[making many correct points, but at no stage…]

Scan page 4

making many correct points, but at no stage is the concrete brought into the discussion. At no point does the I.C. discuss programme (emphasis in original). Philosophy 1s transformed into its own field of debate the WRP and I.C.] divorced from the class struggle itsell and divorced from practice.

All knowledge begins from the struggle of man against nature, now in the form of the class struggle • the conflict of revolutionary theory in the form of the party with spontaneity in the form of the class. That must he the starting point and central reference point in our polemic. That is not (emphasis in original) the starting point in theorétical education in our party [WRP] The consequence of this is that cadres are not trained in Marxism. They are trained to repeat formulac of dialectical materialism and given some grounding in principled struggles which are the history of the WRP as a section of the International Committee. But, in living terms, no education takes place, because there is no real discussion or analysis within the party of the party's practice in the class struggle!

EVASION

Healy's selective quote sidesteps the points being made. The conflict between man and nature and between the party and the class is stressed here by Thornett because the WRP's propagandism and abstract approach to theory separates Marxism and the revolutionary party from the living movement which is its material base. He consciously avoids answering on the I.C.'s refusThe philosophy of Marxism, of dialectical materialism, therefore is unlike all previous philosophies. It is not just a body of ideas, to be argued by 'theorists' outside the day-to-day struggles of the working class, If placed outside these struggles it withers into an abstract set of concepts, turning into its opposite -an obstacle to the political development of the working class.

One of the basic tasks therefore of the Workers Socialist League is to educate its members in the main ideas of dialectical materialism, to explain and discuss these ideas as clearly as possible, and always to encourage their use in developing a fuller, richer knowledge of political developments. We fight to defend dialectical materialism against all attempts to distort or revise it, or to take it out of the hands of workers and make it the sole preserve of intellectuals and theoreticians. It can only be developed by a party containing both intellectuals and workers and fight. ing on a programme to lead the working class to power.

This is why we now challenge the leadership of the Workers Revolutionary Party on their revision of the central question of philosophy - Marxist dialectics - and its relation to the idealist dialectics of the German philosopher Hegel (1770 -1831), from which Marx and Engels began their struggle for scien tifie socialism. One of the problems in taking up the wrong philosophical positions of Gerry Healy, National Secretary of the Workers Revolutionary Party, in the, past is that he has put so little of his philosophy in writing, preferring to confine himself to lectures. We welcome therefore his venture into print with an 8-page pamphlet attacking the Workers Socialist League UNITY How does Healy revise Marxism? Like all reactionary thought his thinking reflects the world in a distorted form. The material world itself exists and moves through the unity and conflict of opposites this is the kernel of dialectical materialism, manifesting itself in all areas of society and politics. The sharper the economic crisis, the guotation Healy uses from Thornett's document:

"All knowledge bugins from the struggle of man against nature, now in co fort of eno canary theory in the form spontaneity in the for of the cas: That must be the starting point and central reference point in our polemic."

From this quotation he undertaks to prove that Thornett holds a vulgar one-sided materialist concep tion of history, which in turn leads the author into the swamp of subjective idealism." (Healy, p.1) thing separate from nature.

SLEIGHT

This sentence is the incredible sleight of hand on which the whole of Healy's case is then constructed. The assertion that Thornett "transters the source of consciousness to the brain" - in other words starts from consciousness determining being - is nowhere contained in Thornett's material. Lets look at the quotation Healy uses from Thor nett again and see what he actually says:

*All knowledge begins from the struggle of man against nature, (which is material) now in the form the class struggle - (which is material) the conflict of revolutionary theory in the form of the party (not in his head) with spontaneity in the form of the class. (Emphas added)

Healy goes on: "Here is the basis of all idealism, that it is consciousness which determines being and not being which determines consciousness. Having subjectively separated man's struggle with nature from the unity (emphasis added) of this struggle with nature, Thornett can only start from the threadbare baggage of idealist reasoning which begins within his own head and is arbitrarily used to prove any argument which he thinks necess. ary to attack the Workers Revolutionary Party. That is why we designate his method that of subjective idealism." (Healy, p4)

Healy The problem Healy has to cont.

id with is that Lenin polemicised ship. In the International Committee booklet In Defence of Trot skyism, published in Feb 1973 it is used as a basic plank in the theoretical argument against the French OCI. In fact it is the very passage quoted here which the IC cor rectly accuses the OCI of deliberate ly omitting in a quotation. At that time its omission was taken up sharply in these terms: "As Forgontier (OCI theoretician) well knows.- and here he must have decided quite consciously to obscure the point, since he had the text before him - it is precisely on this omitted paragraph (emphasis added that the split in the International Committee turns! The relation between theory and practice, between party and class, is a relation struggle. The relative unitu theory and practice is established, constantly re-established, only through the struggle of inutually excl usive opposites.