” and "all power to the Soviets" encapsulated all the above. Bolshevik hegemonic consciousness was distilled into history’s shortest - but most effective - transitional programme.
Adopting a hegemonic transitional method today means developing a programme that can incorporate the interests and demands not just of the working class but of all those exploited and oppressed under capitalism and link them to the need for socialism. This in no way means imposing a set of preconceived formulas from without. As Gramsci put it, “the starting point must always be that common sense which is the spontaneous philosophy of the multitude and which has to be made ideologically coherent” [7]. In the early 20th century, that predominantly meant fighting for the interests of peasants, women and oppressed nationalities alongside the working class. Trotsky’s Transitional Programme includes calls for an alliance of workers and farmers, for “An uncompromising disclosure of the roots of race prejudice and all forms and shades of national arrogance and chauvinism” and to ‘Turn to the woman worker!’. The rest of this article looks at what it might mean today, beginning with the obstacles that can come in the way of developing and consistently putting forward a transitional programme.
Nobody said it was easy
“To start with propaganda for the struggle for power when it has already begun is typical chvostism (tail-endism)...for Lenin the transitional slogans ought to be propagated at a time when the Communist Party has not yet won the majority of the working class and the working people, in a generally revolutionary but not yet acutely revolutionary situation.” [8]
Humanity is hurtling towards the abyss of catastrophic climate change which scientists are now warning could potentially lead to human extinction [9]. Yet far from shortening, the “bridge” we need to build between day-to-day struggles and the struggle for socialism can sometimes seem to have gotten longer and longer. Whether in conversation with co-workers, friends and family, trying to put forward left-wing ideas to a hostile, right-wing media or making speeches about socialism in a parliament of petit bourgeois gombeens, it’s natural to be concerned about sounding unreasonable, out of touch, or off your rocker altogether by raising the need for socialism when it seems so far from being realised. Limiting what you say to demanding Scandinavian levels of public services or re-nationalisation of a form that existed in the past; simply echoing the demands of organisations representing oppressed groups; or confining yourself to pacifist rather than anti-imperialist anti-war rhetoric can seem by far the easier - and more sensible - option than trying to build the bridge to the socialist revolution! As self-defeating as that can be in everyday life where it fails to cut us out from NGOs, the Social Democrats or Sinn Féin, in the establishment contexts of the media or the Dáil it additionally fails in setting an example for newer members as to how to put forward socialist arguments. Worse still, it can then become a habit that spills over into our activist work in campaigns and movements. If we aren’t raising socialism at the fulcrum of struggle where consciousness can develop most rapidly, when are we doing it?
It’s important to remember that the trend of public opinion for some years now is towards the extremes of both left and right - a hallmark of a potentially revolutionary period that has caused many a centre-right politician to agonise that “the centre may not hold”. Even as the Tories in Britain move further to the hard right, an opinion poll carried out last year by the right-wing Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) showed that two-thirds of young Britons [under-35s] want a socialist economic system. Commenting on the result, the IEA warned “capitalists can no longer reassure themselves that the young will “grow out of it”…This is a long-term shift in attitudes, which is not going to go away on its own.” [10] This attitude shift is certainly not confined to Britain. Even in its US heartland, 46% of under-35s have a negative view of capitalism [11].
Stronger evidence than polls is the general increase in strikes, movements and uprisings across the world since the 2008 crash. The years immediately after the crash saw a massive protest wave involving strikes, uprisings and revolutions such as the Arab Spring that has solidified into a longer term, if slower, upward trend. One study, by a global insurance company, found that the number of large protests and demonstrations globally has risen 36%, from an average of 355 a year from 2000-2009 to 482 a year from 2010-2019. In Europe, large protests increased by 71% [12] Pre-Covid, International Labour Organisation statistics showed that strikes were also on the uptick - with over 200 million workers involved in strikes and work stoppages in 2019 compared to just over 14 million in 2010 [13]. That trend is re-asserting itself post-lockdown with strike waves spreading in Western countries like the US and UK. The same period has also seen innovation and adaptation of the strike tactic, with billions of people globally participating in women’s strikes and climate strikes, as well as the influential Black Lives Matter movement.
Accelerating this sea change is a growing cost of living crisis fuelled by profiteering that threatens capitalist stability across the globe combined with the emergent reality of environmental collapse taking place in real-time before our eyes. We might not be (yet) in the type of “generally revolutionary but not yet acutely revolutionary situation” in which the transitional method was first devised, but if we aren’t raising anti-capitalist, transitional demands during a tumultuous time like this then we are missing out on real opportunities to push consciousness forward. So what type of demands should we be raising?
A transitional programme for today
Like RISE’s “What We Stand For” [14] the programme of a revolutionary organisation will necessarily always be much broader than just transitional demands. Much of it will be made up of what Marxists have historically referred as partial or ‘minimum’ demands for reforms that can potentially be achieved within the confines of capitalism without posing an existential challenge to the logic of the system. Often these are key demands for important rights and economic gains that are raised by popular movements of workers, women, LGBTQ+, or black and brown people, for instance abortion rights, a living wage, legal equality, or the right to vote. Transitional demands go a step further than this in raising demands that challenge not just the short term interest of capitalism but which tend to challenge the whole logic of capitalism, while still falling short of so-called “maximum” demands for the abolition of capitalism and establishment of world socialism. Transitional demands can generally only be won within capitalism by a massive movement powerful enough to threaten capitalist rule and would require establishing socialist rule to maintain over the longer term.
Some parts of Trotsky’s original 1938 transitional programme remain relevant today, such as the demand for what he called a “sliding scale” of wages and hours - automatically linking wages to inflation and a shorter working week to share out available work without loss of pay. The first of those transitional demands builds on the “minimum” demand from disparate groups of workers today for pay rises sufficient to cover inflation and should be included in the programme of radical left organisations like PBP. The second can be relevant as a degrowth-type demand in the context of the climate crisis. In contrast to the current reformist trade union campaign for a four day week, which is premised on maintaining the same productivity over four days rather than five i.e. working harder but for a shorter amount of time; a transitional 4 day week demand would “share out” a reduced amount of work so that the logic is to work less and produce less for the same pay - something capitalists would have a much harder time agreeing to. Also still relevant is Trotsky’s demand for the “expropriation of separate groups of capitalists”, including in transport and “the most important sources of raw materials”. At present, these tend to be couched on the left in the language of democratic public ownership and/or workers’ control rather than “expropriation” but as climate change accelerates a transitional demand to expropriate the major oil and gas companies as a step towards democratic planning reductions in carbon emissions and a just transition to green energy should move centre stage.
“‘“It is the method or approach Trotsky, Thalheimer, Radek and others developed of putting forward demands that link today’s issues and struggles with the need for socialism.””
Of course, probably the majority of any transitional programme today will bear little resemblance to Trotsky’s. Some of his original demands were more suited to the demonstrably “generally revolutionary period” in which he was living than our own, such as his call to arm the workers and form workers’ militias, which would likely not work as a “bridge” between present demands and the “consciousness of wide layers of the working class” and “the socialist program of the revolution” [15]. For obvious reasons he also had nothing to say about a whole host of contemporary issues and struggles around trans rights, climate change or biodiversity loss. So it is the method or approach Trotsky, Thalheimer, Radek and others developed of putting forward demands that link today’s issues and struggles with the need for socialism rather than the particular demands they put forward close on a century ago that are important for revolutionary organisations today.
Habitually trying to come up with and raise transitional demands reminds revolutionary activists to always be thinking about how to connect immediate struggles to our shared end goal of socialism. That’s also what Lenin’s concept of the actuality of the revolution is all about: “every question of the day – precisely as a question of the day – at the same time became a fundamental problem of the revolution.” [16] Otherwise, it’s all too easy to get bogged down in the weeds of day-to-day issues and struggles and lose sight of the starry plough!
Notes
1. Radek, Karl, quoted in Thalheimer, August. ‘Strategy and Tactics of the Communist International: What Are Transitional Slogans?’, 1928. https://www.marxists.org/archive/thalheimer/works/strategy.htm.
2. Trotsky, Leon, The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International - The Transitional Program (1938). https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1938/tp/.
3. Trotsky, Leon, The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International - The Transitional Program (1938). https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1938/tp/.
4. He actually says “social-democratic consciousness” which was then the common term used for socialism. Lenin. ‘What Is To Be Done?: The Spontaneity of the Masses and the Consciousness of the Social-Democrats’, 1901. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/ii.htm.
5. Gramsci, Antonio, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, Edited by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Howell Smith. New York: International Publishers, 1971, p. 181.
6. Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels, ‘The German Ideology: Critique of Modern German Philosophy According to Its Representatives Feuerbach, B. Bauer and Stirner, and of German Socialism According to Its Various Prophets’, 1845-6. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/.
7. Gramsci, ibid, p. 421.
8. Thalheimer, August. ‘Strategy and Tactics of the Communist International: What Are Transitional Slogans?’, 1928. https://www.marxists.org/archive/thalheimer/works/strategy.htm. Thalheimer was one of the main theorists of the KPD (the German Communist Party) and early Comintern and an influential early exponent of the transitional method.
9. Carrington, Damian, and Damian Carrington, ‘Climate Endgame: Risk of Human Extinction “Dangerously Underexplored”’, The Guardian, 1 August 2022, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/01/climate-endgame-risk-human-extinction-scientists-global-heating-catastrophe.
10. Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), ‘67 per Cent of Young Brits Want a Socialist Economic System, Finds New Poll’. Institute of Economic Affairs, 6 July 2021, https://iea.org.uk/media/67-per-cent-of-young-brits-want-a-socialist-economic-system-finds-new-poll/.
11. Wronski, Laura. ‘Axios|Momentive Poll: Capitalism and Socialism’, https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-capitalism-update/.
12. Chaucer Group. ‘Mass Protests and Demonstrations Surge 36% Globally in Decade Following 2008 Financial Crisis’. Accessed 18 August 2022. https://www.chaucergroup.com.
13. International Labour Organisation statistics on
14. RISE, ‘What We Stand For’, 2021 (https://www.letusrise.ie/what-we-stand-for) -incorporates our latest attempt at a transitional programme but is in need of some updating, particularly in light of the cost of living crisis. RISE updates its ‘What We Stand For’ regularly through a democratic vote of the members
15. Trotsky, Leon, The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International - The Transitional Program (1938). https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1938/tp/.
16. Lukács, György. ‘Chapter 1 - The Actuality of the Revolution’. In Lenin: A Study on the Unity of His Thought, 1924.https://www.marxists.org/archive/lukacs/works/1924/lenin/ch01.htm.