Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1998, page 35
3. The Demand for Purity
Here, “the experiential world is sharply divided into the pure and the impure, into the
absolutely good and the absolutely evil” (Lifton, 1961, p. 483). Within the CWI, this process
was best illustrated through its enormous emphasis on unanimity. For most of CWI‟s history
internal debate was effectively squashed, for ideas that challenged party orthodoxy could be
beaten off as tainted by “the pressures of capitalism.” But when the organization
experienced significant setbacks in the late 1980s internal debate became unavoidable,
particularly since an Opposition was declared by several of the most prominent leaders.
However, and again this is more the norm than the exception in Trotskyist politics, this
rapidly led to the formation of factions, uproar, and expulsions, with each side of the dispute
claiming (1) complete fidelity to sacred traditions and (2) that opponents were under the
influence of bourgeois ideology. The “demand for purity” is thus central to Trotskyist
practice, but is inimical to the norms of democratic debate.
4. The Cult of Confession
In essence, this condition requires people to confess their inadequacies, their relative
unsuitability to act as a vessel for the group‟s pure ideas, and the many ways in which they
have let the organization down. The DWP, discussed earlier, institutionalized the ritual of
confession into its program of criticism, a norm at party meetings. There is no evidence that
such practices gained such a hold in the internal life of the CWI. This may be partly
because, up until the 1991/92 schism (and as noted earlier), vigorous measures were taken
to sustain an illusion of unanimity within the organization‟s top ranks. Without the role
models of lively discussion above it appears that the ranks retreated into an abject
conformity unusual even in Trotskyist circles. This minimized the opportunity for confession
rituals in party practice.
There is some evidence that in the 1992 split this changed. People who initially sided with
the Opposition but then “changed their minds” were required to publicly retract their
previous opinions. However, this was obviously mild in comparison to the practices of the
DWP.
5. The “Sacred Science”
This aspect of ideological totalism is particularly apt to Trotskyist politics. Lifton (1961)
describes it as follows:
The totalistic milieu maintains an aura of sacredness around its basic dogma,
holding it out as an ultimate moral vision for the ordering of human existence.
This sacredness is evident in the prohibition (whether or not explicit) against the
questioning of basic assumptions, and in the reverence which is demanded for
the originators of the Word, the present bearers of the Word, and the Word itself
...the milieu ...makes an exaggerated claim of airtight logic, of absolute
“scientific” precision. Thus the ultimate moral vision becomes an ultimate
science and the man who dares to criticize it, or to harbor even unspoken
alternative ideas, becomes not only immoral and irrelevant but “unscientific.” (p.
487)
This could be a purpose-built characterization of the CWI, as discussed above. Trotskyism,
as defined by the CWI, is the only pure strain of such ideology (and hence of Marxism) left
in the world, since the many others claiming such sanctity have in reality capitulated to “the
pressures of capitalism.” Only the group‟s ideology offers salvation. The effect is to secure a
redoubled effort from the members in party building, presented as a race between the
creation of mass revolutionary parties built in the image of the CWI and world destruction.
3. The Demand for Purity
Here, “the experiential world is sharply divided into the pure and the impure, into the
absolutely good and the absolutely evil” (Lifton, 1961, p. 483). Within the CWI, this process
was best illustrated through its enormous emphasis on unanimity. For most of CWI‟s history
internal debate was effectively squashed, for ideas that challenged party orthodoxy could be
beaten off as tainted by “the pressures of capitalism.” But when the organization
experienced significant setbacks in the late 1980s internal debate became unavoidable,
particularly since an Opposition was declared by several of the most prominent leaders.
However, and again this is more the norm than the exception in Trotskyist politics, this
rapidly led to the formation of factions, uproar, and expulsions, with each side of the dispute
claiming (1) complete fidelity to sacred traditions and (2) that opponents were under the
influence of bourgeois ideology. The “demand for purity” is thus central to Trotskyist
practice, but is inimical to the norms of democratic debate.
4. The Cult of Confession
In essence, this condition requires people to confess their inadequacies, their relative
unsuitability to act as a vessel for the group‟s pure ideas, and the many ways in which they
have let the organization down. The DWP, discussed earlier, institutionalized the ritual of
confession into its program of criticism, a norm at party meetings. There is no evidence that
such practices gained such a hold in the internal life of the CWI. This may be partly
because, up until the 1991/92 schism (and as noted earlier), vigorous measures were taken
to sustain an illusion of unanimity within the organization‟s top ranks. Without the role
models of lively discussion above it appears that the ranks retreated into an abject
conformity unusual even in Trotskyist circles. This minimized the opportunity for confession
rituals in party practice.
There is some evidence that in the 1992 split this changed. People who initially sided with
the Opposition but then “changed their minds” were required to publicly retract their
previous opinions. However, this was obviously mild in comparison to the practices of the
DWP.
5. The “Sacred Science”
This aspect of ideological totalism is particularly apt to Trotskyist politics. Lifton (1961)
describes it as follows:
The totalistic milieu maintains an aura of sacredness around its basic dogma,
holding it out as an ultimate moral vision for the ordering of human existence.
This sacredness is evident in the prohibition (whether or not explicit) against the
questioning of basic assumptions, and in the reverence which is demanded for
the originators of the Word, the present bearers of the Word, and the Word itself
...the milieu ...makes an exaggerated claim of airtight logic, of absolute
“scientific” precision. Thus the ultimate moral vision becomes an ultimate
science and the man who dares to criticize it, or to harbor even unspoken
alternative ideas, becomes not only immoral and irrelevant but “unscientific.” (p.
487)
This could be a purpose-built characterization of the CWI, as discussed above. Trotskyism,
as defined by the CWI, is the only pure strain of such ideology (and hence of Marxism) left
in the world, since the many others claiming such sanctity have in reality capitulated to “the
pressures of capitalism.” Only the group‟s ideology offers salvation. The effect is to secure a
redoubled effort from the members in party building, presented as a race between the
creation of mass revolutionary parties built in the image of the CWI and world destruction.
