[File capitalism thoughtamong the revolutionary intelligentsia. This did…]

Scan page 7

File capitalism thoughtamong the revolutionary intelligentsia.

This did not mean of course that the, workers themselves would have no part in creating a socialist ideology:

"They take part however, not as workers, but as socialist theoreticians . . . in other words they take part only when they are able, and to the extent that they are able, more or less, to acquire the knowledge of their age and develop that knowledge.

"But in order that working men may succeed in this more often, every effort must be made to raise the level of consciousness of the workers in general; it is necessary that the workers do not confine themselves to the artificially restricted limits of "literature for workers" but that they learn o an increasing degree to master general literature. It SWP Rank and File not confined"... • because workers themselves wish to read and do read all that is written for the intelligentsia and only a few (bad) intellectuals believe that it is enough "for workers" to be told a few things about factory conditions and to have repeated to them over and over again what has long been known".

(What Is To Be Done?) (Emphasis added).

Members of the IS/SWP might argue that their socialist propaganda is the ideological struggle Lenin argued for and that the charge of Economism against them is misplaced.

Manitestation

However, Lenin understood that the concentration on the economic struggle was actually a passing manifestation of what was an opportunist method.

Lenin arqued that the fundamental significance of Economism was that it provided:

"a theoretical basis for their slavish cringing before spontaneity. It is time to draw conclusions from this trend, the content of which is incorrectly and too narrowly characterised as Economism"

(What Is To Be Done?)

The SWP's connection between socialist ideology and trade union militancy is neatly summed up by Paul Foot.

"We have to weave. our socialist ideas into actionwherever the battle between the classes is being fought. Militancy is a million times better for workers than apathy (which is usually called moderation.

Militancy makes workers strong and confident, apathy makes them weak and obsequious.

But militancy on its own can also be defeated. It can be isolated, not just from other workers' militancy, but also from the ideas about a socialist society which are by far the greatest inspiration to keep fighting.

.. For once the idea of a socialist society ... gets among the people ... then there is no telling what can happen." (While the Tories shriek Socialism has the answer).

Here Foot displays the most abject worship of trade union militancy-whatever he might say to the contrary.

For him there is no connection between today's struggles and socialism save the abstract intellectual inspiration of a vision of what life might be like in the indefinite future.

No attempt Foot, Cliff and the SWP make no attempt to direct the struggle consciously in the direction of socialism through demands which pose the question of power.

This is because a revolutionary programme and transitional demands that prepare and mobilise workers for socialist revolution would conflict with the present consciousness of the working class. C'onference 1Y//: no Jigni agatrist The opportunist retreat of the IS/SWP's forerunners of the late 1940s has now led them to a distortion of Lenin's theory of the party after a period of rejecting Lenin altogether for many years.

Misunderstanding'

Because the SWP sees no need for a political struggle to develop and train workers in conflict with mere trade union militancy it rejects also the Leninist concept ofparty membership.

In reviewing Cliff's book on Lenin Duncan Hallas says:

"In passing there are two misunderstandings about the What Is To Be Done?' type of organisation which require brief comment; one is comic the other is tragic.

The comic misunderstanding used to crop up every now and then in disputes about recruitment.

It is that the reason Lenin favoured restricted membership was to ensure a 'high political level' amongst the membership so that everything could be most democratically decided and the leadership subjected to more effective control by the membership.

A more absurd proposition would be difficult to imagine." (International Socialism, 79, Well Hallas has made the position clear for us. He thinks Lenin's views on the party membership and of course those of Trotsky are "absurd"

The issues that led to conflict between Lenin and Martov on party membership at the 1903 conference and brought the historic split between counter-revolutionary Menshevism and Bolshevism are worth repeating.

Lenin argued that party membership had to be limited, to include only those individuals:

"who recognise the party's programme and support it by material means and by personal participation in one of the party's organisations"

Martov said, however, that members should accept the party programme but need only support it:

"by regular personal association under the direction of one of the party organisations" • The argument was not over who wanted a 'big party' and who wanted a 'small' one: it was over the necessary membership qualities and disciplined structure for the carrying out of the required political tasks.

Martov., wanted a 'broad' party which would simply reflect the existing views of the entire class.

"Our party is the conscious spokesman of an unconscious process", Lenin disagreed with this:

"The need to safeguard the firmness of the Party's line and the unity of its principles has traut urun cunorwusness now become particularly urgent.

into its ranks a great many unstable elements whose number will increase with the growth of the party."

(Second Speech in the cussion on the Party).

Hallas and Cliff claim that the real reason for Lenin's policy was that the party had to operate under conditions. of severe repression. Any serious reading on the subject shows thin tahn wichhich InIS TO UB rUUUISH.

Lenin saw the rules he fought for to be an aid in fighting political opportunism wherever it arose-yes as an aid in defending 'doctrine and theory' Cliff is fond of arguing that in 1905 Lenin called for the party to "open its gates wide to workers". He also quotes Lenin to the effect that:

*i ne working class is instingtively, spontaneously Social Democratic"

Minimal basis

However Cliff-like other opportunists before him-conveniently misses the rest of Lenin's comment which reads:

"and more than 10 years of work put in by Social Democracy has done a great deal to transform this spontaneity into consciousness."

Today the SWP sets out to recruit workers on a minimal trade union basis.

It sees its role as "linking up" trade union militants, providing them with leaflets and simplistic arguments to use against the right wing and the employers.

Its membership requirements are non-existent and its 'theory' is kept out of Socialist Worker and confined to the pages of its theoretical journal, Socialist SWP members often attack Socialist Press for its 'unreadable' articles.

Like Lenin we see the necessity for developing politically educated worker members.

Our comrades have to sell Socialist Press and cannot get away with ignoring theory and firm political principles.

We fight to develop members as Marxists not just good trade unionists.

And, of course, although we have our fair share of trade unionist tendencies in our membership our experience is that workers given a consistent lead take theoretical questions seriously and work hard to develop as Marxists.

Worker Marxist It is no accident that the WSL and the SLL/WRP before us are the only tendencies to successfully resist the pressure of the traditions of the British working class and develop a cadre of worker Marxists.

This is because we start from the necessity of fighting on programme and a principled political basis against the reformists in the ment.

• This means combatting the spontaneous trade union consciousness in the working class at large reflected in mere militancy, and in struggling to expose the treachery of the reformist and Stalinist bureaucracy in the labour movement which fights tooth and nail to restrict workers in struggle to the limits of capitalism.

Expulsions

That fight which Tony Cliff calls substitutionalism, eni ables the WSL to have political discussion on programme and perspective which involves the whole membership.

We have never expelled any opposition movement and we never would for their ideas alone.

The IMG place great stress on the lack of a democratic element in the SWP's democratic centralism.

But it is the politics of the SWP-confining "theoretical' and programmatic decisions to a leadership elite, excluding members from serious discussion-which has resulted in its lack of democracy.

The lack of a political membership means that disputes and opposition to the line decreed by Cliff, Foot and co. must be settled organisationally-by wave after wave of expulsions.

But equally important to assess are the actual breadth of differences between the leadership and the forces which came out of IS from the left.

Those forces, in however inartinilsto ... unre finhting Rafa alan ApaDapinall for the traditions of Trotskyism Part 3 of a serie by Keith Cliff against centrism. The battles fought there were battles where class lines were drawn.

If the IMG was arguing for a principled Trotskyist position there is no way they could coexist with the SWP leadership.

In the next article we will see how the WSL conceives of the struggle for leadership and socialist consciousness.

We will contrast this with the practice of the SWP, showing how their opposition to a scientific programme and a struggle against the present leadership of the working class inevitably leads them to a capitulation to the reformist bureaucracy.

We will also show why IMG prefers the practice of SWP to that of the WSL.

Implications

IMG members should consider very seriously the implications of approaching the SWP for a joint organisation when the whole theory and practice of the SWP is consciously anti-Leninist.

The revolutionary party must be above all conscious.

Those who claim to be Trotskyist must show what they have in common with the SWP centrists.

A future article will continue the critique of the SWP theory of the party by examining their concept of "internationalism" and their total rejection of the struggle for the Fourth International.

Continued 90 % Lenin the the

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

pould be even truer to say "are PHOTO: John Sturrock, Report

For, with the restoration of its unity, the arty will recruit