29.11.2001

Party notes

Come all ye faithful

Should revolutionary-minded priests join a Communist Party? Should the ranks of a workers? party be open to muslims, hindus, christians, jews or sikhs who identify themselves as communists?

For us as a group, this is already a concrete question. In the past, we have organised people who were not simply religious as a matter of private conscience, but even a comrade who was training to be a priest. Today, we have a number of priest-sympathisers orbiting us at varying degrees of proximity.

For example, I took part in a useful debate on the future of the Socialist Alliance hosted by Leeds Socialist Alliance on Sunday November 25. The meeting was well structured and allowed all political trends, as well as non-aligned individuals, the fullest opportunity - given unavoidable time limitations - to present their views.

The event was relatively well attended, in contrast to the generally poor turnout at meetings on this theme we have seen elsewhere. Indeed, I was assured by one of the other speakers, comrade Clive Heemskerk of the Socialist Party, that it was the second largest so far with nearly 30 participants. (Clive has a neat little folder in which he is keeping a meticulous record of the running total and will - given half a chance - gleefully inform any SA meeting of the poor attendance nationally.)

The debate was held in a church and had been organised by an activist in the SA - a sympathetic Weekly Worker reader with a background in communist politics - who is actually the resident priest. Given the problems of travel on Sundays, I arrived early and found myself sitting through the tail end of the morning service. Outside of the special occasions that everyone sometimes endures (christenings, funerals and marriages) this was actually the first religious service I had ever attended.

The ceremony was interesting and included a denunciation of the war in Afghanistan. Twenty people from this church attended the November 18 anti-war demonstration in London and there have been real tensions between some in the congregation who support the bombing and the ?peaceniks?, led by its ?lefty? priest.

The involvement of religious people in the movement raises some interesting questions. Of course, there has been recent controversy over the Socialist Workers Party?s apparent kowtowing to islamic fundamentalists in Birmingham (Weekly Worker November 8). Clearly, a balance must be struck between flatulent anarchistic phrase-mongering against religious prejudices on the one side and opportunism on the other. Ultimately, the question is one that is intimately linked to precisely what type of organisation we are fighting to build and how it relates to the broader mass of the proletariat. Do we want a combat party of the class itself, or some ideological ?pure? sect with ?socialism? for the consumption of a limited audience, but whose ?mass work? consists of adapting to existing prejudices in order to build the biggest possible events numerically?

We should be clear. Without for one moment making concessions to irrational, anti-materialist world views, we call on all people with religious beliefs who are at the same time committed to socialism and the liberation of humanity to fight in our ranks alongside their atheist comrades. This in no way compromises the materialist method of the party, its scientific character and programme.

In fact, this call is fully in line with the healthy traditions of the revolutionary workers? movement. Writing in 1905, Lenin underlines that the Communist Party will ?struggle against every religious bamboozling of the workers ? to us the ideological struggle is not a private affair, but the affair of the whole party?. But then, ?if that is so, why do we not declare in our programme that we are atheists? Why do we not forbid christians and other believers in god to join our party??

After all, ?Our programme is based ? on the scientific ? world outlook. An explanation of our programme, therefore, necessarily includes an explanation of the true historical and economic roots of the religious fog. Our propaganda necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism??

But it is stupid to think ?religious prejudices could be dispelled by purely propaganda methods?. In truth, ?unity in [the] really revolutionary struggle of the oppressed class for the creation of a paradise on earth is more important to us than unity of proletarian opinion on paradise in heaven?. This is precisely why ?we do not and should not set forth our atheism in our programme; that is why we do not and should not prohibit proletarians who still retain vestiges of their old prejudices from associating themselves with our party? (VI Lenin CW Vol10, Moscow 1977, pp83-87).

Lenin poses the problem very starkly when he then asks - what if a priest applied to join? ?If a priest comes to us to take part in our common political work and conscientiously performs party duties, without opposing the programme of the party, he may be allowed to join ? for the contradiction between the spirit and principles of our programme and the religious convictions of the priest would in such circumstances be something that concerned him alone, his own private contradiction??

Crucially he adds: ?A political organisation cannot put its members through an examination to see if there is no contradiction between their views and the party programme? (my emphasis - MF). In other words, the criterion for membership of a genuine combat party of the class is acceptance of the party programme, not agreement with its every dot and comma.

This profound observation has obvious relevance to the state of the revolutionary movement today, still cursed as it is with a plethora of ideologically-based sects whose membership criteria stipulate ?agreement? with this or that revealed truth or shibboleth. Tomorrow, when we recruit masses of the class itself, it will be even more important.

Many workers will come to us still encumbered with religious, racial, gender and sexual orientation prejudices. Can these be overcome by an insistence that they ?agree? with the party?s programmatic demands on these questions, still less the materialist method that informs its content?

Jack Conrad cites an incident at the second conference of the Scottish Socialist Party when a handful of members expressed crassly anti-gay views in debate. They were vigorously argued with, not told they were in breach of the party?s programme and had thus invalidated their membership. A healthy approach (see J Conrad Towards a Socialist Alliance party p16).

Politically challenging such ideas is important, but, as Lenin recognised, what teaches us most is the struggle itself. The key must be to draw ever wider layers of the proletariat into social struggle. Just witness how the attitudes to gays and lesbians held by many miners were transformed during the course of the Great Strike of 1984-85 and their experience of the direct solidarity forthcoming from these oppressed layers.

Of course, although we identify religion as a backward, irrational prejudice, we cannot equate it with homophobia, racism or sexism. As Marx noted, it has a dual aspect, reflecting both the alienation of humanity and a yearning to be fully human. At its core, the social source of religion lies in the way that the working masses (and, indeed, the ruling classes) perceive themselves as suffering ?apparently complete helplessness in the face of the blind forces of capitalism? (CW Vol 15, pp403-13).

Clearly, conscious - that is, revolutionary - struggle to establish democratic working class control over society is thus the most effective means of dispelling the despair that fosters religion.

Mark Fischer
national organiser