Talk:Tony Cliff

Permanent Arms Economy

It is alleged that Cliff never acknowledged that the theory of the Permanent Arms Economy originated with the Shachtmanite Workers Party. I understand that the origin of this allegation is Jim Higgins, who made many telling points and was always highly amusing, but wasn't always strictly accurate. I have in front of me International Socialism, No.47, April/May 1971, which contains on page 27 a quarter-page ad for the IS Bookshop. This issue of the magazine also contains part II of Jim Higgins' keynote article Revolutionary Trade Unionism.

Half of the ad is taken up by a puff for The Permanent War Economy by T.N. Vance - the text reads: "This book contains a selection of articles taken fromThe New International and Labour Action on the permanent war economy. It presents a serious and original Marxist analysis of late or neo-capitalism. Vance definitively rejects the notion that capitalism has solved its economic problems and sharply criticises those socialists who base themselves on other problems such as 'life styles'. His work is of importance to all interested in Marxist economics."

There is a similar but shorter ad in International Socialism, No.49, Autumn 1971, p.27. Both Cliff and Higgins are listed as members of the editorial board for this issue. For this reason I'm changing the allegation.--Mia-etol (talk) 15:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Revolutionary

I am deleting the word "revolutionary" because the groups that Tony Cliff was associated to never made any progress towards a revolution. The same criterion of not being a revolutionary CAN NOT be applied to Marx (as an anonymous user did), as Marxist theory was followed all over the world to successfully carry out several socialist and new-democratic revolutions. Srijon (talk) 14:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm reversing your change because in normal English usage the word "revolutionary" refers to all those who aspire to revolutionary change, not just those that are successful. Bakunin was a revolutionary although none his followers have successfully carried out a revolution. Mia-etol (talk) 14:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedeia definition of "revolutionary" is as follows: "A revolutionary, when used as a noun, is a person who either advocates or actively engages in some kind of revolution." Tony cliff advocated revolution and therefore fits this definition.

Furthermore the definition also contains the following:

"Political revolutionaries may be classified in two ways:

1. According to the goals of the revolution they propose. Usually, these goals are part of a certain ideology. In theory, each ideology could generate its own brand of revolutionaries. In practice, most political revolutionaries have been either liberals, nationalists, socialists, communists, fascists or anarchists.
2. According to the methods they propose to use. This divides revolutionaries in two broad groups: Those who advocate a violent revolution, and those who are pacifists. Perhaps the best known examples of these two types of revolutionaries are Che Guevara and Mahatma Gandhi, respectively."

Both in terms of goals and methods Tony Cliff merits this definition. Mia-etol (talk) 14:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Moreover, Srijon appears to be a stereotypical left-sectarian in accusing Cliff of not being a Marxist when Cliff viewed himself exactly as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.246.122 (talk) 17:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Section to be added

Although all that is written here is correct, it seems to me that there would need to be a section on his work as organizer and orator. It was also the organization which was the most important thing to him - if his latest work was only read by a hundred people, he didn't care as long a sthey were the right hundred people who could use the ideas to make a difference in the organization.

Phone activism was also very much part of Cliff. If some branch or group abroad was in crisis, they could expect hours of phone calls.

But perhaps he was most notable for a stunning single-mindedness which made many people just give up when they disagreed with him about an important strategic question.

Some people here suggest that he was a great orator. But he never overcame a very harsh foreign accent. Nor did he try very hard, it would seem, to learn how to pronounce English properly.

Name Change

Why did he change his name from Yigael to Ygael, is Yigael more zionist then Ygael?--JK the unwise 12:27, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes it is. He explains how in his biography. I'd explain further but do not have my copy to hand.

Jock Haston

The information here seems inconsistent with the autobiograpy. "Ygael (Gluckstein). This was taken from a John Wayne type Zionist hero who murdered a number of Arabs. At the age of 13 I changed my name from Ygael to Ygal. Seeing that in Hebrew there are no vowels but only consonants the two names are spelt in exactly the same way, so it was easy to do. The root of the name Ygal is this: Moses sent 12 spies from the 12 tribes of Israel to go to Canaan to spy out the land. Two said they would like to settle there; ten said they would not. The first of those who did not want to settle was called Ygal."--NHSavage 19:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[1]

FI state capitalist??

The clause "Fourth International held at the time that the 'glacis' states were already state capitalist" seems doubtful to me. Wasn't the position that the USSR was attempting to maintain and restore capitalism in the Glasis states, and that it was only after the Marshall Plan that the plan changed: the Peoples' Democracies were established and only then did the nationalisations begin. If the FI had adopted such a poition, I would have expected to see it in the Second World Congress positions, for example...--DuncanBCS 11:54, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

The FI position at that was that these countries remained capitalist in spite of overwhelming state control of the economy, which adds up to state capitalism if you ask me, although I don't know of any case where they actually used the term "state capitalism" by way of endorsing the idea. If you look at the section on "the nature of the buffer countries" in the Second World Congress resolution on "The USSR and Stalinism", you'll find, among other things, that while one already had "The imposition on the economic life of these countries of a gradual control by the Stalinist bureaucracy" (point 22), "The nationalized sector itself continues to retain a capitalist structure" (point 25), "In the“buffer”countries the state remains bourgeois" (point 24, which for some reason seems to be out of order), and that one of the tasks of the FI is "tearing down all the illusions of the masses about the “non-capitalist” nature of the “buffer-zone” countries" (point 37). The upshot was that even though the economy was effectively state controlled "the real destruction of capitalism ... can take place only as a result of the revolutionary mobilization of the masses"; the Third World Congress resolution on "the class nature of eastern europe", under examination of past positions makes it clear, I think, that there was a change of perspective on the part of the FI, although they try to partly paper it over. So although technically the article is mistaken, there's an important point there, which is that the FI's position on Eastern Europe was still vague and in flux at the time, and that when Cliff first arrived at his postions in '48-49 they were not necessarily outside the spectrum of discussion in the FI. Rafaelgr 20:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

• The 1948 resolution explains that the USSR had failed to sweep away the frail remnants of the bourgeosie by then: the bourgeois structure of the state and the bourgeois character of property remained in place and, while the bourgoisie was largely excluded from power private proerty was defended and, in the coalitions, there were limitet, token perhaps, representatatives of the bourgoisie. The test of state capitalism is: does the state function as the capitalist? In this case it did not. So, the FI was indicating the survival of capitalism in the buffer, rather than state capitalism, which would have required both a plan, nationalisation and the expropriation of private property: these were accomplished only in the period others has referred to as structural assimilation. --DuncanBCS 22:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

British?

I've just removed a link to the 'British Jews' category on the grounds that Cliff was not British (nor a practising Jew, for that matter). It occurs to me that there may be grounds for removing the 'British Trotskyists' categorisation too, but I thought it best to see what other editors thought first - I don't think this is as clear-cut. Guy Hatton 22:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that the British Trotskyists category is useful, as he spent most of his life in activity in Britain. Should a Palestinian Trotskyists category be created, then I'd suggest that he be placed in both. If a Palestinian communists category is created, this might also be a useful placeholder. Warofdreams talk 01:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

That's pretty much what I was thinking :-) Guy Hatton 07:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Deflected Permanent Revolution

Fine job thus far on Cliff's biography. One thing that I would consider missing is a mention of the theory of deflected permanent revolution. In his Trotskyism after Trotsky, Cliff cites state capitalism, the permanent arms economy, and deflected permanent revolution as the three theoretical pillars of the International Socialist tradition. These three theories offer explanantions of the three key post-WWII developments that defied Trotsky's pre-WWII predictions (respectively, the political stability and imperial expansion of the Stalinist regimes, western capitalism's long post-war economic boom, and the wave of national liberation movements (Cuba, et. al.) that achieved some form of "success" without being led by the working class).

I personally know nothing of the intrigues regarding who originated which theory, but Cliff and the IS organizations clearly took "ownership" of these three theories, and staked their political reputations and futures on developing, explaining, and defending them. All three should be part of Cliff's biography. Of course, state capitalism should be featured the most prominently, given how it became the sharpest distinction between the IS tradition and other left groups, and the key role it played in the ability of IS groups to grow significantly post-1989 while the vast majority of the left was thrown into deep crisis by the collapse of the Stalinist regimes.

I would propose a prominent section in this article titled something like "Contributions to Marxist Theory" with bulleted synopses of these three theories. State capitalism ought to be listed first, and, I think, merit a sentence in the introduction. I'm very new to WP editing, but willing to take on some work in developing this article.Randy 02:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this is covered more than adequatly in the SWP's entry. So just link to that. If we duplicate too mauch, then the duplicates can diverge. --Duncan 13:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Font Size

Is there a reason why the font size changes halfway through the article? It's very distracting. --Filippo Argenti 16:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't seem to happen for me. What browser are you using? (I'm using firefox).--JK the unwise 09:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Pen name

The article is not clear when Gluckstein started using the name 'Tony Cliff'. Could someone elucidate please? Philip Cross (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Using the catalogue of Abebooks, the 1957 work on Mao appears to be the last time he published as 'Ygael Gluckstein' and the 1959 book on Rosa Luxemburg the first use of the pen name 'Tony Cliff'. In trying to rationalize use of the two names in the article, I have used these two dates as a means of deciding which form to use. Philip Cross (talk) 23:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

---

The link to Modkraft at the end appears to be dead.

Rosa Lichtenstein (talk) 02:39, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

---

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tony Cliff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050907130324/http://mp3.lpi.org.uk/ to http://mp3.lpi.org.uk/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:26, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Accent

He is described as speaking English with a "Palestinian" accent. As there is no Palestinian language that should be either an "Arabic" or "Hebrew" accent. What was his first language? 51.148.170.8 (talk) 51.148.170.8 (talk) 10:29, 11 November 2023 (UTC)