Callaghan does not speak for Partj says 'Militant

Scan page 5

Labour Party will oppose political strikes against the Tories would be amazed at the editorial article in the June 1 issue of Militant.

It proclaims, barefaced, that:

"'in taking this position, Jim Callaghan does not speak for the The opposite page carries an. article on the enforced resignation of Spanish reformist leader Felipe Gonzälez after he had failed to achieve deletion of the. Party's: paper support for 'Marxism' • But the message is lost on Militant.

Never mind the fact that Callaghan rules the roost un- DUnTO. Andrew Wiard. Report challenged as Labour leader while spineless "left" talkers from the Tribune Group and paper "Marxists" around Militant talk of anything rather than how to launch a fight to rèmove him.

Criminal record

Never mind the fact that despite the formal "democracy" of Labour Party conferences Callaghan and his extreme right wing leadership clique-like Wilson before them-unilaterally decided government policy on everything from wage control to spending cuts, and continue to to lay down their own ultimatums on the line of the Opposition.

Never mind the fact that Callaghan's criminal record of betrayals-which led to the return of a Tory governmenthas only three weeks ago been given an unopposed seal of approval by his reelection as leader of the Parliamentary Never mind even, the fact that, sensing the angry mood of Labour supporters and trade unionists all over the country, Yorkshire miners' leader Arthur Scargill has correctly called for Callaghan's removal —albeit calling also for his replacement with his "left"-talking former cabinet accomplice Tony Benn.

For Militant all these things are irrelevant. They have intention of removing the right wing leaders.

If the line of the editorial is anything to go by, they intend rather to persuade Callaghan to adopt their own 'socialist' policies.

The article consists main of a protracted polemic against "Jim", pointing out to him in laboured terms how legitimate is trade union action, and how undemocratic is the privately owned Tory press.

to Callaghan and his supporters who have always regarded the Labour Party as a more efficient means of running British capitalism-that:

"The Labour Party was created because the trade unions learned through experience that they needed a political arm".

But what they don't point out of course is that reflecting the politics of the unions themselves-which were built with the limited perspective of reforming conditions within capitalism-the Labour Party has from the start been only a reformist party, surmounted by a reactionary, class collaborationist bureaucracy, of which the Callaghan leadership is simply the latest expression.

The sole purpose of Marxist work within the Labour Party is to create the conditions to expose the treachery of this PARTY "left wing" elements such as the conditions for the building of a revolutionary party.

Instead it nrattlec

tIve. Istedu I PraLLICO gamely about the prospects of achieving à "socialist programme" for the Labour Party with the existing reformist leaders still in the saddle. The article conciudes with faint dreams of:

"A programme for the socialist transformation of society is the key to uniting the working class-to abolish tre never-ending cycle or wage-rise and on ste one and inflation, reform and counter-reform and establish a What Militant wiil not teir Its This means a thorough break from reformism and parliamenmeans also oustina the UI..

Callaghan leadership along with every other right winger and 'left' talker that opposes such struggles.

This is why Socialist Press supporters in the Labour Party will continue to focus attention both on the need to remove Callaghan, and on the betrayals of those Labour 'lefts' such as Benn, Kinnock and Skinner who sit muto on the narty'e NFf. and refuse to mount the slightest challenge tó his control.

----- pull-quotes -----

Reformist party Politely, Militant points out