04.06.2008
New Labour terminal crisis demands radical rethink
Mary Godwin reports discussion and decision of the recent CPGB aggregate meeting
The May 31 aggregate of CPGB members and invited friends discussed the situation following the May elections and concluded that those pursuing fake unity projects had taken another deserved knock.
John Bridge introduced the discussion by reminding comrades of the full extent of the crisis of New Labour. A Tory rightwinger was elected as London mayor, Labour was hammered in the local elections and its candidate humiliated in the Crewe and Nantwich by-election. The party’s standing in opinion polls is lower than at any time since 1943.
Comrade Bridge suggested that people voted Tory this time for the same reason they voted Labour in 1997 - to punish the government. The marginalisation of the Labour left and resulting absence of real political difference between the two parties, combined with the fact that many people have short political memories, left the door open for a big swing to the Conservatives.
Comrade Bridge went on to discuss the disastrous performance of the far left. With the election of Tony Blair in 1997, many had believed in an imminent ‘crisis of expectations’ - a crisis which would see a revival of militant class struggle and provide new opportunities for themselves.
There was no crisis of expectations and Labour continued on its rightward trajectory. But the response of the left sects was to reinvent themselves in the image of what they imagined Labour should be. Without the confidence to stand in elections on their own professed politics, they came together in the Socialist Alliance on an old Labour platform. Some imagined they were applying Trotsky’s Transitional programme to current conditions, whereby the working class would be tricked into making revolution, rather than relying on consciousness. Socialism went from being an act of self-liberation to a conspiratorial activity hatched by an elite.
But voters were not fooled and the few Labourites who joined the SA were eventually repelled by the control-freakery of the Socialist Workers Party and mostly dropped out. All this happened during the decade when Labour was so dominant that leftwingers could not be accused of risking ‘letting the Tories in’ by splitting the vote - there was no reason why Marxist ideas could not be put forward.
The May 2008 elections demonstrated that the left, far from taking advantage of a floundering Labour leadership, has sunk into further crisis. The Left List’s vote, as expected, was pathetic, while the result for Respect-Galloway was also bad. The SWP is continuing to lose members and Respect councillors in Tower Hamlets previously linked to the SWP look like they might defect to the Labour Party. Groups like the SWP are widely seen as liars and manipulators - machines to disillusion leftwingers.
The sects are now in an advanced state of decomposition. Ironically, the left is in steep decline in conditions where the politics of working class socialism should be able to gain a hearing. Capitalist triumphalism following the collapse of the USSR has gone and the idea that the market can solve everything has been comprehensively debunked. The working class needs Marxism in order to avoid a fairly awful fate, comrade Bridge concluded. Our task is clear - we need to look beyond the decline of the left groups and find a way to bring Marxist politics back onto the agenda.
In the debate Yassamine Mather of the Campaign for a Marxist Party criticised the left for its sectarianism and suggested that the CPGB was perhaps too inward-looking. Weekly Worker editor Peter Manson replied that in order to build something worthwhile it is necessary to understand our past failures, to avoid making the same mistakes again. Our task is to establish what went wrong and what is the way forward.
James Turley agreed with the analysis that people want to give New Labour a kicking, and that the left has disarmed itself by aping Labourism. Mike Macnair referred to the regular political cycle whereby the last period of a Labour government saw a rise in trade union militancy and a revival of the Labour left - although he expected this revival to be much weaker this time around, just as “Bennism was itself weaker than Bevanism”. Nick Rogers predicted that the trade unions will become further depoliticised as a result of New Labour giving them nothing in return for their support. But Bob Davies told comrades not to write off altogether the possibility of a revival of Labour’s fortunes in the opinion polls, or of a victory for Labour in the general election.
As to what we can expect from the left sects, comrade Turley predicted several more years of flailing around, trying unsuccessfully to set up social democratic parties. Ben Lewis predicted more splits and fragmentation in the far left, which should, he said, influence the tasks we set ourselves. We must lay out our tasks more concretely. The SWP was clearly turning away from its recent concentration on electoralism and will attempt to mobilise its members on a number of fronts, stepping up its ‘anti-Nazi’ campaigning against the British National Party.
Comrade Macnair argued that the shift in the political situation meant our tactics have to change. They already have done so to some extent - from the mid-1990s until recently we had a policy of ‘participate and expose’ in the unity projects - fighting for Marxist unity, while publicising the unprincipled actions of the sect leaderships. The unity projects are now so bad, and so unviable, that we have largely abandoned this tactic.
Comrade Lewis agreed that the launching of a serious unity project was no easy task, as shown by the lack of impact of the CMP. But Hands Off the People of Iran and Communist Students have been successful, and we should prioritise them. He argued that building Hopi allows us to put forward principled politics and “challenge the dominant crap on the left”.
In the opinion of comrade Rogers the lesson of the last decade is that the CPGB can only move forward as part of a general revival of the left. He said comrade Hillel Ticktin had been wrong to imagine that the defeat of Stalinism would open up opportunities for the left. But he thought the CMP may be a way forward even so - it gives us a way to work with people who have been hostile to us in the past, and we should devote some resources to it.
Comrade Phil Kent agreed - the CMP provides a friendly audience, despite problems with an unstable and unserious minority. Stan Keable agreed with comrade Rogers that Hillel Ticktin had been wide of the mark when he expected large numbers to answer the CMP call. Comrade Keable argued that the existence of the Soviet Union had at least demonstrated that some kind of alternative was possible, whereas the impotence of the left today is exacerbated by a general lack of optimism. He went on to ask what would prevent the CPGB from putting forward principled politics by standing in elections ourselves, now we can no longer do so as part of a unity project. Comrade Lewis also suggested this.
Other comrades stressed that the Labour Party must not be abandoned as a site for struggle. Comrade Macnair said we need to beef up our ability to intervene in, and write about, what is happening in the party. He stressed that he was not in favour of Militant-style entryism, which leads Marxists to conceal their true politics for fear of expulsion. But he said we should report more on the Labour left - and also the Morning Star’s Communist Party of Britain, whose influence could be expected to increase with any revival of the Labour left. Jim Moody, however, thought there was little scope for intervention in the Labour left, and he too stressed the importance of Hopi and Communist Students.
In his reply to the debate comrade Bridge agreed with those who urged prioritising Hopi in the next period. A campaign to counter the threat from US imperialism basing itself on genuine internationalism, not pro-Tehran apologetics, would also serve to educate the left. As to the collapse of Labourite reformism and ‘official communism’ causing demoralisation, the comrade argued that all we need ask is whether we would be in favour of re-establishing the Labour Party of Clement Attlee or the Soviet Union of Nikita Khrushchev. Surely the answer must be ‘no’. Our vision must be of the future, not the past.
Communist Students
After lunch Ben Lewis reported on the progress of Communist Students and its plans. CS has existed for two years and has made significant strides forward despite a few setbacks caused by the low level of politics in the student movement. Plans to further improve the website were in hand, as well as the production during the summer of an introductory pamphlet about the organisation. In the new academic year the CS intends to publish its journal much more regularly. It will be a glossy journal similar to Communist Student No5. But John Bridge opposed the idea of attempting to bring out Communist Student more than three or four times a year. That would represent a duplication of effort, and student comrades should write instead for the Weekly Worker.
In reply to questions about the best form the relationship between Communist Students and the CPGB should take, comrade Macnair said, although at present most students attracted to CS are also attracted to the CPGB, this may not always be so. Students can join CS, and be involved with its decision-making process, without being CPGB members. The fluid nature of student politics means a youth organisation can grow and also become less sympathetic to the ‘adult’ party, which can become dominated and derailed by disputes in the former.
That is why we must insist on organisational autonomy for CS, while striving to retain it as a politically sympathetic student organisation. A separate student publication such as Communist Student, published at least once or twice a term, is essential to maintain this autonomy, he said.
In the final half hour of the aggregate Peter Manson spoke about the 2008 Summer Offensive, the CPGB’s annual intensive, two-month fundraising drive. It will be launched on June 22 in London, and launch meetings in other cities are also planned. This year the target is £30,000. Preliminary pledges totalling nearly £10,000 were made during the aggregate, with comrades describing planned fundraising methods, from translations of little known Marxist works to sponsored haircuts, not to mention the collective sale of badges and literature.
