06.02.1997

The Communist

Party Notes

Comrades should try to get hold of issue number one of The Communist, just published jointly by the British Communist Action Group and the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Front of Turkey. I have not had the chance to study it closely yet, but parts of it make for an interesting read.

This new journal is the outcome of “a period of close collaboration and discussions between comrades from the CAG and the DHKC in London” (Editorial). The two organisations have agreed “a framework for cooperation between the two organisations [which] includes joint propaganda and joint contingents on demonstrations, joint meetings”.

Len Holloway of the CAG correctly writes of the potentially “critical role that the comrades from Turkey and Kurdistan” could play in reforging a genuine Communist Party in this country. “They can”, he suggests, “make a very big difference indeed ...”.

This is correct, of course. We should welcome any moves of the substantial organisations of communists from other countries to integrate as revolutionaries into the movement in Britain. In April of last year, to mark the publication of the Jack Conrad draft programme in Turkish, we issued a front page call for “all communists who live and work under the British state to organise together in the same Communist Party” (Weekly Worker, April 25).

We directed this call to the Turkish and Kurdish community living in Britain in particular because we recognised that “this section of the class supports revolutionary and communist politics in greater numbers than any other part of the proletariat in this country ... yet few comrades from these communities find themselves in the ranks of the revolutionary movement in Britain”. In many ways, this is a historical tragedy as they could play an “an important role in revitalising communism here” (Ibid).

All of this is true and we should warmly welcome the DHKC’s decision to “[lend] their forces to the struggle to build a Communist Party here as well as waging their struggle against their ‘own’ bourgeoisie” (The Communist, February 1997).

It is important we sound a note of caution, however. The CAG suggest, that “communism in Britain badly needs the input of these comrades if it is to survive”. To offer a viable alternative for the working class, “they need from the outset a certain minimum strength which is presently lacking”.

This is a depressingly familiar tune from the CAG. This organisation, despite formally placing “reforging the party at the centre of our work” (cited in ‘Notes on rapprochement’, Weekly Worker April 27 1995), has explicitly rejected the calls for communist rapprochement of the Communist Party of Great Britain. Instead, it has glorified low level activism and attempted to grab itself a little vicarious glory by constituting itself as uncritical cheerleaders of the IRA and other non-proletarian revolutionaries around the world.

Whatever minimal activities it has been involved in over the years, it has in effect abstained from the key task of rebuilding a Communist Party in this country. Protestations now from these comrades that their growing collaboration with the DHKC will be a powerful blow for pro-Partyism should be viewed cautiously therefore: The CAG has a thoroughly false understanding of what constitutes a communist party and communist work.

That said, many of the sentiments expressed in the new journal’s editorial and keynote articles are correct. The DHKC is the first organisation from this important proletarian community in Britain to make such a move. It should be encouraged and others urged to follow its lead.

Mark Fischer
national organiser