26.02.1998

Sectarian isolation

Around the left

The existence of the Socialist Labour Party, despite itself, continues to exert a positive influence on the left. Traditionally, most left papers have been characterised by a near morbid introspection and a fear of the great unknown. Thankfully, the SLP’s formation has opened up - to some degree or another - these closed groups. Their papers and journals certainly make for more interesting reading these days.

A good example is the Fourth Internationalist Socialist Outlook, which is initiating a discussion on the SLP. As it says, “We will carry more material from different points of view on the evolution of the SLP and the broader question of how the left can organise against Blair’s project” (February). To this end, the above issue publishes the agreed statement of the ‘SLP 57’ left and democratic oppositionists; a statement from the Socialist Perspectives grouping; and an article by comrade Pete Bloomer, the previous chair of Birmingham SLP and now a supporter of Workers Action, a recent pro-Labour split from the pro-Labour Workers International League. This spirit of openness and debate from Socialist Outlook is only to welcomed, though it should not be forgotten that it belongs to the school of left thought - the majority one - which believes that the ‘time is not right’ for the launch of a serious left alternative to New Labour. We should wait and ... wait and wait - then see … perhaps.

Comrade Bloom of WA is certainly less fatalistic than some sections of the left. He correctly states that “the SLP at its inception had the potential to become a force on the left”. Discussing the December 13-14 SLP congress, the comrade points out that “without the block vote, one of the left candidates would have been elected”. Comrade Bloom also observes that at the congress, Scargill “cemented an alliance with the Indian Workers Association” (more precisely it was with Harpal Brar as an individual) and “by closing the black section he was attacking” the Fiscites around the Sikorskis and Brian Heron.

For all these insights and observations however, comrade Bloom brings a certain spirit of dogmatism and ‘political correctness’ to his analysis. For instance, the SLP’s infamous ‘residency laws’ are described as “excluding people in a totally racist way” (though such a stipulation discriminates against, for example, white New Zealanders). This anti-racist paranoia leads the comrade to comment, “Scargill may protest that the reason for the rule is not racist - but he has yet to come up with any other rationale”. The less sinister explanation - of sheer legalistic, bureaucratic idiocy by those elements who formed the SLP, plus a commitment to national socialism - does not seem to occur to comrade Bloom.

The SLP congress also appears to have been non-politically correct on other issues. Sounding slightly shocked, comrade Bloom writes: “The possibility of organising within the North of Ireland was also not ruled out, with the resolutions on this question voted down or remitted. It is inconsistent for those who oppose the partition of Ireland to support the continued organisation of British trade unions and workers’ parties in Ireland. We must stand for an independent, all-Ireland, basis of organisation.” This seems to be a classic example of what Lenin called “straight-line thinking”. The state we live under is known as the ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland’. We cannot hope to smash the state if we refuse to organise unitedly in all areas under its control as a matter of principle. This does not contradict our commitment to Irish self-determination and a united Ireland - or for that matter Scottish and Welsh self-determination. (Talking of political correctness, it is interesting to note that in the Socialist Outlook’s ‘where we stand’ column, we are told that“socialism must be ... feminist ecologist”.)

Comrade Bloom’s narrow thinking also comes across in his comments on the ‘black section scandal’. Referring to Harpal Brar, the comrade says: “In an animated speech he argued against the self-organisation of black people, decrying it as tokenism”. One suspects that if had been Arthur Scargill leading the anti-black section charge, the accusation of “racism” would almost inevitably have cropped up.             

Comrade Bloom comes to the following rather prissy and sterile conclusion: “Rather than conduct a prolonged dogfight with Scargill and the Stalinists it is time to lead a split from it and from its sectarian isolation. Socialist Perspectives [which excludes CPGBers but includes Workers Action supporters - DP] is contacting SLP members to urge them to leave and participate in the debate on the politics and perspectives of forming a new organisation outside the SLP - with the question of regroupment and joint activity of the left high on the agenda.

“Having played a small role within the SLP, Workers Action has been invited to participate in the debate on the politics of the new grouping together with other forces. Workers Action is arguing for a labour movement orientation and for revolutionary socialist politics and principles to be adopted” (my emphasis).

In other words, give up the fight and let “Scargill and the Stalinists” have it all their own way. Abandon the genuine democrats - and the struggle for democracy - inside the SLP. In the name of overcoming “sectarian isolation”, comrade Bloom of Workers Action advocates ... yet more sectarian isolation.

Don Preston