On May 30 the bourgeoisie brought to trial eight brothers and sisters from Stoke Newington on the charge of being members of the Angry Brigade and conspiring in various bombings. As revolutionaries it is vitally necessary to be both in solidarity with these comrades and to show our solidarity in an unequivocable way. This is for these simple reasons. 1. It is our basic responsibility to defend fellow revolutionaries-whatever our internal political disagreements -when they are being attacked by the bourgoois state. This is not a moral question —unless we are able to deTend those under attack by the bourgeoisie we have no hope of overthrowing it. Moreover the defence of the Eight is in the immediate interests of the working class as a whole-for a victory to the capitalists in any one of their offensives strengthens them in their confidence generally (and in this case specifically strengthens them in the use of the courts to apply the Industrial Relations Act). Similarly for instance, a defeat for the IRA in Ireland will immediately strengthen the ruling class in its attack on workers here in Britain as well. 2. The recent raids on groups such as the I.M.G. and 1.S. show that the bourgeoisie is not confining its offensive to only one part of the revolutionary movement but to all of us. Moreover, this repression will inevitably increase with the increasing tempo of political struggle as a whole. If we are not going to be picked off one by one we have to aim very quickly for some united way of defending durHowever, this will never be achieved. te now even on the basic our revolutionary prodamations then we have to break from the economism which is still prevalent on sections of the revolutionary left-i.e., break from that political philosophy which considers that the white and male and workers and that the only place they are oppressed is on the factory floor To do this means explaining, amongst other is a totally oppressive bo weapon and also explaining that therefore law" and the 'courts" are likewise not neutral. In the specific case of the Stoke Newington Eight this wans coming out against the bourgeois courts in favour of our comrades on trial-just as we support the railwaymen against the courts. We have to take sides. This is not just because for us to remain neutral when the bourgeoisie is using its legal weapons is to reinforce bourgeois propaganda that the courts are themselves neutral. It is also because for us to pretend to remain neutral when the bourgeoisie is attacking is in practice to be on the side of the bourgeoisie against the victims of oppression. There are only two sides. Moreover, this is the case wheWaterloo alone. The footplateman's job used to be handed down from father to son. In Feltham it's virtually a railwaymen's community and that includes signalmen and other NUR men as well. As usual, the government didn't know the score at all.
What is the general view of the Act amongst the rank and file members, now they see how it works?
What they're doing is stopping the Union using the work to rule as a tactic short of strike action. Maybe they were hoping we would get fed up and accept. But by bringing in the courts they've hardened the resolve of the men. People who wouldn't lose a bob contributed to the unanimous vote at Waterloo ASLEF to continue the action.
The men are certain that the reason there were only four hours of talks during the 14 day cooling off period was because the government wanted to use another section of the Act to build up case history, and use us as guinea pigs.
If you look at the wording on the ballot it's really a loaded question. But in fact it doesn't really matter what question they put. The men. realise it's a challenge to the official union. It's an attront to the organisation they belong to. What's the next step assuming all the unions win in the ballot?
It doesn't matter if they win or lose, there's nothing to stop them taking any action they want. I'm convinced there will be an overbombings alleged. All that matters for us is that. the State is attacking them for being revolutionaries.
THE SECTARIANS It goes without saying that the left as a whole (including the I,M.G. to some extent) has fallen down on its duty to solidarize with the Eightjust as it fell down in the case of lan Purdie and Jake Prescott and just as it fell down in the case of the Scottish Maoists recently sent to jail for 25 years. However, if this were not bad enough it is even worse to hear the sectarian arguments to justify this unfortunately usual one of putting political differences (in this case over the use of terrorism) before the basic need to resist all bourgeois attacks. Is it to be denied (as the sectarians deny) that this is a political trial's it to be denied (as the sectarians deny) that the comrades on trial are revolutionaries? Or do we only define those people as revolutionaries with whom we are in complete programmatic agreement and defend these alone against bourgeois repression f this latter really is the case then given the small size of the left and its relative fragmentation, our solidarity action really will be limited. Anyhow whether or not the Eight are 'revolutionaries' should not be the point-and is in fact a diversion used by the sectarians. As explained above we are in solidarity with anyone who is struggling against the State and its ruling class -whether on an economic "terrorist" or revolutionary basis-because any victory by the bourgeoisie in this struggle strengthens it in its overall dominance over the working class and all other oppressed sectors.
Jake Prescott, sentenced to 15 years inside: the Eight are accused of conspiring with him.
whelming majority, certainly in ASLEF. The executives are probably even now exploring what further action to take. The Board faces capitulation. Once the cooling off period expires there's nothing further they can do under the law as it stands at the moment. This may however be a very political move to appeal that they need further measures in order to smash the organisations of the working class.
What about the attitude of the Board? Of course, British Rail is just a puppet on the string for whichever government happens to be in power. Even Donaldson poked his nose in and told BR to backdate the offer to June Ist instead of June 5th because otherwise the second offer would have been smaller than the first one and they wouldn't have been able to try out their compulsory ballot under the terms of the act.
Why exactly are the unions holding out for backdating to May Ist after all the increases involved is very small?
What you have to know and havn't been told by the press is that when the last pay deal was made the board forced the three unions to sign an agreement that the new wage award would last until the last day of April, and any new wage award would start from May '72. In fact ASLEF on submitting its claim in June last year insisted on the date being brought forward. But they were called to order by the Board and the other two unions tnal May i was in the agreement and they had to concede Another way we must distinguish ourselves from the sectarians is not only by solidarising with the Eight, it is also by anyhow getting quite clear that, as Leninists, we are not by any manner of means opposed to terrorism as a political tactic in every situation and for all time. To be opposed to terrorism on principle, is to accept the politics of pacifism. Thus, firstly, we are not opposed to personal violence as such-indeed given the inevitable resistance of the bourgeoisie, we see violence as a necessary tool for the making of the revolution. As Trotsky said (Terrorism and Communism) *there is no other way of breaking the class will of the enemy except the systematic and energetic use of violence". Secondly our attitude towards acts of terrorism against individuals is not dietated by any matter of principle but only by tactics. Thus we certainly disagree politically with acts of isolated violence which take place without popular support and without the masses being aware of the political issues involved. This, of course, is why we have profound disagreements with the Angry Brigade who, totally divorced from any section of the working class, act out of complete weakness and in fact only serve to repel the class even further from revolutionary ideas.
However, there are also contemporary examples where individual violence is popularly supported by the working class and is politically educative for the class. Rural guerrilla war in Cuba is one example. Urban guerrilla warfare in Ireland is another (or don't the pacifists consider killing British soldiers in either Ireland or Aldershot to be both necessary and educative for the Irish working class?).
For those interested only in the holy' texts this is what Lenin had to say on the matter:
"In principle we have never renounced and can never renounce, terrorism" (Iskra, No.4.
May 1901).
THE UNDERGROUND' Moreover, it is no use the organised left critidising the politics of the Angry Brigade, unless we also recognise why a lot of potentially very good comrades reject the various Leninist organisations, and indeed resort to bomb-throwing-until you are caught —is just by itselt an easy option in that it does not involve having to deal with the problem of helping change the political understanding of millions of people. Secondly, however, it has to be recognised that there is an "underground' of young people who view the self-proclaimed Leninist left as economistic and find it unable to articulate and explain their own oppressions.
For instance, a paper like FRENZ for all its petit-bourgeois ambiguities, does at least recogof women, of children and of gays-police and prison brutality, etc. in a way not really recognised by most political organisations. Unthe point. As you know the NUR men working in London Transport have the same pay increase as that negotiated between the NUR and the Railways Board. But the management of London Transport just took it as read that the pay claim would start from May Ist.
The Board seems to have managed with some success to forge an alliance with the commuter especially via the mass media. Have ways and means of breaking that alliance and winning over the commuters to your side been discussed at all.
Well you see it's a fallacy to say the management have been able to win over the commuters. For one thing they were already before this action very alienated from British Rail because of decisions to cut a lot of rush-hour trains as from May 1. Many of us in the rail had worked with Commuter Associations-for instance the Shepperton Line Joint Committee which I worked with was successful in preventing 19 trains from being axed.
But the main thing anyway is just who is this "public" we hear so much about? Most of the people living in Britain are in fact workers who have at some time or another been engaged in action in their own industry or workplace. There's a massive brain-washing coming from a central point to try to make out that "the Public" is against this or that section of workers.
We have found that almost to a man the public, that is, the travelling public have a great Seening Standard An application for bail by Anna Mendeison, one of the Eight, was used as an excuse to give extensive and one-sided pre-trial publicity to the prosecution accusations.
less the left faces up to these aspects of capitalism and links them up to the main political struggle, then we will only have ourselves to blame if more and more people substitute terrorism for politics.
THE WAY THE WIND IS BLOWING Already in the last few months there have been several major political trials, e.g., The Mangrove Nine (with Roddy Kentish now in prison), lan and Jake, the Scottish Maoists; and of course the implementation by the courts of the Industrial Relations Act. Again, at this moment the trial of the Metro youth is still proceeding. On May 30 the Eight went on trial. Moreover, other cases are already in the pipe-line. Thus on June 6, five comrades on the leadership of the Anti-Internment League come up on the conspiracy charge arising out of the Whitehall demo following the Derry massacre (other comrades have of course already been found "guilty" on lesser charges arising out of the demo). Shortly, there will also be beginning the trial of those comrades alleged to have undertaken the ing. One reason, of course, is that bomb-throw- Aldershot bombings. Tony Soares -a leading black militant is in custory awaiting trial, etc. CEC If we consider ourselves revolutionary in more than name it is intolerable that we do not begin to work out joint activity in solidarity with these political prisoners here in Britain today. One way to begin is to mobilise for the demonstration outside the Old Bailey on June 6, at 12.30 a.m., called by the Stoke Newington Eight Defence Committee, For all information, speaknise, e.g. the existence of racism, the oppression ers, etc. contact Defence Committee, Box 359, 240 Camden High Street, London, N.W.I.
S.C.
respect for the footplateman and a feeling of understanding for their present dispute. In the whole of Waterloo Station which services the entire S. W. Division of the Southern Region, there was only one case of one of our blokes being hit; it was by a woman who was simply very frustrated by the delays and she apologised But the other passengers didn't half give her a rough time. One thing's true; when the workers stand firm, other people rally round. That's what happened in the miner's strike. And on the Southern Region, we are known to be militant and firm, that's one reason why we have had so little trouble from the commuters. How do you see the way forward for defeating this Act?
The way I see it you've got to recognise that the Industrial Relations Act is the law of the land. It's not the law of the Tories but of the State machine as such. We've got to change this law, because if we don't various governments will gradually tighten it up. At the moment we can scoff because it's not very effective but it won't be long before amendments are brought in.
It's not good enough for workers just to move resolutions. The ve got to defeat this Act. We have got to make ourselves politically aware and organise ourselves to smash it.
The Red Mole 5 June 1972 Pace 3
The following interview is with Edna Roach and Nancy McGrath, two of the workers involved in the Fakenham factory occupation. The factory, initially a branch of shoe-producers Sexton, Son and Everard of Norwich, was taken over in March of this year by Taubman after threatened closure. The deal involved the closure of the Fakenham branch, which was occupied in response to this on Friday, 17 March.
Two months later, the most likely outcome of the occupation is some form of co-operative. This is only possible because of the small number of workers involved (initially 20, now nine), the inexpensive machinery used, and its probable stabilisation as a cottage industry producing craft leather goods. The venture may well be economically successful for some time, because of recent publicity, sentimentality, and the interest of the experts". However, this cannot constitute a method of struggle for shoe workers (or indeed any workers) as a whole.
Fakenham, because of the specific factors just mentioned, may well be cushioned for some time against feeling the full effects of the workings of the capitalist market. However, in any large-scale enterprise in a more competitive industry than craft leather goods, the organisation of production would still be dominated by the fact that it would have to buy and sell on the capitalist market in competition with ordinary capitalist firms, no matter how much ownership and control was enjoyed by the workers there. The situation and conditions of work in the factory would still be dominated by all the fluctua. tions of the capitalist market; for example, a depression of the market would still mean reduced sales and therefore fewer jobs, and increased exploitation of workers in other plants would still have to mean increased exploitation in that factory too or it would go out of business by failing to compete effectively with its rivals.
It would thus be absurd to suppose that the experience of the Fakenham occupation can have any general significance in the struggle for workers control. As Nancy McGrath herself points out in the interview, the key issue at stake is "international control of the economy by workers". It would be absolutely disastrous if the experience of the Fakenham occupation led to delusions that the way forward in the struggle for workers' control is to build workers' co-operatives. On the contrary, what is necessary is to explain that it is not the individual ownership or management of a factory which oppresses the workers, but rather the workings of the capitalist system as a whole. From this it can then also be understood that the basic task of revolutionaries is to fight against ideas that the working class can find any solution to its problems under capitalism, and instead to stress that they should take absolutely no responsibility for the running of firms under capitalism.
(Edna Roach is a member of the National Union of Footwear, Leather and Allied Trades. Nancy McGrath is a member of the Association of Scientific, Technical and Managerial Staffs.) -What happened at the time of the threatened closure and Taubman's offer?
Nancy McGrath. We at Fakenham were consistently ignored throughout the negotiations and heard nothing but rumours all that week. We crashed in on their meetings on occasion and were assured of consideration, but this never came about. I rang Clive Jenkins' office on the Thursday for information, and Roger Spiller came out to see us on the Friday to tell us that the workers had unanimously accepted Taubman's offer-"unanimously", although we were not represented. We then decided to occupy the Fakenham factory on our own, with the twenty other people out of forty six who worked there) of a like mind.
Edna Roach. When we decided to occupy the factory, NUFLAT said that we were "silly girls" and that we should take our cards and "go home to your kitchen sinks". Our action embarrassed them. -What did you hope to achieve initially by occupying the factory?
E.R. We just wanted to save our jobs, we knew that we had lost our jobs with Sextons and that in Fakenham we would not be able to find suitable (if any) employment, so we decided to keep working, making leather goods, clothes and so on, with what material we could come by.
N.McG. Exactly, there are many skilled people in this factory, being a satellite factory we know how to organise things ourselves, although with the occupation, the responsibility for what we were doing and making devolved upon ourselves, and this is something we all take part in.
- How have things developed since then?
N. McG. There are developments taking place to create a co-operative, we have people with the managerial, marketing, and financial expertise who are interested in this. Taubman wants E11,000 for the premises and machinery, and at the moment we are trying to raise this money. We hope to continue working as we are now, but we will take contracts for shoes if necessary. At the moment we are able to use a person's skills as they themselves feel they should be, and we hope to keep that as it is. - What about the present Tory government? N. McG. Government is a dirty word for us now. Our local Tory M.P. came to see us after a visit to Macmillan's employment department, and when I told him what we wanted in terms of work, he replied, "Nobody has the right to work, Mrs. McGrath". I think there must be something seriously wrong with a system which operates on that basis. Not that a Labour government would be any better, as Barbara Castle's In Place of Strife shows, they merely masquerade as a working class organisation.
- How do you see the shoe industry in East Anglia being affected by Common Market entry?
E.R. Not much hope at all. Already cheaper French, Swiss and Italian shoes are coming into Britain, and the Spanish shoe producers are gearing up their production in readiness for Britain's entry. This must mean a drastic decline of employment in the shoe industry, which will hit this region especially hard.
N. McG. I cannot see what can be done about district committee of the AUEW had deciEileen English (left), another of the Fakenham workers, at a recent meeting in London organised by Socialist Woman, it, though. An embargo on foreign shoes would only affect the working people in another country. What is needed I think is some international control of the economy by workers, otherwise the gains of one group of workers are another's losses. - What has the attitude of people in Fakenham been towards you?
N.MeG. At first they were looking for red witches under the table, but now they are beginning to understand what we are trying to do, and beginning to agree with us. People said at first that we should get out of Taubman's factory, it's his and he can do what he wants with it, but now I think they are not so sure. The national press coverage has been very flippant and patronising, though, talking of the "petticoat revolution" and being frivolous about something we take very seriously E.R. The men tend to think very badly of us - due to ignorance of what we are doing. really-but the women in Fakenham have been quite good all along. As people learn more about us, so they come across to our way of thinking to a greater extent. Nancy is right about the media-l think they leave a lot out of their reports, and that way give a very distorted picture.
Interview by Norwich Spartacus League The passing of the resolution has resulted in a
----- pull-quotes -----
"ANGRY BRIGADE'S GIRL SLEPT WITH BEDSIDE ARSENAL