Letters

A Duma with full powers?

When Scottish Militant Labour supported the call for a democratic republic in Scotland and the negotiation of a federal relationship with England and Wales, they took a major step in the right direction, a further step away from Labourism. This complemented the fact that they now recognise, quite correctly, that Labour is a bourgeois party, a party serving the interests of the capitalist class.

Unfortunately no sooner than the ink was dry, they capitulated to Blair’s plan to reform the monarchy. In doing this they betrayed the fight for a republic in Scotland and deserted to the enemy. The token republicanism of the SML dissolved as soon as they were required to fight. Their political cowardice, in the face of the devolutionist policy of the bourgeoisie as represented by New Labour, has made them one of the major barriers within the socialist movement to the development of republicanism in Scotland.

I attacked the SML-dominated Scottish Socialist Alliance slogan of “a parliament with full powers” (Weekly Worker May 29). I called this “one of the most foul pieces of stinking reformism to issue from the lips of so-called Marxists in recent years”. Some comrades were shocked. They felt I had been somewhat vitriolic and OTT. Surely nobody in their right minds could be so hostile to such a mild and ever so reasonable slogan. The search began for an ulterior motive. Apparently it was to distance myself from the CPGB to justify non-rapprochement.

Let me explain my position by way of analogy. A river divides the small army of republicans on one bank from the army of constitutional monarchists on the other. A bridge spans the river, which has the odd name of a “parliament with full powers”. The left monarchists think it is their bridge. After all the House of Commons is a sovereign parliament with full powers. The republicans think it belongs to them. How can a sovereign parliament with full powers be anything less than a republic? Everybody is happy with the bridge.

When the shooting starts, it is soon clear that the monarchist forces far outweigh the republicans. Deadly fire rains down on the republican trenches. There is panic in the ranks. The battalion of SML republicans rushes to the bridge, shouting, “We must defend it at all costs”. But it is soon clear that in fact they are escaping across the bridge to the safety of the other side where they will surrender their weapons to the commander of the monarchists, General Blair.

On the republican side immediate action must be taken. The bridge must be blown up now and without delay. This will prove to the republican fighters that there is no escape route, nowhere to hide. We have no choice but to stay and fight against overwhelming odds.

Some republican fighters are opposed to blowing up the bridge. They claim to want to follow SML onto the bridge, but, we are assured, only to occupy it. In theory, they say, traffic can pass over the bridge in two directions. In theory perhaps, but in practice no. It is to fail to recognise the reality of the balance of firepower against us. We can only survive by taking an uncompromising stand. The bridge must be blown up immediately. It is the responsibility of the republican officers to give the order without delay. It must be demonstrated to our republican troops that their officers are not wavering.

If the bridge is blown up while the SML battalion are retreating over it, so be it. They will fall in the water, where they will have to sink or swim. They will be forced to choose which river bank to swim for. We should call on them to swim back to their republican comrades. But if they swim to the enemy side, we should shoot them down like dogs - as deserters and traitors.

I attacked this bridge on two previous occasions in the Weekly Worker (May 29 and June 5). There was no reply. I am not complaining about this. Comrades are very active and can’t always find time to reply, as I know from my own experience. But clearly it was necessary to attack the bridge in a more determined and ‘vitriolic’ fashion. This time there was an immediate response - three articles, a seminar, and a statement from the PCC. Comrades Mark and Mary spontaneously formed the ‘Society for the Protection of Deserters and Traitors from Horrible Attacks’. They concentrated all their fire not against SML but against me. Mark called into question my motives suggesting it was really about rapprochement, an old debating trick. I was accused of “shouting” the slogan, ‘federal republic’, at “the backs of the masses as they march away from us”. Perhaps Mark wants us to whisper this slogan as they disappear from view? Or perhaps a more ambiguous and confused slogan will make the masses turn round and embrace us?

Mary attacked what I had said and defended the SSA, which has “at the heart of its position on Scotland a commitment to a democratic republic”. Don Preston joined in, but concentrated his fire on SML and gave a sort of support to what I had said. Well done, Don. He has been awarded the Republican Badge of Honour for not being panicked into taking his eyes off those fleeing over the bridge.

The slogan of “a parliament (or Duma) with full powers” is rotten because it is ambiguous and dangerous. It is dangerous because it would lead communists in the wrong direction. Our weapon is not our numbers or organisation, even with the Weekly Worker. Our power at present is in the clarity of our ideas and slogans. If we see an ambiguous slogan, which fudges the issues, we should pour not only sulphuric acid, but hydrochloric acid on it as well. My only self-criticism is not that I was too harsh last time, but I must have been far too soft on the two previous occasions.

For a federal republic of England, Scotland, Wales and a united Ireland!

For a republican united front!

For a republican boycott!

Dave Craig
Revolutionary Democratic Group

Society’s ills cured

Thank you for publishing the letter which the Independent Working Class Association sent to Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism! concerning the apparent withdrawal of the Revolutionary Communist Group from the IWCA. But while we were glad to see you had published it, we were disappointed that you used the opportunity to gratuitously attack the IWCA, calling it an “anarchistic grouping formed in 1995, of whom little has been heard since” (Weekly Worker May 29).

The IWCA is not an anarchist grouping but a genuine attempt - as its name implies - to build and encourage politically independent organisation in the working class. There are individuals within the IWCA of differing political ideologies but all agree that the way in which the left has worked in the past has entirely failed to reach the working class. The reason therefore that leftist circles hear little about the IWCA is that it has been doing the difficult work of establishing itself in working class areas that the traditional left either abandoned or never even discovered, given its preference for trade union work or courting the middle classes.

In Newtown, Birmingham, for instance, our members grasped the nettle with both hands, issuing a local newsletter and beginning a campaign to confront the issue most pressing in the area, that of youths mugging members of their own working class communities. This was an extremely difficult issue to tackle, given the obvious potential for racists to exploit the fact that most of the muggers were from the black community. However, with effective work on the ground (using the slogan, ‘Black, white, Asian ... united against mugging’), independent of the police or council, tackled it was, and now, to cut a long story short, things are going from strength to strength in Newtown.

Most instructive has been the response of various agencies to the initiative. After being told that their ‘help’ was not required, the police appear to have immediately switched into repression mode, swamping the area and (like their RUC cousins) are now in the business of punishing the community by nicking local residents for every petty ‘offence’ possible, as well as harassing those members of the community involved in the local committee. Quite a reaction and something to think about for those on the left who sneer at the IWCA’s brand of ‘community politics’. The council and local Labour Party have by all accounts been nowhere to be seen and appear totally disorientated. And the left? Well, of course, the left have enormous difficulty coming to terms with the approach. The SWP have already labelled the initiative racist and reactionary. Meanwhile the reality of working class people living in Newtown is that the mugging epidemic has actually ground to a halt.

This approach can be juxtaposed to that of the SLP in the constituency of Wythenshawe and Sale East, as according to reports in your paper at an election meeting in Manchester, the candidate stated: “It had become clear from the early canvassing returns that complacent Labour candidates had not bothered visiting parts of the estate for donkey’s years. SLP canvassers had therefore received a warm welcome on many doorsteps. It was also clear that a major concern of residents was the antisocial behaviour of gangs of youths, hanging around the streets. Comrade Flannery (SLP candidate) suggested that the situation in Wythenshawe was a picture of a derelict society. The young people’s disaffection could hardly be surprising, when they had no jobs, no money, and no prospects for as long as they lived in a capitalist society. Socialism was the only answer” (Weekly Worker April l7, my emphasis).

The SLP have at least taken the first step and opened up dialogue with beleaguered working class communities long forgotten by Labour. The problem of course is once they’ve encountered the issues facing local people all that they are able to offer them is the pie in the sky of voting SLP and waiting for the arrival of socialism to cure all their ills. As has been proven in Birmingham, the IWCA appears to be the only progressive political force on the ground willing and able to tackle these sorts of problems at source.

The SLP and the vast majority of their membership are from the same old tired sects that have failed the working class before, and although they have taken the positive step of breaking from Labour, they still operate instinctively like the conventional left, custom and practice. Their priority is to address the issues that they are interested in rather than what the class are interested in. Hence, despite the fact that according to your paper one of the main issues likely to affect working class people in West London will be Ealing councils’ “plans to privatise South Acton estate” the two SLP public meetings (for public meeting read ‘lefty debate’) leading up to the election in the area were on Ireland and the trade unions (see Weekly Worker May 22).

This in practice is where we differ. The left is disconnected from the working class because it has chosen to be so. We have not.

Doreen Webster
IWCA

Immaculate isolation

Congratulations on your coverage of developments in the Socialist Labour Party. Members in my branch are becoming increasingly unhappy with the anti-democratic antics of Scargill and his henchmen. Many however find the whole thing demoralising and some are talking about leaving the party.

I have shown a couple of the members my copy of your paper and they agree with me that the left has to regroup if it is to have any impact in Britain.

However, I don’t agree with your ideas about a party with rights for factions contained in its constitution. This seems to be a recipe for splits and disorganisation.

Revolutionaries need to place the needs of the working class above defence of their own pet ideas about life, love, sex and the universe. If a revolutionary party is to be effective it needs to be united and provide strong leadership for the class. If the class sees members of the party fighting among themselves rather than fighting the bosses, they will not join us.

Revolutionaries have to recognise this and act accordingly. If this is too bitter a pill for them to swallow, so be it. They should stay in the immaculate isolation of their petty projects and leave the rest of us to struggle for a party fit for the working class.

I have enclosed a donation towards your Summer Offensive for the service you have provided to the left inside the SLP.

Tony Wick
South Yorkshire