only correct formulation is that Every struggle, Including that against the Tory government, must be placed in the context of the struggle against the bourgeois state." As we shall see, this difference is decisive when it comes to the question of general confrontation between the working class and the ruling class.
When placed in the correct context it can be seen that the correct attitude in principle towards the Tory government is like that towards any other part of the state apparatus (for a government is nothing other than a part of the state apparatus). It is necessary to smash that government. In that sense a slogan of "Down with the Tory government' is just an expression of the general attitude towards all parts of the bourgeois state apparatus.
CENTRALISING THE STRUGGLE Just to decide what a position is in principle is n not sufficient to deal with all the problems of a practical situation, If the attitude towards the Tory government is like that towards every part of the state apparatus, then this does not give practical guidance as to whether struggle should be the consciousness of the working class movecentralised against the government or against the army or against the monarchy, or what. It is still necessary to find the "weak link" in the situation.
In some situations it is definitely incorrect, a complete diversion, to centralise the main struggle against a government. In a country like Argentina or Greece, for example, the government is a mere puppet made and unmade at will by the army. To concentrate in such a situation on the government, and not on the army, would be completely to mislead the masses. In Britain at present, however, the Tory government is a weak link. This is for two basic reasons. Firstly the Tory government is an open declared enemy of the working class. The removal and smashing of this government would therefore be seen by the working class as a big step forward. It would strengthen the confidence and militancy of the class. Secondly, a Labour government would find it hard to carry out the particular policies needed by the ruling class in the present situation, Social Democratic governments are very useful to the bourgeoisie when it is a question of doing a quiet deal with the trade union bureaucracy. They are also useful to the ruling class in a revolutionary situation. Then the Social Democrats form alliances with the fascists, murder workers' leaders, etc. At the present time however the ruling class needs neither of these things. A quiet deal essary advantages to the ruling class. Whereas the capitalist class is centralising all its efforts through the state, the working class is going into struggle in individual detachments. By allowing the struggle to go forward as first gasmen, then teachers, then civil service workers, then Fords men and so on, the working class is not using its full strength. A centralised general form of struggle has far better chances of success.
A GENERAL STRIKE If we consider the working class of Western Europe, it is clear, and proved by experience, that in general the mass general strike is the instinctive weapon of struggle.
The reasons for this are obvious. The withdrawal of work paralyses the country and frees the working class for the tasks of organisation. It is threfore natural that now, when the working class is faced with huge attacks, the general strike should be the form of struggle that the most advanced militants think of for decisive struggles.
What does the slogan of a general strike mean in ment? For the bureaucratic leaders it means just a form, a rather frightening form, of protest. For the masses however it means something entirely different. A general strike for them means an all out war against the enemy. The masses may be unsure as to the exact aims or exact forms of the struggle, but the slogan of a general strike means a desire to bring about a decisive clash with the class enemy. The revolutionaries of course advance and support this demand. They too are for a decisive struggle against the foe.
FALSE POSITIONS One very important point which has to be dealt with in connection with the general strike is the way some revolutionaries put forward the demand. They say The TUC must call a General Strike" and couple this with a central demand of "Recall the TUC" This is a completely wrong way of putting forward the slogan. It suggests that the bureaucracy is all powerful and that only they can really organise the struggle. This is completely false. On the contrary. by far the most important general strikes are those which burst out from the base and which the bureaucracy is forced into supporting after they have started. It is completely false to say only the bureaucracy can organise a decisive clash. If that were true all would be lost, for the bureaucracy is never going to intervene to attempt to develop the relation of forces to the furthest possible extent in their favour - not to accept in advance that the struggle will not go beyond the bounds of the bourgeois state.
A confusion of a similar type was made by some revolutionary tendencies at the time of the Freeing of the Five when they called for a General Strike to smash the Industrial Relations Act. This is just another confused variant of those who claim that the aim of a General Strike must be to gain a Labour Government. To pose the aim of a General Strike as being against the Industrial Relations Act is also to accept in advance that the struggle will not advance beyond a certain point, that the relationship of forces cannot develop within the struggle in favour of revolution. If the Act is repealed then the aim posed for the strike would be achieved. It would be like the grand old duke of York who marched ten thousand men to the top of the hill only to march them down again. The aim of such a decisive clash as a General Strike cannot be posed as some reform. Even if the strike should start round more limited aims it is the task of revolutionaries lo attempt to turn this into a decisive struggle for power - not to pose its aim as some gain within the bourgeois state.
GENERAL STRIKE AND THE STATE The difference between "placing all struggles in the context of a fight against the Tory government" and "placing all struggles, including that against the Tory government, in the context of fighting against the bourgeois state" can be seen most clearly and practically in the case of preparation for a general confrontation such as a General Strike. If the struggle is simply against the Tory government then the existing organisations of the working class may well do for the struggle - the Tories will be forced out of office, there will be an election etc. If on the other hand the struggle is against the state then very different steps have to be taken.
To British ears, conditioned by decades of reformism, struggle against the state sounds very odd. It sounds as if small groups of people should attack police stations or something like that. This economic struggle but it is hopeless for decisive political tasks. Nothing could be more absurd than to propose to starve the capitalists into surrender, tor while the workers may be immobilised by the strike the repressive forces of the state, the army and the police, are very much active and mobile. A general strike which only leads to a simple. stoppage of work therefore runs a big risk of being a defeat for the working class. Every general strike of this type in history confirms this lesson.
Does this mean therefore that revolutionaries are opposed to general strikes? On the contrary. While a stoppage of work in itself is not a strong weapon nevertheless that stoppage makes possible hundreds of things which are real and formidable weapons of struggle, The most important of all these things is organisation. Once the working class begins to elect strike committees, form Councils of Action in the areas, move towards national conferences of factory delegates and so on then the power of the ruling class is at once really threatened. Immediately the question of 'who rules" is on the order of the day. This can be seen even in such a simple question as the control of the movement of supplies and transport; Are scabs and supplies to be moved "according to the law of the land' or are they going to be controlled by the workers? It is this type of development, in which the working class begins to assert its own power against the bourgeois state, that is the real threat to the capitalist class - not the simple stoppage of work.
It is quite clear from this that the main task of revolutionaries in preparing for any sort of decisive clash, such as a general strike, is to bring to the forefront the question of the organisation of the struggle. It is this which is decisively important because it is the success or failure of this which will determine the outcome of the struggle, If the working class is not organised before or during the struggle in strike committees, councils of action and similar organisations then not only will the working class not be able to tackle really decisive problems. the overthrow of the government, the seizure of state power, but the reformist leaders of the working class will be able easily to get the movement under their control and sell it out.
This theme of organisation, which constitutes the main work of revolutionaries in preparing for a decisive clash, is summed up An ODCANICE COD A CENED AI
STRIKE. This is-far more decisive than arguments about the exact day when the