12.04.2000

Aggregate debates rapprochement

An aggregate of CPGB members took place in London on April 9. Although some comrades were absent due to London Socialist Alliance work, attendance was good, with comrades having travelled from Manchester, Wales and Scotland to take part. Comrade Dave Craig of the Revolutionary Democratic Group was also present with speaking but not voting rights.

The aggregate opened with a discussion of the LSA, introduced by comrade Jack Conrad, enlarging on his 'Draft theses on May 4 and after' (Weekly Worker April 6). Comrade Conrad characterised the LSA as a socialist challenge to the Blairised Labour Party in a period of reaction. CPGB members are working for the LSA in most of the London constituencies alongside members of other groups, primarily of course the Socialist Workers Party. SWP comrades have been told by their leaders to cooperate with us in the LSA, because people were now ready for a socialist alternative in the ballot box. For the SWP this is a political revolution.

The SWP has not stood candidates since a brief, unsuccessful foray in the mid-1970s, after which it equated electoral work with 'electoralism' and routinely denounced it as reformist. Its conversion from auto-Labourism to the LSA was welcomed by comrade Conrad, although he criticised the recently drafted SWP action programme as "sub-reformist", with its absence of both revolutionary and democratic demands. Like all economistic revolutionaries the SWP underestimates the necessity of arming the working class with a programme dealing with the central questions of high politics.

Comrade Conrad emphasised that it is important to start planning the direction the LSA will take after the May 4 elections. As a footnote to the interview with Barnet and Camden LSA candidate Candy Udwin (Weekly Worker February 17) we noted how the SWP refused to answer the pivotal question, "How do you see the LSA, and more importantly left cooperation in general, further developing?" However, recently the SWP press has addressed this issue. Paul Foot has accepted that elected LSA members should be recallable by and subject to the discipline of the alliance, including an annual LSA conference. These are both positive ideas, but the LSA also needs to think about its future structures and how to expand in order to found a national organisation, said comrade Conrad. He referred comrades to points 15 and 16 of his theses. In describing his hopes for the establishment a UK-wide Socialist Alliance run on a democratic basis, Conrad emphasised again that for us this aim is subordinate to, rather than a substitute for reforging the CPGB. A nationwide Socialist Alliance cannot lead a revolution, but it could provide a catalyst for the fusion of revolutionary left groups into a pro-Party formation.

Several comrades active in the LSA related their experiences and impressions. Some noted that the SWP is starting to recognise that the working class is not as fired up as was thought, and to worry about the effect of other left slates splitting the socialist vote. But SWP comrades are also discovering that other left groups working with them have worthwhile things to say, and some are beginning to read and value the Weekly Worker. The by-election in Tottenham, which will probably take place in June or July due to the death of Bernie Grant, was suggested as a future focus for LSA activity.

Other comrades anticipated that the split in the left vote will not be a problem; sectarians like the CPB, CATP and the SLP will be utterly defeated on May 4. Any LSA electoral success will be a victory for the left as a whole over sectarianism. Moreover, any LSA success will transform politics in Britain, as comrade Conrad spelled out in points 16 and 17 of his theses.

The second debate at the aggregate concerned relations with the Alliance for Workers' Liberty. Most of the comrades present had attended the joint CPGB-AWL school on economism and forging the Party the previous day. It was widely felt that, although valuable in many ways, the school had been disappointing in its failure to improve mutual understanding between the two groups. One comrade summed up the general mood by saying that discussing economism with economists is a labour of Sisyphus.

The initial meeting between leading representatives of the CPGB and the AWL was reported, this being more productive than the school itself.

The AWL is a serious organisation with a democratic internal culture, although there is a marked division of labour between the theoreticians and the trade union activists. Indeed the AWL embodies two distinct cultures - theory is for the left, workplace and trade union reports are for workers. Comrades agreed that a continuing dialogue and more joint schools with the AWL are desirable, but that there can be no question of the CPGB and the AWL fusing while priorities remain pointed in different directions. The priority for the AWL appears to be trade union work; ours is the Party project of uniting the revolutionary left in a single democratic centralist organisation and winning a mass of advanced workers to its ranks.

In discussing the school, comrades voiced surprise at the failure of AWL comrades to understand the difference between defending the right to self-determination and advocating separatism. Frustration was expressed at their apparent inability to listen to CPGB members, who repeatedly told them that we do not oppose trade union work on principle. In fact we have a proud record working with miners, dockers, Timex, health workers and others in struggle. We simply do not prioritise trade union work at present. Comrades were self-critical about the CPGB's weakness in this area, but agreed that the lack of a communist presence in key workplaces is not something we can overcome by immediately sending forth our small forces. Our main task is to produce a weekly political paper. The AWL seems to hold that any left group, no matter what the circumstances, must always do trade union work. Our practical intervention at the moment is winning the left to take part in elections.

Comrade Stan Kelsey stated that AWL comrades should be regarded as potential members of a future reforged CPGB just as much as our own comrades, and although there was no formal vote taken, none of the comrades who spoke in the debate dissented from the view that the PCC should continue exploratory talks with the AWL leadership and plan joint activity where appropriate. Comrade Dave Craig of the RDG complained that, although he had initiated these discussions, he had since been excluded from them at the instigation of the CPGB. Comrade Phil Watson among others answered that to have the RDG present at these bilateral meetings would cause confusion; initially he understood that the AWL comrades had not realised that he was a member of another organisation. Discussions between the RDG and the AWL are for those organisations to arrange; as for the CPGB, it is willing to formally enter into talk with the RDG - if the organisation seriously wants to pursue communist rapprochement (which at some point must mean fusion).

After the lunch break Dave Craig addressed the aggregate on behalf of the RDG. He outlined the history of the RDG and of its contact with the CPGB. He emphasised that unlike the AWL, the RDG is not so stupid as to criticise the CPGB because RDG comrades do not bump into CPGB members at this or that trade union caucus or committee. The RDG recognises the importance of the development of theory by the CPGB, recognises the significance of the Weekly Worker, and will continue to support it financially and practically. However, there is now no prospect of merger between the RDG and the CPGB in the foreseeable future. Comrade Craig stated, that having spoken to RDG members and supporters, it is clear to him that the majority of the organisation is opposed to unity with the CPGB.

In reply Jack Conrad said comrade Craig subordinates himself to people who objectively have a different programme to that shared by comrade Craig and the CPGB. Other comrades pointed out that one RDG member was a keen supporter of the Campaign Against Tube Privatisation, whereas comrade Craig seemed to be committed to the LSA. Comrades agreed that the abandonment of the prospect of unity was disappointing, but welcomed the continuing support by comrade Craig and the RDG for the Weekly Worker.

The fourth item on the agenda was the Republican Communist Network. Comrade Sarah McDonald reported on the activity and growth of the RCN in Scotland, and comrade Craig spoke about the establishment of the RCN in England. Comrade McDonald described how the RCN started life as an ideological bloc within the Scottish Socialist Alliance, and became tighter and more organised when the SSP was formed. It seeks to act as a communist pole of attraction as the SSP has developed, countering its reformist tendencies. The RCN has become the main opposition within the SSP, something facilitated by the split in the Scottish CWI. Moreover the RCN has managed to safeguard minority rights at the SSP congress and has every expectation of winning a new layer of SSP members to communist politics. She said many comrades in the SSP are starting to realise that Scotland is not more advanced than England after all, and working class unity is the way forward.

In England and Wales, the RCN is still fighting to establish itself as a viable organisation, comrade Craig admitted. Comrade Conrad stated that although the RCN is obviously primarily a Scottish phenomenon, given coherence by its role in the SSP, the CPGB supports the foundation of the RCNs in England and Wales in order to make it an all-Britain organisation as a way to combat nationalism. Therefore the CPGB would take part in the RCN, while recognising that our main priority for furthering left unity remains the LSA and Socialist Alliances.

Rapprochement between the CPGB and AWL could perhaps be facilitated and channelled through the RCN. In Scotland the AWL has formed an SSP faction - Solidarity - its place is in the RCN. An all-Britain RCN - embodying the ongoing unity of the CPGB, the SSP left and the AWL - would be a real force for revolutionary democracy.

Towards the end of the aggregate comrade Stan Kelsey spoke briefly about the Summer Offensive, to be held in May and June. The target is £20,000, with members expected to raise a minimum of £600.