Talk:Fourth Internationalist Tendency

[Untitled]
This is certainly in need of some expansion. I will try to do this. MMcCallister 03:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Let me know if you need help.
I once wrote for the BIDOM, and have a back-file.. --Duncan 12:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

"The FIT dissolved in the period prior to the 1995 world congress. Most of its activists became members of the Fourth International Caucus inside Solidarity." Hi, I'm not sure of the accuracy of this part. I was in Solidarity when the majority of FIT members joined. Many of them left shortly thereafter; unhappy with the loose regime inside Solidarity. Some of the younger ex-FIT members were later expelled from Solidarity as  part of the International Trotskyist Opposition. The FIT members who left Solidarity were around the Labor Standard magazine/web site. The majority of the remaining ex-FIT members that I know of have joined Socialist Action over the past couple of years. Perhaps,it should say something like: "The FIT dissolved in the period prior to the 1995 world congress. Of those ex-FIT members who remain politically active, some are members of the Fourth International Caucus of Solidarity, others are members of Socialist Action." Jleslie.redphilly (talk) 16:47, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

In fact, only 1/3 (about 22) of FIT members joined Solidarity; another 1/3 retired from politics, and 1/3 of primarily trade union cadre were opposed to joining solidarity. These latter members were around BIDOM which continued to publish and then Labor Standard. Several years later, a handful of the trade union cadre around Labor Standard joined Socialist Action. Mary Cecile — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Cecile (talk • contribs) 14:34, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

"After the SWP's 1990 decision to cut its political relationship with the International, the rationale for the FIT to exist as an external faction of the SWP was reduced." I don't know where this interpretation comes from since it played no part in discussions within the FIT at any time. It is speculative and interpretative and not based on any of the discussions or conflicts within the FIT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mary Cecile (talk • contribs) 14:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)