Theoretical supplement, November 1983

Theoretical Supplement

THE SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY

Twisting and tailing

for immediate troop withdrawal when the Britishearmy oorup ied the sie counties of Northern Ireland, fearing to confront the social-democmtic illusions large layers of militants-had in the Labour government's “peacekecping” role, In 1972 and {970-5 repeated their cime when the [RA‘s mainland bombings in Aldershot and Birmingham tought forth centrist

Syvie denunciations of both British terror and TRA

reauiance.

From 1972 CHI was trying to solve the problem of bull ding & “workers party” through the organisational device of factory brasches By [973 he had, ty scancdalqusly nuremucratiae moins, got kis Wey, At the same tyne the CUE proup Maffed the National Committee with politiqiily inexperienced wor: kere, Quite inappropriately called o ‘workers’ leadership", whe they were able to demagogically manipulate..None of this wor ked. The turnover of members in this pertiod was considerable 26 bumdreds of worker: who could have been won us the proletarian cadre of a revolutionary party were mised ucated and wasted by the Cliffites, What was the use of a party thul ould only encourage miltants to do what they had been deing for years, cepectally aa the Emits of trade unton milituncy were becoming Gearer alter the retarn of a. Labour goveromerit.

A party whose perspectives were ever more out of touch with realty could only serve to politically disarm militants. The election of Labour inctwo General Elections in 1974 deGvered a body blow to the International Socialists. At first the 05 headers expected this to be but a brief pause. before

THE SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY leadership ia currentiy engaged ins far-reaching purge. Anyone opposed to their “downturn” perspective is being driven out of the organiition, The members left are being given intensive training im the basic politics of the SWP tradition. With all their schemes for growth having been dashed on the rocks, Cliff is steering the battered bulk of the party into political dry-dock for a refit, ready for the day that a new upturn in the class struggle will put wind into the organisation's sails once ‘again.

The lntest overhaul in the leadership's perspectves will be justified to the membership asa clever and realistic tactical adjustment to changed circumstances; 2 ahift made necessary by a different balance of class forces. (CLif has alwys maintained that the SWP'S 180 degree fern! ate no” more than “bending the stick”. The trath is very different.

The sig-zags of the SWP are mot tactical responses to changed creumstances on the basis of a consistent marait strategy. They are the il-conceived twats and tourna of a tendency that lacks any real political, programmatic ballast, Marxista have a meme for sock tendencies - ceotrism

The Gath if that the SWP has had ite day. [t is long past ite pee Ds the eer 1970s it wes the largest grouping of poteeta reeotetionarias in Britein. In tie late 17600 0 tide of slitest eetlteperieiem, prevltion ot Wikeea’s Labow govern: morat ace! the ecemple of the Freech General Strike of 1965 pated! a poet seb: of peep tients and woriem tirktde prvcdstionary pobtics The ieaden of the 15 proce. (et the SWP war then knows, opportuninticelly meee woth , che Etre they could get back to busines 01 woual. Their April 1974

In previous years they had refused to bach mations! Bhep = | Petapective bithely declared that “Ths maaan besinee: nero mri ieteny A Bnei RB 4 ie ete ee ae 6 FN Hn een eee

‘s Pere eier tearm veers” O(n fact the Labou - p0y ‘VEfEmennt and teadé¢ union bureaucrats proved far more soccessful in making ther Socal Contract stick The cganisation was wrecked by crisis an the tide of anteTory militancy temporar Hy recteded. Mim bership statted 00 deciine sharply. “Serious political differences developed in the organisation. The Left Faction (formed in (973 and expelled in (OTS when it foun ded Workers Power) argucd agnintt the “economism” of the

rf ed regime in South Vistuate in the. 9505. Snifing in Opportunity to peopel from the rank of thom now opposing the US's comdemght on Victgam, the 15 decuied to sepport the NLP 's streggic. This paid off and thar smmbernie pew to 1,000 in 1968:

The prowt® of the (5 ceimcided with © moonting crisis for the British reding clase ft was preparing a counter-offensive igeieat thee Sttong shop floor organisations that the working Gas hed built up in the boom years of the 19605 Wilson's Labour government and the Tones under Heath tried to break the strength of shop stewards through anti-une bow, iscomes pollcy and a drive to te pev bargaining to Productinity and Measured Day Work deals, strack with tne ttade union buresucracy.

Working clogs organization proved resilies!t in the face of the initial attacks, Wilson bed te diteh ha planed anti-union laws. Heath's income pobcy wae emashed by the miners and his anti-union laws broken alter e6lidarty Hoppages freed jailed dockers. Large sumbers of militant workers, disillusionel with Labour aad confident in their own fighting strength, were pushed towards revolutionary politics by the pressure of the clogs struggle itself.

Of all the bett groups in Britain the [5 group was able to take moat advantige of the strugelessof the late 1960s and early 19700, They turned their organisation “to the class"* in |S69, focusing their resources on relating to the industrial struggle with factory bullatina and - in 1370- Tony CHif'a “Employers Offentive” book on the fight agains! productivity deals, In contrast the IMG (forerunner of today's Socialist Leaguel, was fixed om building amongst the student vanguard and the SLL: (forerunner of the Workers Revolutionary Party) was already a hardened sect. The 1972 18 conference claimed 2,300 members of whom over hall were industrial workers. By the end of 1974 the 18 wassclaiming over 4.000 members.

00

in the working lass: On the right of the organisation the 15 Opposition reflected the political pressure on many worker members to draw closer to the Broad Lefts in the unions,

THE TWISTS AND TURNS BECOME FRENZIED

“ Typically the CHE group sought to avoid confronting the political crisis. facing Worker militants by buresucrate és pulsrotis aod a search for a new lever of young workers whose minds weren't calated by Labourite usians or bureaucratic habits. Socalist Worker wae tedesigned with Digger print, shorter ar ticles and shallow politics, all’ te make it more aiccnasibie hity the new youre audience, The paper never reached thar ou dience however, The 15 Opposition was eventually expelled

in late 1974. But the expulsions and sitengthened bureau fatic regime solved none of the problems of the [5 . Since 1974 the Clef leadership hes Girried through a series of enzled terists and “turns in a-desperate bid to tevive the fortunes of the organisation,

* Between 1974 and (977 the Cliffites tried ta “Steer Lett" [S-demitsted pseudo cank und file movements were built. In 1974 they launched the National Rank and File Movement andl added the “Preineere’ Charter” to their lst of Mront onganisaliona In 1979 the Bight ta Work Campaign was loonched as another stunt for reaching the “raw youth. From the au tumnof F976 ‘to early 1978 the Chiffites stood against Labour in eight by-elections, achieved laughable votes and few recruits. Ambitious plans to challenge Labour ba 60 seats arene dropped sin anticipation of major recruitment in the expected fertheaming indwstciel struegles, and with a great deal of-trumphalism; the Sccialist Workers Party wat declared in Ianvary POT In August 1977 the SWP joined with other mibtints in driving the fascists off the streets of Lewisham. Beound large, however, the SWP refused te argue for this course of action in the trade wnidns. Instead, in sectarian fushien, they simply encouraged thelt oa members to “eet on with it". The whole “steer left course was nothing mare than, in Trotsky's porase, fear of fhe opportunism whith «as gathering pace in their own tanks after Labour's election.

* After Lewisham the organisation turned Tight. Their “steer left" pelicy had fed to ther marginalisation in the Trade Unions. They became frightened of their own isolition alter a press witechhunt against the SWP in the aftermath of LewiSham. The right tora of 1377 pomardy took the form or an accommodation to the potit-bourgecia mdical clement: that ‘it ig now fashionable for S¥Pere to call “the swamp”,

The fight turo was heralded in the Autumn of 197?) when the SWE Hailed-a state bao on a National Front march in Tameade af a victory, even though it was deliberately aimed at preventing the left from mobilising, Soon afterwards the S4P

THE

Pe a MT ep ce ee Bre

The IS grew because it wascutting with the grain of apontanequs militancy at the thae. With its calls for more milltancy: and anti-Tory: campaigns it Waa giving voloe to the mood of a considerable number of militunts, However, it failed to areate a cadre of political militants out of the workers it Te erulted, The Clif leadership maintained the organisation ona diet of gimmicks and organisational tricks precisely begaiie of had ne ulternative to - indeed dtaaw no need for an alterna: tive te the-ant-Tory spontaneous Trade Union struggle of the early 13705.

The contrism of the 15 over this period was dominated by political accommodation to the clasa strugple aa lt was. Cutting with the groin of trade union militancy was easy, However, standing firm against the political prejudices of many workers proved to be oeyond them. In 196? 18 refused to cull

15 and for o cadre party Aghting for the communist programe

tonk fhe tottiative tn forming the Anti-Nazi League. Although the ANL was described at a united fronct,che SWE in fact filowel the pollics and acuions of the ANE to be determined hy the Wberal and Gherical allies that they coaxed inte it. This way they hoped to offset andovyercome their isolation. The bitter fruit of this opportunign was tasted La. Seprember [O78. The SWP tefused to argue for the secoml ANL carivl ta march baek to Brick Lane in the East End of Londen to defend the Asian Community Spans & thousand. «trong Car est march. [n their “Right tum” the SWP were in no inodd for hreakine their festive pact with Peter Hain, Tom Rehinson and the now reviled Tony Benn

In this phase the SWP also accommodated to feminism in opportunis: manner. Fefore (492, the economist [4 had apurned the struggle for womens emancipation os a diversion from: the class struggle, Inthe AN L-days however, the SW paper tor wooren, Ramen Fotce. become «platform for feminist politics, and the polithes ol lemimam spread. rapidly in the tonks of the SWP

It Was a champien.of the amtieporm marches in Soho repardless of their obpechively, reactionary bogie. It caneentrated on every concern of the petit-bourgeois socialist feminist mil teu, Far from striving to win these women ta revolutionary politics, the SWP's acoomimedation to-them helged speed the disintegration of that movement in Labourism and filest¥lism, Moreaver, a good number of the SWP's own women fell vice lim to feminism. The price of pumping the SWE beck up ta ite 1974 sine through a tern tothe radical campaigns was a Uetcrioraiiig fhci compostion andthe corresive.impuct of petit bourgeois fashions in Cliff's ranks,

AT

* In the aftermath of Thatcher's first electoral victory Clif tried to. steer left once again. Wortens foice and the black paper Fione were clomed down in 1981, As usual the Cliff letdership could not grasp the political crisis that tay atthe root of the isolation and disorientation of ntanv shop floor militants or the impasse faced by the recruits from the campaigns. The carnpalieness are the principal victlma of the present Punge, Sines the “dewnturn”” dictates = me cumpaign wack! As los the dwindling noks of the SYP'a warker mililants, their isolation is blamed on the “burrauonstisttion” of the shop Hewards’ moventent? Without explaining the politi cal erlé daderbying develeprients amongst the stewards, CLIT gave w green light for members to reegn from electel official poate and shep stewards positions in-the unions, hile tha Line has recently been modified - SWP mem fers are again allowed to stand for stewards’ postions - it remiing an nrportant come ponent of the SWP's strategy for dealing with the “downturn ’.

The malin emphasis of patty-building now, however, ts io abake off members raged in the ways of previous curns and eonsttuct a new slimmed down SWE trained up for future battles. To do tts the leadership have again targeted: arudenta us their prospective new raw material peoprphicts branches - once dennunced as Tarren propagancrt forums - have replaced aerkplace branches, and the clock is bring turned back to the Tate 13608. In this scheme the SP will be ready und wating fot ancther 197s style ugtura im the chiss =trugele. This is the stuff decom, mot revolutionary parties, are made of,

THE BANERUPICY OF CENTRISM

The history of the [S and the S4P is a histone of oppor: biniem and accommodation, The present crisia and puyge in the SWP is the fruwt al thar cradition, Perodicelly opausiiions haw developed in the [$.SWP in responie to the twists and Surns

of the Cliflites. In gener) they have reluaed to go to the roots of the 1% political tradition and only criected (he latest turn ou? awiteh. The experience of the SWP bas served to turn many serious militants against the ren idea af building a revolution aty party and been but a greluce to ce-ebtry into Labourcein, trade unioniam or apothy, We in Workers Power reject both Ue tradition of (U7 and the rightmoving accommedation ta Labourign that is prevalent on the Brotieh Lefer.

The SWE tradition hes failed the testof stragele, Pt aquandered the opportunities that ware presented to revalytionines from! theceariy 107s, It served to break the political willal many alticere militants whowanted ro build 2 revahitionary party SWP menibers are now piven lo sneering at che ‘oan of ex-revelutionacies: Bul it is their leadership that has ployed a maioriole in creating that svanip with its binktupl politica ace bureaucratic regione, We urge all seis milttants whe ae sickened with the SYP but acill committed to building nivolutionary party to read Our aonlyses of the SWE tradition, discuss it with us ame) break with theeratoec tradition it rep: resents.

Theoretical Supplement

WHAT IS TO. BE DONE?

The question Economism can’t answer

MANY CRITICS OF the International Socisliem/Socilia Worerrs Party have secused it of Ecomomism. Unfortunately the total failure of moat of these critics ta orient themeechves towards work in the largest mass workers’ orpanisations - the trade unions - has discredited this correct charge.

When the student vanguardiat, the feminist, the “ante fascist’, Trotskyist-Bennites demonstrate in words and deeds their aversion for the “beckward"’) “white male abilled working class” they completely undermine thelr criticam of the IS/SWP, ladeed their “politics” are simply the obverse tide of the coin of the SWE. Where the latter concentrates almost ¢xclusively on the economic struggle, the former say that politics is epshrined in the Labour Party, Both represent a ‘slawish bowing te spontaneity’ - Lenin's charge agains! the Economists’ (rend in the Russian Social Democnicy-

The 5WP theoreticians have o holy terror of Lenin's pamPhlet Whot is tobe done? Fearing the sharpness of ita crittaan. Cliff and other SWP writers have manufactured @ totally falze picture of Wher ao be dose? “Economism” Is carieatured ax “opposition to building a revolutionary party” or the ignoring-of politica! questions and since the [5/5WP is nol melty of cite of these tt is concluded that it cannot be @co-

come, CuidT attempts todd Whar is to oe dong" by 'ieiming that Eenin “ove beteren spontaneity and consciousness’, that por een ca plete scpamtion of spontancity and conschousness Ie-meciini-

stland neo-dialectial’ and that Depin later admitted. this to

be the case CHM wishes to hold fast te the proposition that “Aa econo mic demand, ff (t it sectional, is defined at ‘economic’ in

More's terms, But if the meme demand ts made of the state, It i politier! Clift asserts the interna] evoluthonary logic of the economic strugele: “Jn meny cives econormic(sectional) Mruggies do not give riséete polition! (class wide! crrug@ies. hut there fc no Chinese wall between the two, ond pany economic struggles do ppiilover inte patizier! ones," (Cony Chit, Lenin, vol.) pp.80-B27

Duncan Hallas, writing in ]973 explains this with tespect

to the events of LA02: “Thc the buliders’ strike wt en ere emic ovement! fhe tirike to force the Pentonjulile Fier, @ pulitiot! moverieal, a successful aomneciionel imaggle fo cocree the ruling class, Bar the origin of the Peafonnills otrugele ney the Midiand Cota Store dipuit; a perp économic, very lection ditpate.- dn atiemp! to protect thee jobs of registered deckers agetnat cheaper obowr. The eooronmic itruggie fed, fe this cose, fog politter! struggle ood generally speaking fbi is uel how prlitica! FW ide aetiand- other phon fps elector ones - dereiop, (fatermetional Saciciiter, No.5 Dist series),

From this supposed law of development Hallas asks and answers the question “How do revalutionany arcialigty ger into positions, gain the authority, thar cummends a hearing? Ay certous, aching dd persistent striggie on these liswes that actualy concern their fellow workers, maintained ponent ener fume. And phese ites will be economic hones, tection! femmes, interes of Conditions, bonuses, gradings, ware nated and

af onc reenove CF eel en > ai ist r

MOTE | LABOUR — —bah

For Hallas. this means concentriling on giving a ‘beth, Ae fccesifal, fed on fie vodcrets day fo day, tread dad fuffer Gwey, jaw thelr FoAveriantongey fellows " There is

mo fear that. this will make revolutionaries indistinguishable from ywure anc simple trade union militants becouse of an: in herent logic propeikng economic struggled inte political ones, a logic provided by povernment intervention into,the ezanomic ephere (via “incomes policy’, police on the picket line,-antiunion Laws ete etch. Thus Hallad concdudes: “This political Nraggic can $e corned through oaiy ak the boris, In rhe fest Slice, of ebonemic afreteies, of gectionel craggicn, Mae magic general Hogans can replace ciear, resiistic, wad concrete deader. Pip iadthese sectional struggles, De cenira! slogans hove fae wie from [hese itnd geaerciice then,“ :

Now Economism is not the absence of polities Lenin mikes

deny the politcal struggle az if bows fo tr spontaneity,

this crystal clear te Wher a fo be done? The Economist “foes net altogether repudiate The political striggle.”” Lenin cites EoonOmist writing: that tik about “combatting the government” Lenin however point out that the Economist believes thal ‘pok itics always obediently follows economics,” “ He conthiues 4 by politica: i mntar SockDemocrric noatties fie, sociable oF communmt pobticn- WP) then fhe fheses of (fhe Economists! in utterly incorrect. The economic rtruggle of fhe workers i very offee coentchtd wifh Botirgedis politics, clerfen! polities efe The Ecoworista! thever are correct, (f by poitties iz ment trode vein polit, HE thr common ftriviag ef all workers fo necure from fhe preremes! meatus for dllevicting the distress fo which their ceeadifioms pire rise, bur whick do not dholish that condition, fie, witch dy motremope the rubigarion of iebour fo copie. Lenin conclidess “There ir pelitier aed polittcr Thus we fee hat (The Feomomircs’ Pexqricr! dace maf no meh fa Thr nccecinn, While fully recognitiag the politica! sornoggte, which orite: shonfaneoutiy fron the working class morenent forth i abrolitedy mfuses independentiy ta wark aut 4 apecttlcally Soctal Demoeratic politics ....°'

SPONTANEITY AND CONSCIOUSNESS

Lenin notes the Economists’ charges againat the lskr tendency of “selling up their programme against the movement. Aging! Chis fe replies that it the tack of Margists ta “reads che: frodns inedus, mevencar to the levelof ‘its progemme’. Surety fe is ot ft fiction fo drag at the ted! a) the mescemiett,

Lenin incon way cenjes that the working class ““spontanecs ly" - ie, out ofthe very conditions and struggles of its exploited portion under capitalism - develops class comsciousness, Nor dota he deny thal the economic struggle has a. “spontanecds'' tundency towards politics. Whut he does say in the famous and wilfully mitunderstecd quotation ie that: “Clsr polittesd (our emphasis - WE} coercioginen crm be fraught to the workers only from without,ther is, oaty from-outnide the #oomamic stra fale, from outride the sphere of relariong between workers and emiplo vers.”

Phis quotation, along with Lenin's obseration that “there cin be na talk of an independent idsolegy formulated ty the working masses themselves in the prooss of thelr mowment™ traws attention to the fact that the <creotion of a workers’ movement with saqiliss consciouiness.and @ socialist pregnumme isa constinds @etive task, not 2 “spontaneous” one. The raising of spontaneous glass struggle, whether “econamic’ ar “palitical™ into socialist oanschouness ls an indisnensatle task and one which only a vanguard purty qin undertake.

Mone of this is in cantradiction with a correct apprecation of the revolutionary. creativity of the masses, But if workers spontaneously engage in epic class atrugglas, spontaneously create woviets and Epontancously errupt into insurrection they also - and necessarily for longer periods - spontaocously succumb to bourgeois ideology. Lenin's attack-is on those who tail the economic stropele and who, in the mame of “spontaneity, denigrte socitist class conscinoywanes, He attacks thos: who will not develop a specific socialist programme, stratepy and tactics and will pot strogele fo win Ue “mass movement" to ii; to raise [he sttuggle from the “day te day bread and butter. issues (Hallas.

CHUTE likes to pretend that Lenin lett all the immature aon: gense of Whot ite be done? behind onee he had acon the mass movenent of L905, These words from thal year refute him:

“We cme’ be canter? to-kove our tection tegans Jie bekinel events and td their Deiag odupied to 2wentd offer rhein occur ence. We suit hare sisgona that ieed we forverd, Jight wp the petk before ws, and rive qa abore (he ieredinte tasks oF fhe movenwat. To wage. consutent and austained riruggi¢ fhe porty of fhe proveftrigt omaor derercine it faction from acorrion te ocontion ft ia fection decitans if mum combine fidelity te the princinics of Marxism with dae regera for (he progresstve sorter of the pradettedat" ‘Revoietion Teaches, 190s)

The SWP's objecting to Whey ip fo be done? te in. essence Chel: objection to Leninism itself, Ques {before 1968) this was overt and consistent ie, they objected to the demoeratic cantrallat pocty structure which waa the orginised expression of the Len: inst methoduef theotetical, politicaland ecomomic atrugule. Yet Clits acceptange of the formalities and-terminclapy of Leninism hides a deep hostility to its progmumie and methesl,

Of a piece wath this is che SWE's tejaction af Trotsky’: and the Communist International's utilisation of transitional demanis, Thos Duncan Hallas objects to the transitional propranune.

He quotes Trotsky s fanvous,statement that “Jt ts necessn te RelP Pie eee! IA The pracee ay ie ail atragele to find rhe oridge fviweern present demands ard tke socialist Bregerame if

the revelition ad hs bedge show included syitem of transition: a] demandes semening from today 5 coneitions and from rodirpy'r COMO of owide frre aplathe wiring cle and und iterabipdecding fo ome fae! conchitions he comgues of power by the prolivarta?, "And then hegoesen wilh gondescending irony: “Whether ar met it ts posrthi¢ to fe alogens or ‘demand’ that nie! phéte exacting specicarions deounds, very obviensiy an olre wmsrarces. Ifatq giver tierce taday p consciousness af wide iyers' is decided!y nonrevodutionger, fen ir will fT Ae tr formed Dy glogans, ChangerJn actus! conditions are needed, The protien af each tage GF te find and savaned there ‘ofant witch nealy stele @ cherd in ap lear some rections of fhe clos Geely efccoiiee, (Rr whele ef atl bol which ae abe fae iie

of jecding to working cians actions: Often they will nol be frre. sional ia terol Trotiuke ; very resizieted definition,

Ofcourse Trotsky one beohedd responsible for the tendenc af mot of ha follower to fetihize the motion af transitianal demands, anderen the specific demands of the J938 progeammemort obviousy the “siding coals of wares’, The emphans he Sone (oid rutter wer, foewever, excemire tad encouraged lhe belief that “demonds "have tome whe dadependently of reraiutiotcry ore nication of the working chee Trotsky Marzinn,..p. 104).

Behind the SWE"s hostility to “slogans and demands’ pecially transitional ones, lied their toral inability to see ie the horizon of the immediate economic or-trade union paolltlcal struggles. Thus they present themeelyes aa specinlist advisors on action linvarably militant trade union tactics), on generalisation, faolidarity ection between aectional struggles up-to, but oo fur ther than “macs strike action’) and on organisation (where they advecate joining lhe party to Unk together the rank and File militants.)

AGITATION AND PROPAGANDA

Traditionally the SWP therefore attempts at al) coats to aveid politiea) istues Chat are not linmedistely posed in working class economic strugek. hither they try to ignore questions euch as Ireland, Women and race oftagether, bf that will not work then they Wil trim their positions to keep them in line with relevant conscigusneds, They did this.on Ireland jor example, where they refused to call for the withdrawal of British Troops when Labour acnt them in and denounced the L972 Aldershot bombings as “indiddwal terrorism’ despite their forma: postion of unconditional Dut eriticil support for the. JRA. The onky alternative to this in the SWP leaders’ book is to set up a‘keparate’” sai,

Paign or ie “e in with those comoerned about ” That Tie ie wha 1 Women's | ofc andthe. Jti-Mavi League for Bp

The agitation of the SWP. consists of “calls to aethon™” to continue and step up existing struggles with mealistia ie, immediately rediisable, goals, Alongside this the SWP maintains a separate diet of propaganda simedat exposing the evila of capitalism: and presenting weosssarily abstract ampuments for socialism and workere control, Agitation and Propaganda occupy the distinct ond separate terrains of “Action now" and passive education for the “Great Day a commin” precisely because the SWP rejects the method and tradition represented by the Transitional Froerainme. Tt bas no progmmme to take the working class from irs present struggles to the creation of Workers power, They once produced a draft programme but it never got beyond the internal bulletin. In-reality their programme is split into a masomum! minimun: on¢.as much. ag that-of thetraditianal Social Democ racy, There is only one mator difference; the Social Democratic minimum programme plovifies the terrain. of electoral politics and relegates economic struggica: to the attain of the unions.

The SWE does the-exact reverse, SP loyalists will abject that they stress the ‘'selfactivity” the direct action, the do-it yoursell approach. This.is true bul when sectional trade union militancy oF evan mass direct action for trade union political ends develops to the fullest extent it indeed poses questions euch a&-the political general strike, #ho rules in socsety, and how to really deprive the bossesof political and eoonomic power, Only the sociallat programme contains the anawerto these ques tions, This: answers nol an sbetract one of “Socialiam', but a serles of methods-of onganiaation, and gouls of struggle, which go further than the existing everyday demands and slogana of the moventent, Comovuniat gropaganda has oo prepare the ground for the fight for these damdns and. slogans. [f these answers are nol given, a these slogans ate not raised, Uf a new Jeadership dots not-emerge on the basis of a strategy anc tactics which area leap forward for the class, then bourgecia answers will be given = Sy the existing union snd-Labour leaders.

‘=

Lenin

Theoretical Suppement Movember 183

| Wiorlcors Power

Theoretical Suppiement

in the Callinioos article refered to carlier, the author dexcnbei the NREM as atillborn, He is nght; but whereas he blames this on the objective state of the class situgele at the fume (thee beginning of the downturn) we blame the politics of Che (S/S WPThe organisation built the NRFM on a eyndicalist basis.-Thereiveal to direct workers into a conscious-conflict with, ‘reformise: from pbhove"—the Labour Party—was justified on the grounds. that it was already discredited. in: the eyes of the workers. On the eve of Labour's election victory in carly 1974 Andreas Nagliati,. the 1S industrial organiser at the Lime, wrote:

The froditiona! parte of the working clas, fae donor Party if am emply dhell orgenisaionaliy and ia ters of active inveleement, Politically i is so dineredited that even the Deries Piciour amibworking clo pieaiure: Aare aat really restored if ta warkimg close favour,” (IS] Febroary 1974)

The conference calied by the rank and file papers-the Carworker, Collier, Platform, HUT Rank and File ete—in March downgraded any discussion ofthe political situation facing the working cles under Labour. Resotetions put forward by the Workers Fight group on racialiam and workers" control and nationalisation, were all opposed by [Sand given short shriit at the stage managed conference. Phe programme adopted at the conference was one of. militant trade unicn demands, The [5 itself decided in advance that jt would not fight openly for ts ow socialist policies, for fear of searing, @eiy mulitents, At sume stag in the wnapecified future, TS.clilmed_it would raise its politics. The jogic of this.yinducalist approach was explained by Maghats, Writing of the notealigned militants-he argued:

“Whar con bind them fogemerds & programme for fighting arowed certain minimal demandi—agelnt wage freeze and incomes policy, for on end to the Indusinal Reltions Act ond laws aggina? picketing, for democritiation of the unions, for a fighting Puicy om weper. fn this fer the rotiongle for the Atak oad rile oruaintion. (iS) Fenruary 1974) :

a . rt - : P i

rr

_ =

= . a b r re a -

i i eee

Hiiery of G Tie Middle Saal Marini economic Ioday

The 1974 conferesec gave Sirth to the WR PM, Ut was-a “united front’ cortralled by supposed revolurionaries who were boycotting their own politics within Wt and supressing anybody elses! They amply joined in with the militants at the conference in relating particular experiences from thes workplaces. The mecting was tore of o relly than @ working ¢onlerence to discus strategy and tactics for militamte in the light of the fallof Heath and the election of @ Lebour government

Fear of reformiam and the political incapacity to fight it grevented US from raising and discussing The question of strategy and tactics vie-devis the Labour Govertment, Realism, or cather a deep feeling of their own impotence, stopped fs from-posine itsel as “the alternative leadership’. OF course at the end of the day an 18 speaker stood up and sang the praises of socali¢m Drach at Of did at the end of de productivity deal book}, hut it had Hrtle bearing on the strategy of the HRPM The sec ond conféresce of the NR FM took pisce later fe the same year. In the in¢ontine Wilson had been re-elected, Vel again, however, these developments did little to aflect the nature of the confer ence. It followed the same recipe as the first and with the same resolts, The (5 leadership were edger to avetd a discusscn in the NEEM of what they often fcorntuily refered to as “big politics’.

The modest success of the feo conferences approximately S00 delegates to cach—reinforced the political modesty of TS. An internal bulfstin to April T9FS reooenised that the NRPM was not “Strong enenel ro ituach fadesendeat getioa”” but argued that a serious campaign to reat the NR PM in the Incalities wr id overcome this in the short term. The 18 firmly believed that the “homevrison” with Labour was mereh the prelude toos ‘bie hing aad the resumption of militant strigpele: This perspective Was rooted in [8*s false understanding of the nature ef the trade union byreaaoracy and its hold over the workers movement, 15 hate: the bureaucracy. Ite vivid expression of this hatred pals it the syripathy of those workers sold cut and betrayed by the bin euucraly, Ant the [S)S4P does neal understand how to defeat the bureaucrats—its hatred is based on Tear and Tear leads them to stek a way around or belind the backs ef the union leaders:

1974

This-incoenprehension dates back to Cliff's fconomic Roots of Acformim, on atticle written for Socialist Review in lune. 1957, Here Lenin's theory of the Labour aristocracy and burcaucmcy is grotegqucly quiaituped and smumly repected, ‘a sacl, tein crit of comerratine Aides the revolutionary wrgeraf ihe pear of worker) Alay derek through this would reveal @ surging ero utionery ie Tike ree of the reveldutionery porty is simply te show the mau of fhe workers thal lac interesiy are sca by tie “infiniteti! minority: of ‘aristocracy. of jobour’ *. ‘Neither Wokiegton Nor Moscow p10).

Cliff then mobilised the apparently. knock down. argument that the mass of wogkters ancuin-fact reformist in their conmeciouscss; Brushing aehde, wath o few inconsequential statistics, the very ides that therakilled workers benefit differentially from. tmperialiet supereaplodiation be-ablghts on the much simpler argument:

“Tie x pln of cpio through (mperiatise ria if oe (hie for the. ide water aed Pabour parties: fo wrest conocer for the worker frat gipitalion withent avertarowing if, 2A gives Fire tog le pfernt Bureaucracy whicr in ita turn becomer od dhe on fee rre@iniionary developers af die working can, The moor fanctios of fii bureauweracy is to rervecan gt For berweed the workers ee Mar ferses, fo mcdid¢ie, aeeulidie agree nents berween them, ond Keep the Peace’ between the classes... But the trade onion and Labour Party boreaucracy are cifective in disciplining the working clam in the long run only to the extent that the economic comditions of the workers themselves are tolerable. In the final amabysat the hase of reforms is in capital. ist. propeerity” (aa bower, p LES /L16 emphasis.in the original).

The conc! asion then floes “When copiiation feweser, decoys in ime ectent- theft amy oerieed demands of ihe working clr reach Beyond tig Ment, Fae Bell will toll jor reformism. '* (ibid p. LIT). This theory it fades om all counts As a critique of Lenls itis nensene, Lenin did met botd that the working class wus a consiant “revolutionary le”, aponianoously ready to crupt but held back by a thin teper He did Gold—with Marx— that the protetariat had no objective amd inviting trics.to capitalist priv-

led ithough obviduiy gol 2ostmuonsly) Lo. collins belween the workers.and the copitaleta, Obviously there are pemods of boom and slump of expan ad comiradictian which effect ihe inequency, ope amd darection of the.clam struggle, Aut wha! Lenin wai emerting waa that usder loperialiom o sizeable tratuan of skijked worker bad exnergril, well paid, with the con étiom of iit of oe | pea bourgecd which tud che

democracy of the mage of the members —— ofien, excluded, the mm of non-enionised or anemployed worker. This theory cxplin how ite pomible for the union bureaucracy to mobiniain ite hold evenoin- pénods of crisis when capitalise manifestly, cannot meet the “serious demands” of the working) clast—indeed when

it claws back previous conBesiiad: Such: clawback periods; TI20 23, 1929/93, [S79/83, do pot in any sense automatically ondernuine the bureaucracy because the workersas-a-w hole ae no lone0 Praspericaes, ’

THE NATURE OF THE UNION BUREAUCRACY

Clits theary tends to obscure the communist concentration on the mass of the proletarial, its concern for the interests of the class as a whole, This indudes focusing on its most oppressed and emploited sections the unskilled, the unorpaniked, the waemployed, women, immign aly regaTded. nat 2s. amine orities” but as partol the mayenry of the projetanat, with oething to lose but thei: chaink Of course the well organised, militant sections. provide invaluable, cadre. far, the la bow) mioveanernt fut without: taking up and fusing wilh the majorly of the class this minorily temuing a-base foy the bureaucracy. CUI and the SWE theoreticians reflect am accommodation to this sintum whea they voice (hein wiew of the bureuncracy, Thus-for, Alex Callinicgs it li not based om any really existing social forges. Rather. it.is the oatumboesubliofthe bargaining process, This tk because the bargaining proccss mecessitates origination ame: or: ginislion breeds Oureaucmlism

“4caieirion of tour patarally gad spontaneously cmerges befeeern fhe evs of workers aad Cher representatives, witoie rane ip uecredsingiy goers in borgeindag wile the eeepinvers TTI Autumn 1982) our emphasis).

And: “fre tode aienseven if they ere born oy of ciemenial struggig? Jetween labour and copital, inevitably. produce o dover of Jultiiece opficests whose tusk it is to egoliete 2 camiprenise between the pao oles” (Galliniens, The Reroludionary Read to Socials - qur emphasis).

This unalysis, which owes mote to. the bouwpedis soctolopist Michel-and tus iron law of oliparchyoor the Webbs Chan it does to Marx aod Lenin, leads tea shallow, contingent hostility of the bureaucrats. [tleads toa gell-defenting attempt to bypass the official leadership, and, a-compictely one-sided: stress. om-seliactivity. amd seli-organmisation, not as means le challenge and replace the bureaucrats, bot to offset or control them,

Thus Clif inan article written in July 1971," Phe bureaucmey tnday’ @S Journal Me 48 - first series} coneludes:

“The ateaggle for democracy in thewmiioas regular clecians of al efticiak, ie riginie teed item, wiring ikem fhe overge pay oof Me oworken they reprevaf get, the decision on the cor duct of ahbaribes to be aiken Ov mas omeetings of owarkers, ete oi! teenie of oordinead dperknnce. vl erctiiniage dereaacrdc niedy the wteddy, conlrotiag fend ef rhe rank and file

These formulations, and others Uke then in the pagea of SWE publications, are based on the Clyde Workers Commitiee decir walion: “We witlitepport fie ficial aad ace dae ees righaly represen! fhe workers, bur we will eet undepenadently immediarely they aire preres h ieee

Mow while this stress on the independence ul te rank and file is fine-so for as it pores, it docs mot po far enough. [t leaves

ate property ond thatthe demands ofthe profit syatenvcunstantly

oul - and given the Clyde Workers’ Committee waa donuingted by inclustrial synilicalists this is pot surpriing - an organised ooliticnl challenge to. the officials with the objective of wresting the national unioas from their.contro)] and replacing them with a revolutionary leadership aublect to. cank and file democracy.

From. a.communist standpoint, ie, (rom that of the need for a politica: struggle to overthrow the bourgeoisie aod its atate power - CUIs position is hopeless. Union democracy is necesary nel merely to prewent-aell-curs now, to bind the bureaucracy's hands, Workers need the full use of that centralised national unien apparatus to make their ttruggles more ellective: They needa “general stall of labowr"” that leads, mobiliges and fiphts inslead. of today’s tame cot TLC.

Therefore the bureaucracy most be dissolved and replaced with a militant, communist leadership, Such leaders -woulil both guard and promote the denocracy which alone. really makes the unloms schools of struggle, schenls of socialism. But they would also have a positive duc: The sank and file alsa vacilotes. The job of communist leadership is to answer the fears of che rink and file, overcome thelr vacillationa and mobilise them for otrugele. To blather about “self-activiry™” or spontaneity is no. cover up ones total Jack of direction, The working clas will net thank, and more liportantly will not choose, “advisors” who just fatter their “sell-activity’ or “spontaneity”,

The IS. because it feared and had oo tactics ta defeot amt replace the bureaucrats, effectively put a sign-boord up on their fok and fike proups! “No durenuerat need apply, “CH Ticiab keep out!", This ia what the 1S/SWP propaginda about the fat talarics and perks of office amounted to, The method al the united frent and of demands placed upon bureaucrats like Scargill wie-absolutely hevend them, le mieht “sew Wusiens'', “reduce malf-relianes aad self-netivite’'s) Thus it left these bureawerata free to cultiwle their fenormous) infldenoe ower the rank and fle whilst the IS contented isell with the tiny handful who would break with them os a first step,

FEAR OF OFPORTUNISM

Like their argument about Labour Party membership - to go in &\fo be defiled, it leads te capitulation --in the tank

and file movements the JS emchaded the “leaders” becouse. it feared the reflection or shadow of its own opportunism, Theis hotrar.of comliminalion masks a deep inner snes shal foe

guide to action are absolutely decisive, AN ection Silane for ihe unions can milly the membership anil defend its inlerests Egainst the bosses and the officas who try to sell these interests short. It can molbalige the forces to cust the reformist buresueracy and clear the way for the tansformation of the trade unions intg-omans-of revolutiondry struggle, instead’ ol being organs for: domesticating. ain the course of doing this, revoludinnaries strive to win the leadership of ‘tive rank and file meavenwt and the trade unions an whale,

The SWP's synidicaiiam has always prevented them trom beginning such a struggle. Ther concepiicen of the NRFM asa body of militants grouped on a self-limiting trade woron Pogmmme, always meant that they hed to conceal their politics

within the NREM, fine words about the socialist millenium notwithstanding, They could not connect these fine werds with the struggled against the participation schemes and wage cutting policies af Labour. Every rank-and file programme: that ¢rer emerged from the (S/SWE stable wad based go minimum demands, while these willing to subseribe to socialism (always posed in an abstract and maximalel manner} could join the party, Thi con ceptol the NRFM was increasingly untenable under Labour.

It was useless in equipping militants to fight Jones and Scuncon it the wien aod Wilson and Callaghan in the pavernment, Militant shop-lanoe refarmism was redundant under these circum: stances. Mot surprisingly, the WP turned awiy trom the NREM and towards the Right to Work Campaign, This was leunched by the NRFM, Det Oy the SWP's admission, the child gobbled wp the parent..[t was o campaign of isolated actions and marches whith mobilised the angry fobless youth and unleashed them at TUC congresses. The youth obliged by kicking the shins of the detpicable time-servers: While one can aympathise with the santiovents of the youth who did the kicking, what this whole RIWEC pened reflected was the SWP*s turn away trom building rank and file organisations on the shop floor, Sor did if reprecent a real fight to get the undone to organise the whemployed. It was an expression of their inability to answer the problems of militants,

Thus from 1974 to 197? the SREM faded ints obscurity, Them in 1977 it wasowheeled out for a conferenor in Noventber during the firefighter's ttrike, The §WP haped, opportunistically, to ash in on this strike by launching the NRPM However, the daily buletin produced by the 54°F in the name of a mythical firemen's wink and file growp tepedted all the errors of the Barly (970s, Mote and more militaney, bigger and bigger picketa were «

Se ee ee ee ee

The Socialist Workers’ Party

That this & the cote is shown by the fact that the “spontaneons” ‘continuation of the militant struggles of the early 1970s was the Labour Government of 1974, In this period of militant trade union struggles, both political and economic, the International Socialists were unable and unwilling to offer an imdependent action progrimine which led from these remarkable struggies (the Kill the Bill stvikes-and demonstrations, the built ders, postal workers, and tea miners’ strikes. the Pentonville jnilings mast political atrike) to the question of working clos power, instead they tailed every one of these struggles claiming it would “bring down the Tories,”

Thus after the miners stinting victory over the Tories in carly 1972, after mass pickets and widespread solidarity action had demonstrated a mass class: hostility to the Tories, the IS were still trying to keep the stroggle at ite eciting-econemic level and oven Bt iis-existing sectional level, True they “bent the struggle imelf a political character." They said that the struggle ad a political character but no more han that.

THE REJECTION OF TRANSITIONAL DEMANDS

A typical front page of Socmlist Worker in the miners’ sirike ~ under the misleadingly bold “Demand the TUC calls o General

Strike" - said: “Uf the miner do net win thet full, claim, deneand thet the TLC calls a one day general sivtke of all affiliated unions

cerinst fhe Pore Jockout " (Socgiot Worker, No.259,)19.2.1972) When the miners after their |972 victory were in the fling line again the SH’ wag still iniling and indeed advocutingtailism. for most of the working class: “The powerful battalions of the brood prion ca orgonive in smock Phase Three. Ther con blest a hole

fheough which ceery other section oom merok. Jf ia defeat whieh

tis Tory Government of richer for the few and misery for the many could aot turvive.”

During the Pentonville jailings in mid-1072 the 1S did not mankge to-call for a Genera] Strike uniil after fhe TUC hed

fireatened to call one, And ewen then, trueto form they avoided

like the plague the “political” and “too advanced” slogan of a Genel Strike ta Stash the Industrial Relations Act.

Faced with rampant double figure inflation in the period Sectalis: Worker could pot get beyond “Pay: Use Your Muscle for More!" It again renowned, cursing with bell, book and

andle, the siding scale of wages because such a slogan, if granted

ka nag ol aii Lyf maght pul aatop to the wages struggle, In fact

if the working cliss or substantial sections took up and fought fer this generalised, clasa-wide slogan on woges, it would have been a clearly political diogan. Even if - In exceptional circumstameds.- it had been conceded it would have been 0 ceaseless bone of contention with o government aod oo employing class determined to lower wages and Sine down mflation at the workers” expense

Forma of tiding Seale have been fought for, won-and foupht over in maisive struggied in italy, Belgium and the United States Even Heath's indexation fraud linked to the last phase of his income’ policy, and preserved by Labour, when tiggered by toflation totes far in cmos of the threshold Heath had thought safe, led to ag rash of strikes by poorly organised, often women,

workers. Here again the gctual spontaneity of the workers proved

to be more aivanced than the tuilism of the Internitional Sa cia lists.

Above ol) what the Ciffite economist schema fails to realize is that the vacuum 1 keaves, where there should he the fight’ for a communist ection proeamme - including aa well ns tranautional demands, immediate economic and political d: mocraticjone is filed in Sfe by Reformmiom. Thea the SWP has no alternative, even at the pinneck of wiruggl:, excep! lo grind its teeth and “Vote Labour with no illusions";

Economian & helpies: when faced with howpeois-politics in the working Class, which in Britain taker the form of Labour: lam. The SWP fetes if, corse: it, wishes it dead and developa theacies to prowe that it f Yet each time che SWP thinks that the Hercules of working class selfactivity has hucled it to the ground (the early Te) it nists up again with renewed foros, even temporarily subduing the economic sctugele. The SP can't comprehend that this is beoae political refocmism is the tree born aon of the trade union streggie, ft renewa its strength constantly: fram it; The Miner?’ militancy put Wikon and Bean info office who thin tutned on the miners and did all they could to-cnsure that never again wok’ they find themselves returned te office in such ah ¢xtra-pariamentary fashion,

The notitical ctroggle does not begin only at the ultimate [imit of the bread afd butter strugeie. tc begins with revolutionunes transforming that struggle - not-hy slogans alone - by winning lecderhip onthe basis of policies and tactics , encapeulated in rewslutionary Wogand, which can transform spontanecds action into a comicious political strugele for socialism. The SWP - des pite the good intentions ofits mililancs - is simply the othe: gide of the edin to the Left Labowriem they <n despise,

TRADE UNION STRATEGY

Syndicalism’s fear of

the bureaucracy

{Tt MIGHT AT first sight seem curious to accuse the Socialist Workers party of syndicaliam, After all is it mot a party? Doe it not openly proclaim its goal to be state power for the working claca—even insisting that without soviets and workers control of production there can be no Workers’ state?

Certainly the SWP is not a classically anarclo-symdicalist form ation that denies the need for either political action of the proletarian dictdtership, Yet the pre-19!4 French COT, cor Am efitan (WW were by no menos the only ayndicalist formations. English “Industrin) syndicalianr und the DeLeonite Rocalist Labour parties on beth sides of the Atlantic eclectically combined 2 ayndicalist practice in the unions with parties devoted to makime propaganda, including electoral propaganda.

Wemust leave aside for the time being the SWE's conception of the worker? state. In a future article we will show that this too. is closer to a Lbertorion and syndiculist view than to the Marxist, Leninist and Trotskyist understanding of the preletarlan dictutorship. Here we will look ot the SWP's thoroughly syn-

diealist notion of the rank-asd file movement aod the stragele for

inion dencracy,

In essence itis this: The SWE bas no clear or contistent comm

foment to the struggle to oust the trade union bureaucracy and to replace the present reformist leaders with revolutionary ones.

Instead the (5/SWP looks tn the de-centralising sy¥ndicalist idea of

i tyttem oidemocratic chocks over leaders. Thos in the dunpubGibed) (5 programme we find the slogan of “Workers control ovr the Union”. Workers contre! over production, 1 system as Trotsky med of dual power im-the factory, of contro! over man apement posible in a pened of premewobetaomery come dod may extend for some period after the teeta of Gower a a achool for workers management under a catmlly pad aoe omy, Certainly we seek to check, contnol, Geni the af ete od betriyals of the trade unjon Dburesuctits, bot a seater of checks und balances over them is notour pod Our gosl i a commenial leadership ia transformed Tphting industrial unions. Comimumets fight for a siracluse of workplace union brinches and factory committees which are capable of creatlig¢ action councils in beiphiened pesiods of chiss struggle und van develop in 6 revolt isnary situation into workers councils [soviels| Communists do nol hide their party abel from the amas of workers but openly form Cractions in the existing wonton. They willingly form united Fronta With norrcemeuaist tank and file workers who wiah to Tight for militant poloie? and trade rion democnicy, This anit

Workers Power Thesratical Supotement Nowenker 1960 iii

ed front may beepiscdic ard local-or long lasting and national; The best example in Britain was the Nutional Minority Movement in its earliest years and the various reform movements, vizHence committess and rank and file groups which preceded it. Democracy and openness about party affiliation and party pol: icv la, however, a jealously guarded right for vommunists even when, or rather epectally when, it is the leading temdency in such a movement for these formations temain united fronta and

nol parties. Freedom of criticism alone enables the wollkers to

select and Teselect the headers and ‘the policies proven carrecc in tiruggle, The history of the 1S5/SWi's attempts ar rank and file Orpinisation indicate the forcigness of this tradition to them,

TAILING THE STRUGGLES OF THE CLASS

In 66 the US proup focused it attention an the telationstip between shop stewarde—whose numbers had increased enorm:

cushy diting and after the wat—anl the trade union bureaucracy.

The 15 group recognised that the Labour Government's attempts bi (mp incomned policies and aati-union laws was caysing stewards to move into action against 2 reformist povermment. In res ponte to this rift the [5 published « book by Tony Cliff and Colin Barker called Jeewmer Poller, Legislation and Shop Siewards, Deapile their current irsistenee that in the [960s they vere net calling for arank and fle movement (axe Alex: Calkinicas’ Mmendactous account in 1S) Autumn (YR) this beck did put jax ward an early version of the nok ond file movement slogans I ged Shed the principal problem with the militant shop stew. at Sas The Gagmentation of their strugples.and their conseqfeet mierow boritone Their reformiat consciomness was recogfeed Set ee fegerded ws a major problem by Clif, Ever the opfeneet Tee eid tha it was fortunately being whittled away: Tht importance of state sponsored, central referee hos been dertining, today the workers have less te gain and terete hone for fio peonel! reforms, And fear the role of Meir agonal reprriratatives, the Labour MPs, bos been declining tao,” (p26) Worker were turning instead to the shop floor ond the sharp Hewanls in get “do-it-yourself reforms better piece work rates: bonuses, boldays and so on While admitting that the conscious revealed by this procest remained reformist, Cf argued thet shace it was nefonmism loceted-in the shop floor and based on seit activity itwas thereby spontineously “dertrowing ree tradi

fon of refernisa from above” te 135)—ie the Labour Party, Thi tasks: that flowed from this analyais were of course to encourage shop floor ‘reforms, but at the sime time to overcome the fragmentation of the stewards movement and thereby finish the working class"Lingering belief in reformism from above: “The principe! favky of socialite de fa de wher we coe fa waite She workiar cine gad fo eneurege fhe mecvemen! fran melon, a WSS). This unity wae to take the form of a national shop stee ards movement

Tis whole analysis was short sighted and itopressionétic, [ft was certainly true that workers looked to shop floor organisation and bargmining a5 the main eas of achieving economic gaina ia the 19S0:-and 19e0s i was nel true that this shifting locus of hii a6 15 called it, sounded the death*knell of the Labou

arty.

Indeed Shen economic ches, mats unemployment and inflat ion, on the-one hand, and stalutory wage fréeres, corse in accial services aiid attacks by the lnw oon hitherto established trade un ion Tight) replaced the boam conditions of the late 1950s and early to Mid 19008 the ooed for slate wide, governmental anrwers would come to the fore Before this situation became critiond there Tay live: vears inowhich the shop floor militants of the 14405 were able to utilise their stewards organisation for ar effective Fightback. These were haleyvon days for (irs progacs it and puaetice. Bot the prézlem of the Labour Party —refermig from tboreswas nol indeed could pot be, resolved by retormis Tram ‘elow, iy

Yet (S-continuedt to blithely keep politics to a minis in ita trate union work, In 1970 a-second major book by Cull wa launched, In 230 pages CU described in deta'l the natgre of productivcy deols and spelt out o tide union pre ramumne on how to feht them. In one anda half paged atthe ep in u segtion entitled “Politics if was aasected that “We need aon ain adcieist movement (p2320 No connection betwee this asserted meed and the struggle against productivity deals we made in practice Toule uniotiam aad polities were presented a separate entities, In their practice in thit period the 18 followed Cuts cus. In the struggle to free the jailed Pentonvile Five deckera the TS refused 1o demand that the TUG call a general sirike despite the mass siike movement that was erupting te free the dockets, Symptomatically they refused out of the fear of TUG misleadership? Mass sympathy stokes by ithe rank and file were dn their view safer, Only when the TUC ilsell called a one day penen| strike did the 15 sharnelacedly geo fit to Hise | call, Thos they tailed not only the working class, but, ioevitabl the hureaucracy. Morbid fear of the buncautrars, wthempls te avoid tuther thin challenge and break thelt Influéues led te cag itulatian te it. Abe in the miners vinike of LF? despite extensive tink and file aelf oreucisation and strength and deapite che existence ofa tight wing leadership the 1S refused to quil for,< build a rink and file movement during the strike, They chesres on Searels militancy Gut. would not attempt oo organise the the yank and file during the auike. They claimed that afters the strike, that ia outside of the contest of strugplé. they would ca i cenigrence around they paper, The Colber,

During the early 1970s the [8 aud gain recruits amongst wel er, Thanks to Lhei energetic intervention in workers'arrugeles ind because they voiced these workers! wiews, Generally they d not held omba these recoils far very Jocg ani the draam of Ts lilting the vincwam on Che lett as a-cmuss alletnative to Libeur a nol materialise, To overcome thia failure to become a nonss. alternative, the 18 inereasingly turned towards the building of ra and fe movements, around dewapapers, in particular industria the mings, London Transport, amongst feachert, doonpst carworkers ald others. Encouraged by the windine deen of the Communist Pacty's ‘ponk and Gie movement” the Liaison Com itter. fon the Detence of Trade Unions, eansequent te thei cap ture of a number of unions, (8 in | 974 decided po Igunch a National Rank and Pile Movement. This was conceived as a br ge to the porty for advanced militants, and a means wheresy a tiny party could play a big role, Tony Cuil deaertbed the relat ionhip between the party, the rank and file movement od 1h mids of workers a & sefies of cog whecks—a small one, the pam scttiing in: motion a lurger ane, the NREM, eetting: in latger one again, the mass of workers. The mechanical Gea was apt because the relationship waa conceived. of 55 mechs rather than political, The patty was simply one clement of the ‘unifying’ process, cot. the pohniea! leadership of the NEM

Ctf forgot that the big cog wheel turned under the moteet force of ecomosnieand political crisis. When in 1974 a way po erful. criga rolled the working class in the direction of a Labow Government, the great. cog-wheel tore the teeth of the offer td sequence. [ite mk and filists fell Gack onder the ilies the new left Jeaders, The 1S. 'members’ pamed back ower fhe Bridge to staff the rank and file growpe

The Socialist Workers’ Party

ued, but the problems of mobilising other selione of the public | health strike, actively opposing the formation.of a national sector and fighting the TUC which engineered a sell-out, were net answered

The last gasp of the NREM came in (979, in June after the Tories had won the election. This was conceived by Tony Clif as. an anti-DLory rally, not & sepowm revival of the SNRFM. He was opposed in this conception by the industrial organiser, Steve Jefferys. However the conference, as a pully, was a great success. Over a thousand attended jt (double the attendance at previous gatherings|. But its political content marked the low point of the SWE's wretched eennomism, It launched 3 compaign around a “Code of Practice. This called on workers not to cross picket lines, not to break the closed ahop, and to observe trade union norms. Yes, it wae-the old refrain, basic trade union: Is, The Code of Practice was, whee mensured apainst the tasks of ie hting & Tory government commuted to awhole series of antrunion lows, pathetic. As the bosses limbered up to launch their most ruthless offensive for years, Tony Clif, John Deason and the SYP could only call for a return to bases, After 1979 and the failure of on ant-Tory movenrent to eceme from the conference, the shrouds were prepared for Steve Jefferys and the NEEM. Both diseppetredin the subsequent years. They were followed by the waniout gank and file papers - Cerworker, Redder Tope, Engineers” Charter, ete -all of wits gales had been steadily winding.

All that can be done, says CHIT, is to be ak the plekel lines bot “to play it low key - until the upturn comes” (Socialist Review April 1983 This is clastic, In the upturn (1972-4) the SWP played it “low bey’ so as not to frighten away militunts from the §S or the NRPM. In the downturn they play it “low key™ until the upturn ! By “low key"" they mean not pushing “big politics’, but concentrating an ofgancing pickets ind taking tollectiont in order to win over the “ones and twos”

BACK TO BASICS

tode unionism, Sometimes-its on a big scle (the upturn), sometionca its ona small scale ithe downturn). Socnow, despite the doubly treacherous mle of the officals; and the ferocity of the Doses’ offensive, the SWF have wound up their rank and file groups, fave retreated into them own georgaphical branches

“Tn locating fhe omer aed feo by collecnng money for piri, where prepared to fiend wither polities Mf i otal rch

the future” (CHIE iy Socialist Review, June 1933),

Cliff ond the SWP ote terning away from the real probleme

4 {posed by the bosaes offensive, Like itor not, thot offensive raises ‘big; that is national, political issues like privatisation,

union nights, the welfare state, wor and peace --hich clas shall

THE STEEL STRIKE AND THE RANK & FILE

This digappearing act was fora time officially unacknowledpe It even went into partial teverse during the 1960 steel strike when the SP re-launched theif bulletin Beal Steel News, Having learned nothing and forgotten nothing, the SWP Bourbons set about pursuing an identical course to that followed by the 15 In the 972 miners strike,

With the rank aod (We mobilised om a hage scale and acting independently of the officials, the opportunity for forging a peal tank and file movement wae there, To- Be realised it would have io take up weno Eke jobs, the transformation of the notorougly undemocmtic ISTE, amd so on. RSN eschewed these tasks and refused to organise the rink and file during the strike against the officials. It concentrated solely on mobilising workers around the pay claim. At some unepecified future date the time would be npe for a rank and fle movement, bul not while the rank and file were actually in motion on @ mess scale.

Socialist Worker reported an RSM meeting a4 conclucting: “After the strike Rca! Sted! Newt will hove to @ke mp hres Hite the reform of the STC and the fight? ageina redundancies it Well aa the general polities! orpumenis” Cour emphasis). After the strike had been sold out by the unreformed [STC and after the Tories massacred jobs in the steel industry, and after the militants had once again wnk ints apathy, it was too late to take up these fue, Mot surprisingly, RSM has not been heard of dince

big ones will go away until the SWP ond the working class ure ready-to hondle them, ieaheer folly, They won't go away,

particular strikes, 03 an orminisihen the SWF Cuming away

ONE STICK THAT SWP members repeatedly beat the rest

of the left with is that they alone are “building the party’, The SWP's publicotions regularly agert the need fora revolutionary party. Not a few books from the SWP stable - ¥olume One of Cfl's Lenin and ChrisHannan’s The Lot Aevolurion to name but: two- have as their theme the centrality of the party for the making of a revolution. Despite this breastbeating and dogged repetition of trodes, the IS/SWP have never understood the real nature of a revolutionary party on the Leninist model, lat alone come chose to building one,

In the days before Tony Clif became @ “ Leninist’’ be open espoused a Laxemtarsist madel of the TEVOIUTLOnAry. paecly, That is, he argued fora non-cadre, non-vanguirl party, a purty of the whole working class, organised on a federalist - as opposed to democratic centratist = basis, The firet edition af his jubsaduently docrored pamphiet on Loxemburg stoted: “For Morxists, in adereced- industria! cauntrics, Lenina 7 orgie po tition cfnm much fess serve afd guide tran Ror LuyemAwrys, Aohvithiicading Per orenighecets oa ike @iesion of sporfaneity. “(1929 edition of Rom LuxemAurg), Even after his supposed conversion to Lenincem in LO6e/s) CLIPS attachment to Epontaneist potions of the party persisted when he argued that Luxemburg's position was superior to Lenin's 1902-4 position! “witck war copied ud given an added Bureovernte fwist by the Siobists the world ower (1969 edition of fos Luxemburg). In plain language Clif is-atiibuting the monoliths created by Stalinisn to the model developed by the early Holbhewk party. r

The abuft to a “Leninist” model of orgnnisution by the Clif group came in 1968/9, Cult justified his previous fedaralist position on the grounds that 15 had been 5 propapanda group and “all branches were like the beads on a string’. (Netter Wesitagton ner Moscow Chet, p.2151. However, the shift to more agitutional uctivily, he amued, necessitated & shift to democratic centraliam, The seoond justification For the shift was the defeat of the French general strike. Clit had empirically repiatered that a spontaneous mass strike (the tigBest ever in Europe) had aot produced the revolution, The reason hack been the shsence of a combat, thar is, a “Leninat"

party.

By late 198) it was obvious to the SWP Jeadership that their fank and file Perspective had collapsed, They were forced to come up with on explanation. Clif as usual shifted the blame onte his members and the objective situation, The members, it stems, were guilty of doing whet he had told them ..They had built the rank and Me groups a8 militant trade union bodies, and hac themselves acted as militant trade unionists within them. Lo and beheld, they had actually liquidated themssives into these Bodies and, in 80 Going, turned them from being a supposed bridge inte the part info routes oul of the party, According to CI: “Snsread of recrulting people from hand aad file groups Inia fhe party, cormmrades direpear into fhe rank end file groupe lSoctlst Review, May/June 1982). Enrlier a rank and file activist - no doubt put up to it by Chit = had shamelacediy admitted:

“hur Fae ond file paper wad devoled cimtod! exchwilvely to wits was Aappening If our ova corer of the world and rhs determined our prianiies” (Socialist. Review, Mover ber! December PFET},

The SWP'r official historian, lan Birchall, describes the mernbers of this period a3 having pol lost. “in the minutiae of trade anon routiniem't The Smetiest Mask Party fa the World pid,

All of these charges are undoulbtecti y true, bul they. beg the question, why did this happen to members of a supposedly rewielutionary oreanisation? The answer ix qduile straightforward - the S¥P leadership ensured that il happened because they designed the rank and file proupa as bodies concerned Purely with trade union matters,

The second renton cited by Clil for the collapse of the NRFM perspective ie the “downturn in the class struggle. Since 1974 there has been @ gradud) collapse of militancy and confidence inside the working class. Contbined with high unemployment, this makes the building of a tank and fle. movement imposibiec, goe= Cuths argument, While at one time this would have meant at feast keeping alive the oolion of rank: anid file organisation, now Lt means dropping the iden altogether and, in the cate of the

CLIFF'S EMPIRICAL METHOD

Both pretexta were base on on empicical method, Neither auctounted for the actual shift in position in the Luxemburg pamphlet, The doctoring of the texbOChit's right) was not dn any way acknowledged or accounted for (Clitfs ceceitiulness), As such the oew burn to “the purly'’ was not the result of a real understanding of the essence ot the Leningst motel, Ul wap based on a copying - and disterting- of the onponisational form of that model. Since their tum to “Leninism™ the 0S; AWP tradition has developed a standard explanation of the need for a party. For example, Clil wrote, in “Lenin and tie Revolutionary Party’) “For the ackierenent of @ socialist reFolWlon @ Fevolytonery party iseeies Pecause oF ire we ven fevelys ol culture and consclousneds in different grawps af wer: hers. If the working cies were ifectogicaliy homogenous There

Workers Pawar Thegratical Buppeement November 19RR ¥

In any and every ebeation, al) the 54 P can shout whack to

file prowps| hove retreated inte their own geceraphical branches where “politics are to be discussed, OF course, they continue tc intervene in disputes, Gut here they most only raise soonll things: Weare door te ome ed eon whe ore prepared ite fehl dad

niall seale activities thet @ leaderthip techuils for the snnepeles of

rule. To concentrate only on “thelittle things” and hope thar the

Despite the often treless activity of SYP members in euppert of

from the problems that confrant the militant minority inside

shop stewards organisation (sec WP 37 fora full account of thisj/the working class, The SWP*s hostility to questions of leaderslip and politics, and their faith that en upturn will spontan-

eously rekindle a fighting spirit are condemealng it te secharian impelevance.

Tt appears that there so purge going on in the SWP at the moment, [hit & tnevitable as the or.antsation. lures in upon itech. Workers Power, which began life aa the Left Paction in the (Sin 1972/3, has drawn a lesgon from che party's history, We believe that despite the defents that have been suffered by the working igs, the Guilding of a tank aod file movement is a burning task. But it will only Ge of use lo the militant minori in the clags if it addresses the tdeological and organisational cris

that has facilitated recent defeats. [fF must challenge and defeat

the relotmist bureaucracy. To do this, it will require @ political

atrategy, a revolutionary action progmimoe. Revolutionaries da

not have prapranunes for self-education circles alone, A, prog-

ruimime isa set of policies, tactics and poals qipabie of mobilising

workers in action, Fot us, therefore, intervention in the trade unions must be communist intervention. We seek to win - by demecratic means - leadership of a genuine rank and file aLovement.

Todo this we need te be absolutely open about and fight for our revolationary pPolttics, and ool hide them for feer of frightening people away. Thie dora not mean we present these politics asm ultimatum, (in the contrary, 82 are prepared to take any step, however mirdmil that takes the workers forward

alongsids reformist workers, However, unieds we fight Fer emir wan politic: at the same time, we cuomet expect the working

clas to break with relarmism and march with uw along the road of revalutionary struggle.

The SWP's failure to infect polities Inte the NREM lel? the militants of the 19705 to be duped by Jones, Scaqion and the Labour government, In the )980s their “low key approach" wil leave toqlay’s militants at the meny of Evins, Duffy, Kinnock and Scargill Such is the bunkrupteoy of syncdicalism today,

CLIFF AND THE PARTY

A parody.of-Leninism

woul belad need for lerdershig. “(1S 58, 9,10). This teaves oul of actount the question of political consci¢usness, the ideas about socety, the state and ao oan which are held by the workers: 1f the clash were ideologically homogenous on the hagis of wrong ideas, for example relommsm, nationaliam o6 even nice: there would: obviowsly still bea aced for commu nisis te tight for the leadership of the class. This woukl have te be done in such a wave ato break workers front thes idsus and vin them to revolutiunary communism. The crcl question is whether the werking class cin develop ame vel igdery consciousness aut of ita own etrugeles. Chit anges that it can, the problem is that different workers teach sich coriscicmsness al different tinies.

Toay Cue

in Wag? ore be done? Lenn arnpued most forcibly that the spontaneous ideology of the working class wis trade cmianisn

and that this meant “ensliyement by the bourgeoisie’, The cole of the party, argued Lerin, was to bring scientific soclalism inte the working class, Of oourte, even in the supposedly omtsided Whar is te be done? Lenin recognised that the workers did tpontameeusly gravitate towards geccaliin: bat the task: of the party were to conquer ancl subordinale this spontaneity lo order te fraegiorm it inte rewolutonary comsciousness,

The SWE have cate niuch of Lenin's later comment that Wher isso fe done? saftered from being & onesiced polemic devine Peenomism, Molyneux, following COTE, urgues that:

“Of we gece! Lerte’s formodetion thal Bvolotonary conscious nevi hos ta he brouga? tnie the working clary then precisa Mtge ie left ot Hors ys fiendamenial dictua ther ‘tie eaaitcipa: Hor oy fre ivorking eiesr ir the ach of te working close cent cA fhe conrrary fhe rae of rhe working claer won be @ tr city subordinate one, orrins cad the Party pes, This arpument fails tn undesstand etther Lenin's original argumentatiun er Che one-sidedmess thal Lenin later idenctitied.

What Molyneux wants is nat ta correct a certain polemics] oneaidedress bot to deny any validity in Lenin's poditin, HMoiyneux beleves Liat the spontaneous strupele can achieve revolutionary socialist consciousness “Sr deea ir wes fro ee ingurpen? workers of Fariv that More feared thes tke warkjag cies coo ably tke over che exiting stare machine

Theoretical Supplement

the process of work inside dhe orgenisction.

He goes on to admit that many recruits were soon Josthe does not explain why - but insite: “Auf there wasko war} thip-could be foro in edeence, ao magico rasrk engreved on Hee forchedos of potential Pecrats [his-15 disgraceful [t is a recipe for deceiving potential recruits, diluting the political level of the opganimition and demozalising members, causing them to drop out. [t dectives people by recruitlnig them.olten on purely trade omen proonds and then bewildering them in a branch mecting wher political questions beyond thelr comprehension are debated, lt dilutes the organisation by bringing in people pot trained of educated in the often complex problems of revolulonary matgiam, leaving them prey to cdemagogues, personal prejadices and ao forth. kt demoralisea members bocagse, more often than not, theysare unable to cope with life in & rerilulcniry ongemaation because they have ot been troined, in advanee, to deal with the problems that this involves, The result - the d&and SWP hear the responsibility for destroying probably thousands of potential revolutionaries 25.0 result of ther ahori ten opportunist membership poliCLES,

Precitely beciose Ube party ima party of Jeaders it has got te be a8lective inte tecradiment. [thas oo-select,-train and Tecruit people who -can slay the course, people who, in their fieldacal work beve the political culture to be able to tad other: In other words before it.con become a mass purty and In order thal fomay become a mass party, the party le to be 4 cadre party:

Cif yustifies the mepection ofa cudre partyon the srounds that-it is inherently gubstitutionist. His camy Tromky on Substhutlonin- written in 1P60-and republished.as recently as 1982 expres’ this bertarian view of the party. He anues that-there weea chusal relationship between the Bolshevik UTganikiion dnd counleerevalulionary Stalinism: “Hower if the Site bell Gy tke Boipkevik Corry reflected aor only fhe will of fhe parry bur Of the tote! social peaity (Ro which the Bobhoevites found faemagies, one should nor araw the con. clon that there Ban Ad tvoasal connection at all between Bolchert cfnm Pied on helrorchy ey profesnonal reroiiiqne ones and the dtetaion of te future,”

He quotes Trotaky's Menshevik position against Lenin approvingly. Trotsky wrote: “The organisation of the parry sizbstifpied (lee jor the party ofa whee; fee (ie centred! eo ites substiivier tect! for the orgaaisrion; aad finaly, the ‘Hictafor’ suberitanes Alsen forthe clnteal commitiee Cll! comments: “In Troy words ahour the danger af “rubities Jnaeent in tenia’ conceprion of the Perty onan: ation, at Air pier qgenat wiformiiy, one ca fee au prepaetic geal, Ais opacity to look aterd, fo being info a ued fled system every froet of fife.”

but maaan seus fy.” (ibid.p.F0). In addition he cates the Chartists, the Rutsian workera of 1905 and shniter examples of major working class political struggles to “prove” his point Molyneux is merely parroting CHIT when be argues this. Tadeed CUff argues that Lenin reversed his 1902 position in 1905 “Lenn fad to protect ir followers from ollegiace fo What to be done? Ai formulation Ment of the reictionghip bes Tween fpontaneiry aad organisation til! bedivilg The move ment. Yer in {O05 ke cleeriy reversed fey position: “The working clors it fnstinecrively, spontaneously rocla|-democratic....° "

(8 tourna! May 1973- the dots are Cliff's).

Here Cliff is mot simply purdlind - he is wilfully twisting Lenin's actual position. The quotation he ends with dots ip, actually in context, much fuller end more careful than CLT Higgests. Lenin points to the fact that in the 1805 upheavals the workers were fighting “in a purclhy Social Democratic spirit” because: “The working cliss ts inrfinctively, spantaneouily Socla-Democratic, and more thon ten years of work pul in by Sott-Democacy has done a great deal fd franiferm rhs ipontuneity into conscourmess. (Lenin on “The, Reorganigation of the Party’, Collected Works, vol 10 p32).

Tony Cliff

LENIN Volume t:

Building the Party

Far irom. being-a change. ol posilion, this was entirely conGetent with Lenin's |902 view that: Jt o often sata thet rhe withing Air pontipcousiy gramisies fowerdy socwie. Fru i perfectiy true in the sense fae secteiit theory reveal rhe cue: of the misery of the working cass more profoundly ead more correctiy than aay ether theory aad for that reason fhe Workers are oble fo atsimilate if sa early, provided Aewewer thi theery dogs nor inseif wield to ipontaneity, provided it tmberdinagies tpontanetty to det het is fa be deme?)

The SWP's failure to-onderstand the relationship between spontaneity and consciousness liesat the root of their false nation of the party, Take the examples cited by Molyneux of the Chartists,-the Communards and the workers in the eoybets. These workers did mol rise themselves to the ievel-of revoluticnary communist conscigwines, Certainly it was the Commune which provided Marx with the historica) experience from which he - the revolutianary communist - generalised the theory of Che state. That generalisation, which ia essential for the development ofa revolutionary strategy, was mot made by the Communards who were led by non-communists. Simarly the first soviets, in 1905, did not raise the call foraermed insurrection against Tsarism, the Bolsheviks did and in Moscow they. won workers to that position, Equally, it was the experi: ence of [S03 which, much later, was generalised into-a reyvolutionory ‘strategy “All Power to the Soviets!” by Lenin.

Their inghility to understand the primary role of the party as the ideological vanguard of the class means that for the SWF the patty plays 4 primarily organisational role. It simely links Up exiting struggles. Molynews arguer “lhe fact of workers gchieving sacidlist conschousmery spontaneously does not extril afrdin te the socal democratic gridualis view {of the partyWP} for this conreclousnest does not develop gradyally, mocwmi isting ateddily and fneviretiv..so the consctouress of the adVanced socinist workers must be ornanived ond centralised fo incre te the macimouor itt influence within theideolsgier ty hererogendus estas a whore," (Moris and the Parte. 30h

To argue against this ides is not. of course, to deny that the Party does have a very important otganisational role to play. However, if the ideoiogicul role, the role of political leadership, is ignored, theo the precle nature of the orginisational One equally ignored, In order to fight effectively againat capitalism anid the capitalist state, particular forma of orpaniRation of the working class are needed: What those farms are, for example. teyolutianary trade unians, soviets, militias, ete, fan be learht from past and present struggles but thar is na guarantes that the working clas will now udept them, spontaneoualy or Chat al will adept them in time, The lessons of past battles hove to be brought into today's strngele because they have either heen forgotten by today's generating of mil: ifante of have never been letrned, If the party does ner argue for the correct forms of oyganitation and methods of struggle (tactical ond apainst insullicient or wrong ideas then those wrong blew chat ia, Sourpecis ideas, will dominate,

The ditect consequence of viewing the party merely as the “gemeraliser'’, the weapon for simply linking up of strugples, if a-rejection of the idea of a cadre party. Consonant with his carly potitions on Luxemburg, Clif has always (falsely) Sounterased the brond mass party tc the supposedly elitist vanguard party. For the [8/549 therefore, party building Meha Opening the deor io the masses ot @ minimal Sasis, lan Birchall clefended this line in bis histary of the party in the Pollawing termi: “ir fad aiwars been the practace inh, the Ch Wis To win Aeeruity fo the orpanisahon on the basis af @ Rn cereemcnt On gervity ded iedve fhe quesson ef edie cation ana-hesender dpeiciees IY polities ta be-develaped ta

THE PROBLEM OF SUBSTITUTTIONISM

For Cliff, then, the Leninist conception of the demeecriticcentralist patty if inherently substitutionist: By saying this he if Erving Gapport to every anti-communiet phuilistine whe-orgues (hat Stalin simply took over and continved the work of the party of Lenin! Tt quite clear that, for Cuff, a Leninist party without a Lenin to ran it is a dangerous monolith. Why ele prawe Troteky's “prophetic genius’ instead of making clear Trotsky sa gross misconception, It was not the cadre or- @anisation that was substitutianist, but the political programme of the Stalinists after Lenin's death. They substituted reliance on the Kuomintang and British TUC officials for the building of 2 revolutionary party and the political independence of the working class, The reason CET ignores this real subatitutlonism if becouse for him the question of leadership in a programoeLic sense, is irrelevant.

Ironreally Chift's distortion of the Leniniat party beads to substitutionizmn by the SWP. Real democratic centralism requires: real internal pacly bite, an educated and involved membership and an accountable leadership. None of those Lhings exist in the SWE, The leadership's centriem - ite mwisrs and turns, errors and follies - preclude cemoomtic centmlism., The established Cliffite clique sinnot afford ta risk training a membership that could hold them to account, The history al expulsion anc the present purge are eloquent testinonies of this, The result is a high ture-over of members, with the recrusts from one turn ‘eing sacrificed diting the next turn, This iso parody of democratic centralism. [t sabstitutes the rule ‘of the clique in the contral committee far the real democnitic centralise Leninist model],

euceessive “hur” is accompanied by a significant Joss of members who were recruited mainly, if not solely, on the practice of the preceeding turn. Such cowimies aré accusec of not being able to get out of the rot of routiniam, of being eonservative and too caught wp in their own arene of work to be able to see the need for the party to reorientate, In an immediate sense (his may often be true but it this is the case then the fault lice primarily with the party leadership that allowed them to beoome routioist, single-ttsue campaigners, not with the comrades themselves, Clitt's justification for this approach ig baged on the theory that the party is necessinjy built by the leadership “bending the stick’ in different directions as cipcuMmarancer change,

One more we find the quote-doctor Cliff enlisting Lenin a8 a supporter of party building via “bending the stick’, CET argues: “The fegdlness to bend fhe sek fir in ane direction Wd then lo reverse ond bend jt fer fe the apronte dimction, a chanacheriinc he hed thropgheut fir lye, rook clear form airedaieat thir eoriy ste of Air development aro revoivtian: ary veager, And further on: “We ewes maker clear rhe raze af tee aay, repeating ¢ (hopesad tres what if needed, wring the hegrice!, thickest strokes ta dereriie the torks, Tamerrow, Lenin wel reoriiere the botenes, wil anbend fhe sek cad

Thit hat been the situation inthe SWE for many years, Fach,

Thea bead if in anecker direction. ("From Marslat circle to Agitation’ iS Soeraal: S27 op 221. : This picture of Lenio as the soje arbiter of the political practlee of the Bolsheviks, the geniue who twists and turns his Ominisition as he thinks fit; again letves out of account the political strategy that puided Lenin. [f is obvious that any lender needs ta be able i shift the emphasis and the focus of weark. This-is trac of the Pope, Margaret Thatcher and Weil Kinnock, Leniq was able ta do this extremely well and, it

Aor Loxmnburg eouid be said, this made him @ great leader, but it wan't this that mate him és great revolutionary lender, It was Gis abuity to fight for the communist programme, stemming from fis Tole 03 a part of Le developed Bnd trained cadre party, in al? sorta of very different clreumatances that made him this, In fact his changes of strategy. thot is, of programme, were qgulte rare; the reailsation of the bankruptey of the Second International and the need to coll fore Third, the de facto bettlsoning of the “democratic dictatorship of the proletariat nnd the peasantry’ in favour of the strategy of Feomanent Revolution after Apil 1917, for example,

In short, CUT Deleives that a Leninist party is only healthy if there is.a Lenin in charge If there isthea the purty leader, of leadership, operites Sy being able to awit the onenisation from one direction to another, at will, As Rosn Luxemburg put it {ln anether contest) the membership develop the pas dive virtue of obedience, :

DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM IN THE §.W.P.

haturally, the leadership of the SWP has te pay lip service to the norms of democratic centralism. Chris Harman's recently te-sued emiy Porte ond Cheez is a cage in point, The fact that he cio piveun account of democratic centralism that is formally correct-on many points only makes the organisation's prdctical trampling underfoot of theae Grind all the more shameful. In talking about the concept of discipline, for examp, Hatman writes: “Qiscipiine for Lenin does sat mean Aiding aifferences thal exist within the perty bet raphe ex posing the fo tke full Weal of day so as to aeeue therm our (p.l71, However for such conscious discipline te exist, which means avery comtade being convinced through argument and debate of the line of the organisation, there must exist a much inery within the ergsnlsation for conducting that argument and debate, Yel the BWP does not have gn Internal Bulletin in which the membership can air differences, expose them to the Full light of day, Nor does the SP accept the rleke ef qembers who ciapgree with the ine: and therefore, want to argue agminest it, to orginise themselves ag factions Such debate fs esdentig) and cannet be restricted, bs in the SWP, toa a “preconference period . Political arguments do not ennform to calendars, they are dictated by the cours: of events. By only allowing limited argument apainst ita chosen policy the leader: ship of the SWP engures that ft cum prepare the membership to aceept its position long-in sdvanes of any counter argument AS a remujl Che inner leadership acts, in fact, 04 a pennanent, factiod. Nor surpelaingly it becemes ever more isolated from the pressure of the mink and file, and ds incrassingly restric: ted to the members of the ¢pparulus of the organisation.

In every phaso of ita axistence.. the SWP Cliffites have . got It wWiong on che question of the party. On its role in the working cliss, its organigational prociples and the critecia: for membership, the SWP make fundamental mistakes aod Tevisions, This is why we attack them. To the tight-of the SWE, the Socialist Organiser and Socinlist Action: criticise them for raising the cul) ta build a revolutionary alternative to Labour, That is mot eur ortticam, We are 00% for the building of a revolutianary party as an alternative to Labeur, What we insist is that the SWP have aot done that anid,ome tially, cannot doit. Workers Power can, loin us and belp ta build it.

= ee

liPheck nes Mlewuwees Ob el | eee ee tle eee