06.02.1997

What to do about democracy

Around the left

Communists unstintingly fight for all democratic reforms. This is the essence of Leninist politics. We aim to make our organisation into a tribune of the oppressed. Therefore we struggle to ‘extend’ democracy to its fullest, in order to gain hegemony over all of society and to inspire the working class with confidence. The same motivation lies behind our electoral work - ie, to politicise our class.

This means we are not leftists, who shrug their shoulders and mutter, ‘Why bother? It’s all bourgeois anyway’. We are implacably opposed to such an arid approach, which is ultimately passive and ‘apolitical’. Electoral work is vital if you want to undermine illusions in parliamentarianism and electoralism. Similarly, campaigning against all anti-democratic abuses is a weapon directed against bourgeois democracy itself. Such is the mainstay of (Leninist) communist politics.

It is interesting therefore to see an article on Proportional Representation, ‘A reform too far for Blair’, in the latest issue of Workers Power, in which comrade Peter Main “puts the revolutionary case for electoral reform” (February). Only a terminal leftist would find this a contradiction in terms, it should be added.

Comrade Main mocks Tony Blair’s comments about “not being persuaded” by the case for PR, an extremely mealy-mouthed approach for someone who never tires of prattling on about the necessity for ‘firm and decisive’ leadership. Correctly, comrade Main writes: “Blair fears genuine PR because it gives small parties representation. This could trigger the fragmentation of current parties and make political differences clearer - offering more alternative views”. That would undoubtedly be a far healthier political environment.

More to the point though - does Workers Power support the introduction of PR? Unfortunately it is hard to answer that question for sure, as comrade Main’s article is penned in a frustratingly Delphic way. Yes, he tells us that, “Revolutionaries support democratisation both as a matter of principle and of practicality”. So, WP does advocate PR then? Well, perhaps ...

 ... Or perhaps not. Later, when dismissing the idea that socialism can come peacefully through parliament, comrade Main states: “Revolutionaries call these ideas reformist ideas and recognise the importance of challenging them. The debate over PR can make this task more difficult” (my emphasis). It does? How come?

Blowing distinctly cool there. But the balance appears to tilt back in favour of PR as the article progresses. Thus, comrade Main argues: “In practical terms, proportional representation ... would be an advantage to the working class and to revolutionaries”. The comrade concludes by stating: “We should not ignore the demand for democratic reform”, presumably referring to PR.

The real question posed is: will WP actively campaign and fight for PR? Or will it just regard it as a ‘side issue’, to be tucked away and forgotten about once the real business of voting Labour at the general election takes over? We shall see.

Don Preston