Revolution no. 8

‘Toin a union ~ pT Clause Four ~ what does it mean? 4/5 © Fighting racism in Sheffield p2 © Plus: Hyde Park Rebels, French youth get organised, Junglism, CIA and much more

‘a racist — a supporter, Steve, reports what happened and describes the background to other racist attacks in Sheffield.

n Monday 27 March a

14 year old Somali was

walking home when he was chased by a gang of white youth to a friend’s house.

Outside the house he was beaten up before local Somalis came to his aid. The youth was then taken into a house, and the police were called.

The house was then attacked, with bricks thrown through the front and back windows. One brick hit a young Somali boy in the face. Two Somali youths then left the house to chase away the attackers.

At this point the police arrived and... promptly arrested the Somalis! One Somali, Abdi Ali, attempted to tell the police that it was the white youth that they should be arresting. The police beat him up, before arresting him, for daring to point out the facts.

Now he is out on bail but may

@eeeeesesoees ee ees @ S= throwing . . . some shop windows were broken . . such trouble as occurred was attributed to the rowdy persons who are always ready to create disturbances on the slightest pretext” (The Times)

Sounds like a report about the anti-Criminal Justice Bill demo in October 1994.

But it’s from October 1932 after a demonstration against unemployment in Hyde Park. This pamphlet from Practical History covers several demonstrations that took place in Hyde Park over a period of 150 years.*

The authors point to the fact that we have had to fight for the right to demonstrate:

“Some opponents of the CJB seem to believe that it represents a departure from traditional British liberties . . . A quick look at history scotches the myth of the tolerance of the British state.”

The Battle for Hyde Park starts off with a demonstration in 1855 against new laws stopping working class people from doing any-

mall crowds indulged in

be charged with assaulting a police officer and carrying an offensive weapon. .

Treatment in West Bar police station was no better. Held for 24 hours, Abdi was only seen by a police doctor at 2am, five hours after being arrested and only aftera Black Justice Project worker had threatened the police. Throughout the detention they were subjected to racist abuse from the police. When they requested halal food the police refused, instead saying that they had refused food for the 24 hours they were detained. This proves what racist scum the police really are!

These recent events are the latest in a series of racist attacks against the Somalis and black people in Sheffield. The Saturday before, two young Somali men were viciously beaten by a gang of between seven and ten men. Witnesses said it was obvi-

thing on the Sabbath (Sunday) like shopping, drinking and other recreational activities. Meanwhile the rich were allowed to do what they liked.

Karl Marx, the famous revolutionary, was so excited about the 1855 demo that he wrote,

“We were spectators from beginning to end and do not think we are exaggerating in saying that the English Revolution began yesterday in Hyde Park.”

We are taught that we have had a democracy in Britain for hundreds of years. Thisis a lie. Women and working class men have had to fight to even get the chance to

STORY OF

ously a racist attack. The attack was so vicious that one of the men is inacoma in the Northern General Hospital. The attack took place opposite a local nightclub, the Music Factory, on London Road. Police, who habitually harass clubgoers there, apparently stood by until the attack was over, arrested only two of the gang, leaving the rest to get away.

This is not the first time that a racist attack has led to a serious hospitalization. Last year a Somali student was beaten into a coma near the university. Also families living on the Manor Estate were subjected to attacks in their homes and on the streets and black families living in the Firth Park area have been constantly harassed in their homes.

The Somali community is determined to fight back. They have refused to talk to the police. As one Somali pointed out, “why

Ah RIOTS

put a cross ona ballot paper once every five years.

In 1866 the Reform League was demanding universal suffrage for all men. When it tried to hold a meeting in Hyde Park the government banned it. The crowd broke through police lines and held a meeting anyway. A radical newspaper of the day describes the victory:

“The people have triumphed ... they have vindicated their right to meet, speak, resolve and exhort in Hyde Park. True they were not allowed to enter by the customary, the legal, and the constitutional way. But then, they found out there

talk to one lot of racists about racist attacks from another lot?”

Defence teams have been set up and these are supporting the families in the area where the house was attacked. Revolution supporters and Workers Power are working with them to builda determined campaign to drive the racists off the streets and to have any charges dropped against the two that were arrested.

DIRECT ACTION!

Sheffield Revolution supporters believe that to stop these attacks there needs to be organised selfdefence. Every one should join the fight against racist violence. The Labour Party and the unions should support black people's right to self defence. If you want to get involved see your local Revolution seller outside your school, and look out for meetings being held.

were other ways than the legal, the constitutional and customary way of effecting an entrance.”

In 1914 when women were fighting for the right to vote the Suffragettes were banned from holding meetings in Hyde Park. They defied the police and marched into Hyde Park, and even had a “water carnival” in the Serpentine, swimming to the “boats being lashed together in midwater to prevent their use”, before being arrested.

The 1932 demonstration by the unemployed was attended by thousands of workers. After mounted police charged, the workers “tore up railings and used them as weapons and barricades for the protection of their meetings.” Now there’s a lesson for all of us!

Practical History have put together a useful pamphlet for anyone who wants to understand the history of working class and oppressed people fighting back.

So next time you hear someone saying that we’re lucky to live ina democracy tell them that it’s not a question of luck but a question of struggle.

*“The Battle for Hyde Park:ruffians, radicals and ravers, 1855-1994" Available from Practical History, 121 Railton Rd, London SE24; free or donations.

984 PKK (Kurdish Work-

ers Party) launches gue-

rilla war against the Turkish state. In Turkey the Kurds are denied their national rights. It is a punishable offence to use the Kurdish language. The government uses imprisonment and torture to stop the Kurds from fighting back. The British government are military allies of Turkey in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and do nothing to help the Kurds.

1988 Kurds are the victims of bombing in the north of Iraq where they are fighting againstthe regime of Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi army uses chemicals in these bombs that leave people horribly burned or experiencing a painful death. Thousands of Kurds die. The government of Saddam Hussein is a dictatorship and is known to imprison and torture anyone opposing it. The British government is friendly with the government of Saddam Hussain and does nothing to even condemn the attack at the United Nations. Many British armament firms are actually supplying weapons to the Iraqi government and are making big profits. The tabloid press says nothing.

1991 The USA, Britain, the and European Union backed up by the United Nations (UN) launch the Gulf War against Iraq. It is a war of mass destruction. Some 200,000 Iraqis are killed. The allies claim they are doing this to “liberate” Kuwait which was invaded by Iraq, They claim they are fighting against aggression and for freedom and democracy. Throughout the war the British press declare Saddam Hussein a Hitler-like figure and start printing stories about the brutal treatment the Iraqi secret police hand out. They also suddenly "discover" that chemical weapons were used against the Kurds in 1988.

1992 After the Gulf War Iraq has a civil war which includes the Kurds in the north fighting. When it is clear that the Kurds are beaten and thousands of refugees are fleeing to escape the Iraqi army, the UN, using US and British troops, set up “safe havens”

AS TURREY MASSACRES HURDISH REBELS

A CALENDAR OF WESTERN

for the Kurds in the north of Iraq. Meanwhile “liberated” Kuwait, the place where Britain, the US and the UN fought for democracy, remains a country where there is no democracy. As before the Gulf War it is run by the Emir and his family. Only 60,000 have the vote out of a population of two million. Women don't get the vote at all. The Kuwaiti secret police round up anyone they suspect of having helped the Iraqis when they invaded. They imprison people without trial and carry out widespread torture. Needless to say neither the British, the US or the UN launch a war against Kuwait because there isno freedom and democracy. The Emir and the rulers of Kuwait are friendly to these governments.

1995 Turkey sends 35,000 troops backed up by helicopter gunships and F-16 warplanes to crush the PKK. They go into the “safe havens” and

+++ 36" parallel 80 miles

f ARMENIA’.

ish forces

Turki advance 25 | | Miles into traq

evidence mounts that they are bombing indiscriminately and are actually forcing refugees out of the “safe havens” and back into Turkey. No resolution is taken to the UN by the British or US to condemn this,

in fact both governments give Turkey backing “with reservations”,

Why? has the British government reacted to Turkey and | Kuwait so differently to Iraq? Because they donot really care that Saddam Hussein bombed the Kurds or that he is a dictator that allows little freedom and no democracy in Iraq. They don’t mind when this happens in countries with governments that are friendly with Britain. But when Iraq invaded Kuwait it meant that it would control huge amounts of the oil production in the world. imperialist countries like Britain saw that this threatened their control over this region rich in oil and that would mean they would not be able to exploit it. They lied about why they were fighting and then murdered thousands of Iraqis so that they could continue to get their blood-stained hands on as much wealth as ever.

“Even having a good time is a class Question!”

On Saturday 18 March, there was going to be a massive free party near Loughborough in Leicestershire. As the foursound systems were being set up (we said it was going to be massive!) the cops moved in and closed it down.

Ravers from as far away as Wakefield and Stamford arrived to find police vans buzzing all over the place and the road to the venue blocked by more vans. While people were busy kicking shit out of each other as usual in and outside pubs and clubs in Leicester and Loughborough, most of the rapid response unit

was stopping a party that would have almost definitely gone off peacefully.

No reasons were given for the ban under Section 62(b) of the Criminal Justice Act. It was enough for the police to simply declare the event an illegal assembly and shut it down.

Section 62(b) can lead to up to three months in prison and another section of the Act allows the police to impound vehicles and seize sound systems. The further underground these parties are driven, the greater the risk of people being hurt.

People are less likely to call in

ambulances if someone gets sick, and we are more likely to get our skulls cracked open by the police. It is typical of capitalism that safe free parties are banned while club owners get away with charging a fortune to get into an event where the only drinks available are Lucozade and Perrier at a quid a can.

If someone was making a lot of money out of the free parties and the government could get plenty back in taxes from beer sales they would be legalised straight away.

Even having a good time is a

class question.

# ony Blair wants to getrid of Clause 4 of

Te Labour Party rule book. It seems

“BE likely that he will succeed. Why does he want to do this?

Blair is opposed to the ideas contained within Clause 4. He disagrees with the idea thatwe need “common ownership”. He wants the Labour Party to stand for a society that is based on the private ownership and market economy, basically capitalism.

Revolution believes that we need a new form of society, socialism.

It will be a system where the working class owns and controls the wealth and power, collectively. We are fighting to get rid of this system where the top 10% of the country owns half of the wealth. This wealth and property is owned by a handful of rich capitalists. This system is their system. It is set up to maintain private ownership of the factories offices, transport system etc. The bosses want to keep their private control over this wealth and ensure that they continue making profit from the labour of working class people.

We do not see why a small group of people should be able to live a life of luxury on the backs of the rest of us. We understand that this means not only do we have to end private ownership but that we will also have to end the political control of the rich capitalists.

Although Clause 4 states it is for common ownership the Labour Party has never attempted to achieve this when it has been in goverment.

But for Tony Blair even this verbal commitment is too much. He argues that Labour must be elected at any cost. He says that ifthe Labour Party does too much then it will scare away support. He wants to get the backing of the press and the rich.

Healsoargues thatif the Labour Party does notchange Clause 4 then it will be unelectable and the Tories will go on to win their fifth election in a row.

For many workers and youth this prospect sends chills down their spine. It will mean more laws like the Criminal Justice Act and the anti-union laws. It will mean less money for education and local services. It will let the Tories go further in their attacks on the National Health Service. There will be continued high levels of unemployment and more attacks on income support and other benefits.

With that in mind many workers and youth who want a Labour government are prepared to accept the argument by Blair that Labour must become “electable”. But they're wrong.

The Labour Party has never had the goal of overthrowing the capitalist system. At bestits aim is reforming the system. Whenever the Labour Party has been in government it has

notacted resolutely against the capitalists and

for the workers. Despite having majority gov- -

ernments on a number of occasions the Labour Party has always failed to take the power and the wealth out of the hands of the rich capitalists and give it to the workers.

Itis no surprise to us that Blair wants todo the bosses bidding. We have to examine how the Labour Party was formed and what it stands for.

The Labour Party originated as a result of the trade unions deciding that they needed political representation. This happened because there had been decisions by the courts that went against the trade unions. The unions realised that they needed to change laws and to have a voice in Parliament to be able to do this. In February 1900 the Labour Representation Committee was formed by the unions and socialist groups.

In a few years this became the Labour Party. It was not a socialist party. It was only committed to supporting trade union principles. It was a party that represented the working class butit refused to clearly state its aims. It made no reference to ending the capitalist system. It did not want to take the wealth and power of the capitalist class and hand it to the collective ownership and control of the working class.

The trade unions, who setit up, were led by people who did not want to getrid of the profit system, merely to reform it.

Trade unions are set up as defence organisations of the working class. Workers form them to fight for better wages and working

Clause 4; What it says... “To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and

the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry and service.”

conditions. This is a good aim and one that we fight for as well. But they do not aim to get rid of the captialist sytem where workers are exploited by capitalists.

They are essentially fighting to reform the situation that workers find themselves in within this society. Even more the leaders of

lost

these unions begin to form a layer of society that negotiaties between the capitalist and the worker. It becomes their role in life. Their job is to represent the workers, they are employed by the trade unions.

In addition to this they manage to secure control of the unions, and are paid higher salaries than those of the workers they represent Because they are not affected in the same way as the workers actually in the factories or offices they have a different outlook on life. They do not want to rock the boat too much for fear of ending the situation where they mediate between the capitalists and the workers. This may seem to be a half way position, one where the union leaders are getting both sides to compromise and be reasonable. But essentially it works in favour of the capitalists. Why?

The workers could organise against capitalism to act as a class and get rid of it once and for all. It is in their interests to do this.

But if their leaders are asking them to be reasonable, not toask for too much, then they are basically telling workers to accept a situation where the capitalists remain holding the wealth and power, only, with a few changes, a few reforms. Ultimately this means that these leaders, whether they are of the trade unions or the Labour Party, end up defending the capitalist system. But they are not leaders of the bourgeois class. They only have their position as a result of the organisations of the working class.

This is true of the Labour Party, Its leaders, and the political policies it carries out, keep

the system as it is (of course with changes). In that sense the Labour Party is pro-capitalist, pro-bourgeois. At the same time the Labour Party only exists because the trade unions, organisations of millions of workers, have set it up and continue to support it both politically and financially. That is why we call it a bourgeois workers’ party. It seems to be a contradiction. But it is basically the case that Labour is for the capitalists but of the workers,

After the Russian Revolution of 1917 things changed, workers were won to the idea that a new society was needed. They wanted socialism. The Labour leaders were terrified that workers who wanted to bring about socialism would stop supporting the Labour Party and would join in the building of another party. They feared that this could mean a revolutionary party. At the 1918 Labour Party conference the leadership decided to act and to introduce a statement of aims for the Labour Party. This was Clause 4. It aimed to keep the support of workers. But it never stated that the working class would have to secure socialism through its own actions. Since then Labour governments have never even carried out the declared aim of of introducing common ownership.

Many working class people still support the Labour Party and believe that it will work for them. But if we look at the record of the Labour Party in government we can see a very different story. Not only has it failed to bring about socialism and to act against the rich capitalists, it has also attacked the working class.

The 1945 Labour government was elected after World War II. Millions of workers wanted to see socialism. The Labour manifesto even declared it was for a “socialist commonwealth”. That Labour government refused to immediately end Britain's control over its colonies, and to give them the right to run their own government. In 1948 it used troops to work on the docks to break a strike of the dockers.

The 1945 Labour government had a massive majority in Parliament but it never tried to fundamentally challenge the control of wealth and power by the rich. Even when it nationalised the mines, it paid out lots of compensation to the old mine owners and guaranteed them a percentage of the money obtained from new coal production. The nationalised industry, the National Coal Board »was not run by the workers either. In fact many of the new managers were the old owners and managers of the privately owned mines.

The last Labour government of 1974-79 was elected following a huge wave of strikes. The working class was on the offensive demanding better conditions of life. When the Labour government was elected it took the sting out of these strikes. Many workers believed that now they had a government that was there to represent them and that they could rely on it to give them the things they needed. That Labour government did not act

for the working class. It made massive cuts in public spending. The working class needed more homes, better schools, new hospital provision. The Labour Party cutback on these things. The workers wanted a better standard of living. By the end of the government real wage levels had fallen by 8%.

Tony Blair wants to carry on in this tradition. We are against Blair’s attempts to get rid of Clause 4 because it is not for something better but for something worse. He wants to make sure that he is not even supposed to be committed to act against the rich capitalists. That is why he is against Clause 4

People are angry because the newly privatised industries are making enormous profits. They don’t see why fat cats like Cedric Brown should get a pay rise of 75%, making his pay £475,000 while gas prices go up by 8%. At the same time Blair is making sure that Labour is not even committed to renationalising the most basic public services like water, gas and electricity or giving us a minimum wage.

Although many working class people, who want to see a change, believe Labour will do it we know they won’t. We need another kind of party, one that would use the anger that people have against the bosses and would try to organise it. Not just to make sure the capitalists get a little bit less and we get a little bit more but to take all of their wealth from them. To build that kind of revolutionary party we will have to show workers that the Labour leaders always will and always have fought not for us but for the rich.

TONY BENN: LABOUR LEFT ARE FAKE SOCIALISTS

get exploited all down the line. Poor

wages, poor conditions, poor training. And no job security.

Our comrades in France from Pouvior Ouvier (Workers Power) have been working witha group of young steel workers, selling A contre-courant (Against the Stream), the French equivalent of Revolution and discussing politics with these young workers, on and off the shop floor.

These young workers were employed ona two-year “Qualification Contract” for Sollac, a branch of the nationalised steel company. At the end of the contract, the company went back on its promises and said none of the young workers would be taken on.

Together with our comrades, the youth fought back, going to the unions and asking for their support. At the end of the struggle, half of the fifteen youth were taken on permanently. Unfortunately, neither our comrade nor David, one of the workers interviewed here, were amongst them. Below, our comrade talks to two young steel workers, David and Fred.

ACC: What lessons do you draw from your two-year contract?

Fred: It was my first experience in a big company. They took us for a ride and didn’t honour our contracts. We were supposed to have been working in pairs with a tutor. This tutor was supposed to teach us how to use the machine, on the bench. But I was just left to get on with things, so I had to learn without my tutor. In fact, it was the older workers who showed me the work, not the blokes who were supposed to be teaching me.

ACC: What was the atmosphere in the workshop like?

| n France, like in Britain, young workers

David: The bosses treated me like shit, so there was some elementary soldarity with the permanent workers. In fact, I joined the CGT (a French trade union) in order to get my boss to leave me alone.

Fred: At the beginning, I thought that the workers would think we were there to steal their jobs. But we discussed a lot, and we gained confidence in each other, and I was well integrated into the team.

David: The question of racism was important. I felt that my colour upset some people. When I was taken on, they told me that some workers were racist. I was the only black worker in the plant, so. . . Sometimes they made remarks, called me “]’ami noir” (this is a pun on the name of the machine they worked on, a “laminoir” but it means “our black friend”).

"Now we know that you win by fighting. We're the real majority"

ACC: What did you do to keep your jobs?

David: At first we let things ride. They (the bosses) shouted at us, exploited us terribly, but we said nothing because we had to feed the family.

Fred: We were only able to put up with it because of the solidarity of the other workers. We wanted to be united. Us and the permanent workers. You explained tous how important that was. But our positions were very different; some of the other young workers didn’t care about not being taken on because they still live with their parents.

David: The unions didn’t support us. That really disappointed me. I’d always thought that the CGT was the best union, the one that frightened the bosses.

Fred: They talk good but they never once said “we support you”. We’d have been ina much stronger position if everyone had been unionised. We need a single union, to defend the cause of the workers.

ACC; Do you think union activism is enough?

Fred: No. We’ve got to unite around our ideas, too. We've got to unite to defend the workers.

David: Before I become a militant, I want to be educated about politics, really impregnate myself with ideas, understand Marx, that way I'll be able to convince other people.

Fred: Why should we let ourselves be dominated when we are just as capable? Workers are having a harder and harder time; we've got to change society once and for all, have a revolution.

David: Today workers have a false sense of security because they’ve got a TV, a car. But the politicians think for the bosses and they will attacks us on our gains. Now we know that you win by fighting. They’ve got to understand that we are the real majority.

Fred: We mustn’t stay isolated. Our ideas are the ones the workers need; everyone needs to understand them.

ACC: So, you want to be a revolutionary?

Fred: That’s right, and go and sell the paper, make contact with other workers, other youth. I’ve already sold the paper to friends and contacts.

David: I want to join too, but first I want to be politically educated.

, ACC: Right let’s get started! im

EVO: Why do you think it's important to join a union?

Dave: If you don't join a union, you're on your own, the bosses are always having a go and if we don't organise together we all get shafted. Being in a union is about standing together and fighting back. We need to organise better than the bosses and their representatives in parliament. There are over seven million workers in unions, the bosses are a tiny handful and they can't make profits without us. Unions are also the best place to be if you want to talk to other workers about really changing things.

Revo: You are involved in a dispute at the moment?

Dave: Yes, Our council is carrying through the government's cuts. They want to close three elderly people's homes, two hostels for the mentally ill and sack more than 300 of us. Workers Power won the arguments for all out indefinite strike action in the Union branch. This is the only way to win ano cuts budget. In Unison [and a lot of other unions-Revo] unelected officers can block branch decisions and this is what happened. They wouldn't allow a ballot on indefinite action, just a one-day strike. They

uring the mid-1980s D Hip Hop and House fans were the same people. If you liked Hip Hop, you liked House. Radio programmes like Radio London’s Nite FM would blend the two musics together. Towards the end of the 1980s the two musics merged and Hip House was born. Although this was reasonably popular for a while it was soon to be taken over by the Acid House craze. Acid caused a split between the two musics. Acid became very commercially success-

Join a

union!

Revo talked to Dave, a shop steward in Unison who works for Leicester City Council. His message is clear: if you're at work you should join a trade union.

threatened to call off the whole ballot unless we did as we were told.

Revo: Why do you think the union leaders are against strike action?

Dave: They are bureaucrats. They live in a totally different world to us, The leader of my union earns seven times what I get. They haven't got a clue what cuts and redundancies mean to real workers. For them strikes aren't a way to force the bosses into backing down, they are just a bargaining counter when they have cosy meetings and lunches with management. They don't wantus toorganise for ourselves. They want to keep control of the members. If workers realise that they don't need the bureaucrats, the union leaders would lose their big salaries, cushy offices and pension packages.

Revo: If the union leadership

Jungle —(he e Of hilp

ful and attracted youth cultures such as pop and indie music fans.

Hip Hop was forgotten and left behind by many. Those who remained with Hip Hop deemed Acid House as a sell out and any attempt by Hip Hop MCs _ to try and cross over to the Acid House scene were fiercely criticised. After the Acid craze died the new culture it had created quickly turned to Euro House as a replacement. By now House fans and Hip Hop fans hated

each other's music.

is so crap, how do you stand any chance of winning?

Dave: First of all, the bureaucrats can be pushed into action, after all, we pay their wages. But they will only support action so that they can contain it and stop the membership getting out of hand. The real solution is to get

unification

ete son and House

During the early 1990s a new underground House music movement started called techno. Although it was anoncommercial sound it failed to appeal to Hip Hop fans because it lacked any Hip Hop influence in its sound.

Then in 1994, fresh from the UK came Jungle. With its fast repetitive beats it sounded very similar to the old electro/bass breakdance sounds. Jungle quickly succeeded in reuniting the old friendship of House and Hip

Hop and like Acid it also man-

rid of the bureaucrats altogether. Officials should be paid the same wages as a skilled worker. They shouldn’t have jobs for life, but be elected regularly.

REVO: How do we change things, then?

Dave: The only way to implement this is organising the rank and file - the ordinary union members - so we are in a position to take action even if the bureaucrats don't back us. If we get a strike, we fight for it to be controlled by an elected committee of rank and file workers not the bureaucrats. On top of this we fight to organise the rank and file in each union and, ultimately across all unions, into a movement of rank and file workers to get rid of the bureaucrats and organise our own action.

Revo: Why do you think there are so few young people in unions nowadays? How can we change it?

Dave: The Unison leadership think they. can attract youth by giving away Pizza Hut vouchers

CONTINUED PAGE 8

ages to attract pop and indie fans.

And that means, in most inner city areas, uniting black and white. No wonder the powers that be don’t like it.

Jungle has become as popular if not even more popular than the Acid craze of 1988.

Jungle compilations sell in the tens of thousands. The USA import 12" chart is full of Jungle from the UK and new pirate radio stations have been set up which play nonstop Junglistic-Vibes all weekend long.

Check out Storm Radio 105.8 FM, playing non-stop Jungle all weekend in London and the surrounding areas (when broadcasting)

And Jungle compilations not to be missed: “The Ultimate Jungle Collection and the "Jungle Mania" volumes 1,2 &3

(Telstar)

WHERE WE STAND

E LIVE in a world full of injustice, oppression and poverty. While

millions starve, food is destroyed in order to keep its price up. The

latest technology in health care cannot be used in many countries because of the payment of foreign debt.

Even the most basic provisions of a good water supply and decent sanitation are denied to people all around the world. Meanwhile ever greater ecological disasters loom on the horizon.

REVOLUTION does not believe there is anything ‘natural’ about the state of the world. We believe that what is happening is because of the world wide system of capitalism.

It is a system that runs with the sole intention of making money for a tiny handful of capitalists who own and control industry and the land.

We believe that it is possible to create a new and better world system, a socialist system. It would be an international system which means the fight to achieve it must be international and is why Workers Power (Britain) is part of the League for a Revolutionary Communist International that organises groups from Bolivia to New Zealand.

Because we are internationalists we support all struggles by people oppressed by imperialism - including the struggle to get British troops out of Ireland.

Because we are internationalists we oppose imperialist militarism: we say not a penny or a person for the defence of this system.

A socialist system would be based on common ownership and would produce and organise society to provide the necessities and luxuries of life for all according to a democratically worked out plan.

This means instead of having people homeless because the privately owned land and building companies only build houses when they can make money, we will all own the land, collectively and we will plan that to use the bricks that lie unused and the building workers who are unemployed to build the homes needed.

To get this, industry and land will have to be taken out of the hands of the few. But this group of people, the ruling class, will never allow us to do this without a fight. The government was prepared to mobilise thousands of police to attack the Unity Demo last October, just imagine what they would be prepared to do to protect their whole system of wealth and power. That is why we believe we need a workers revolution.

But we cannot wait until then, we have to fight against exploitation and oppression now. We support all workers’ struggles. We support the struggles against women’s oppression, racism and homophobia.

Whether it is workers on strike, women fighting for abortion rights or black people fighting against racism it is often young people who are leading these struggles.

We fight for action that will win and in such a way that the struggles of today can prepare us for the revolution of tomorrow. We try to turn today’s struggles into a struggle for power by fighting for workers control, workers self-defence etc.

REVOLUTION stands in the tradition of over 150 years of revolutionary socialism. Our movement is based on the ideas of Marx, Lenin and Trotsky, applied to today’s conditions.

REVOLUTION aims to build a revolutionary youth movement, to win thousands and thousands of youth to supporting and building a revolutionary party that can lead the working class to power.

So don't just sit there sell REVOLUTION and become a supporter! ©

Revolution is written and produced by youth supporters of Workers Power (Britain) and the League for a Revolutionary Communist International.

ONE SOLUTION

REVOLUTION!

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 7

and record tokens (just like the TSB!). Young workers will join when the unions fight, when they can be seen defending their interests. When they are not fighting back they just don't seem relevant to most workers. There are plenty of opportunities to recruit youth to the unions today but the rank and file activists will have to do it, the leaders are useless.

Revo: Are the unions themselves adequate to change society?

Dave: No. The unions are organisations geared up to fight the bosses within the capitalist system. To really change society for the better we need to get rid of the bosses altogether.

We need to transform the unions into organisations that don't just fight on bread and butter questions, we need unions that fight for a revolution to get rid of the bosses.

But even revolutionary unions by themselves aren't enough, we need a party with the policies and forms of organisation that can bring together all of the struggles of the working class and unite them into a final attack on the bosses.

When workers organise for themselves, outside the control of the bureaucrats, they get a sense of their own power. They start thinking, "If we can do this in our workplace, why can't we run society along those lines".

This doesn't happen automatically, we need revolutionary socialists in the unions linking up the arguments about this or that dispute and showing in practice that to really change things, we need to get rid of capitalism.

Revo: Anything else you want to say?

Dave: Don't let the bureaucrats put you off: if you're working - join a union. There is only one thing more satisfying than stuffing the bureaucrats and that's stuffing the bosses.

See ea JOIN =22m

REVOLUTION!

¢| want to join Revolution Please send me[ Jcopies to sell at 20p a copy

Name: Address:

Tel:

iT Tetneeeereeis Revolution BCM Box 7750 London WC1N 3XX