Sure, continual inflation, an incapacity to meet the new needs generated during the period of the post-wur boom, etc).
The economic perspective of the decisions of the Fourth Incernational were guided in these perspectives by the analysis of Ernest Mandel': Tate Cupitalism (the first edition of which was published in Germany in 1972). Although the particular theses in this work by no meuns command unanimous assent amous Troiskyists, the scope of its analysis of the post-war bom, and ils inherent limits, furnished the Fi with a prescient and penetrating account of the nature of the coming economic crisis. Despire the fact that there are Communist Parties, during the late sisties and early seventies they did not provide any critical or coberent Marxisc perspective on the future of the capicalist economies. [1] Looking back to the period 1972-76, was the FI wrong to declare that revolutionaries anuse prepare for a profound crisis of tbe bourgeois political order; a new unsurge of workers" struggles and the radicalisation of a new workers vanguard? in different ways, the events in Spain, Portugal and Italy have amply horne our the perspective laid down in the theses of the many alented coodomiss msde ape european capitalist power have thrown up embryonie workers councils and weber popular institucions which poientally embody a fundamental threat to borugoois rule.
In the Portuguese Presidential elections a candidate, Orelo de Carvalho, sanding for the suppression of capitalism and the consolidation of organs of workers power won 17 per cent of the popular vote — well ahead of the candidare of the established Communist Parte: In France and Jraly there is every prospect that electural advance will carry the major workers parties into the Government, with Far-reaching consequences for the extra-parliamentary mobilisation of both the bourgeoisie and working clase. Finally in Brirain the
Weekly during the period was responsible for a erious mis-reading of events, semining from a failure so grasp the fundamental characteristics of a class ruggle within a bourgeois democracy. An intoxicated ad ultra left vision of escalating proletarian mobiliacion unimpeded by the institutions and forms of boargeois power was in our opinion evident in someof the IMG's agitation and propaganda. 13)
But we would point out that the opposition which developed within the IMG supported the USFl Theses which, Roberts identifies as the source of the IMG's ultra-leftism. In fact we considered that these errors were departures from the perspectives which had been developed in these documents.
If we however turn from these particular errons to the COB we find that despite Robers" incantatory evocation of the "Lennist concept of the present momeni" the press of the CPGB was almost barren throughout this period of any attempt to analyse the original and specific conjuncture of these years. While during the period 1972-73 the IMG repeatedly discussed the specific features of the Heath governmeht and the great opportunities that the struggle against it provided for revolutionaries, Marxism Today published little that could be described even as an attempt to analyse the current conjuncture.
Sam Aaronovitch published an article entitled •Perspectives for Class Struggle and Alliances" but the Gramsci against Trotsky?
THE GENERAL THEORETICAL Issues raised hy Roberts supply the kernel of his critique of the Fl and the IMG. When Robers writes that the IMG failed to understand the "present moment" or to identify the specific features of the national con juncture in Britain his argument rests not on any considerations peculiar to the British conjuncture — in which he is remarkably uninterested — but on certain supposed fearutes of all advanced capitalist countries.
The 'national road he proposes for the Brimsh working class is virtually identical to the "national road proposed for the French or Italian working class. The cruciai reference point for Roberts is the work of Gramsci, which functions as a talisman for warding off the supposedly 'ultra-left" spirit of Trotskyism, and for legitimating Koberts own views concerning the primacy of ideological structures within the power system of bourgeois society.
The resuhing confection is offered as justification for the politics of The British Road to Socialism - a justification which, we may note in passing, is unlikely to have occurred to the original authors of the British Roud who displayed no, cagerness even to permit Gramsci to be published let alone supply him with a culturalist gloss.
There are certainly major differences of both Gramil. However these differences cannot be estab Ished without a careful attempt to discover the real argament and position of these two outstanding Marxist thinkers and leaders. For different reasons the evaluated and counter-posed on the basis of a few quotations and summary judgemcots that assume that the respective contribution that they have made to to day's Marxist analysis and revolutionary struggles exist ready-made in their writings.
Even setting aside the historical gulf that separates us from them, we face critical problems in interpreting their work; in the case of Gramsci because his The Problem of Bourgeois Democracy THERE IS A MAJOR THEME in Gramsci's writings on the specificity of the West which Raberts ignores altogether - significantly couch it is a point of partial convergence in the political thought of Gramsci and Tracky. For boti, a crucial defining feature of they rest on the consent of the masses → though the fundamental guarantee of bourgeois social relations remains the scate repressive appararus. Curiously enough there is no mention in Roberis' article of the fact that the "western' social formations, to which be constantly refers in homilies directed at the Fl, are today bourgeois democracies.
Instead be locates the specticuty of these social formations solely in the ideological/cultural framework" and its supposed "primacy. NECTOUEELV ideological and cultural institutions and practices do play a major role in bourgeois democrats salems since they help to produce the consent upon which the bourgeois democratic regime rests. [4] For this and ollier reasons the devclopment of a systematic critique of. and assault upon. boureewis cultural and idcological inscitations and practices is a vital task for revo lutionaries One of the most positive developments of recent years has been the advances made in this aren by the women's movement; there are also signs of the beginning of a revolutionary critique of the educational and health care system. New forns of cultural contestation of bourgeois social relations have appeared in many fields. However it would be quile wrong to imagise, ai Robes appears to do, that there can be a sellsufficient project for escablisting "prolerarian hegemony" in the cultural/idcological sphere, abd that TEPUBERE DOlLFIES 15 thereby rendered redundant 15] The necessary struggle against the repressive and divisive structures and ideologies of capitalist society must not be regarded as a sobstitute promise of this title was betrayed by a highly generic discussion of the tasks ahead; after expressing indignation that the Tories were abdicating British "national sovereignty", Aaronavitch meandored to a conclusion that before "socialist revolution" became "an Immediare agitarional issue there would be a 'prolonged and complicated process'. The reader was left unenlightened as to the exact nature of this prolonged and complex process.
Another article that promised a specific analysis of the national conjuncture was Mike Costello's Opportunities in the Present Situation' published in Marxism Today in August 1973. The essence of Costello's argument was that the class struggle in Britain was rapidly sharpening:
"In such circumstances of sharpened class struggle, there can be no doube that open recourse to fascist methods of rule will be attempted by the ruling cinss, and that the movement will also throw up disruptive altra-left bodies such as those which help to sabotage the unity necessary for social transformation today as in Chile or France."
The hopeless confusion and perilous error that Costello manages to pack into a single sentence, far wilder than even the most ill considered statements Robers assiduously seeks out in Red Weekly is unfortunately typical of Costello's offering. constitutes almost the sum total of what could be learns about the 'curreor moment" from the pages of Marxism Today. A debate on the party's programme The Russian Revolution - part of the World Revolution or merely the product of Russia's internal evolution? writings, especially the Prisen Notebooks from which Roherts quotes, are notoriously dense and cryptic, la the case of Trotiky the prolonged vilification which has obscured his political thought and action make the necessary balanced and scrupulous interpretation of his work more than normally difficult - - for abvious reasons, the theorelical Journal of the CPOB is one of the last places where an innocent reading of Trotsky bould be actempied, Armed with these warnings let us now get down to cases.
Roberts apparently neatly counterposes Gramsci's attention to the specific features of the social forma tion in the advanced countries of Western Europe to Trotsky's supposed reduction of all national politics to the dicrates of the world economy. Theoretical "economism" in Trotsky, we are told, leads to political voluntarism (p.51) Trotsky supposedly espoused the "war of manoeuvre', and the strategy of frontal attack? on bourgeois mate power. This is allegedly established on the authority of Gramsci and then illusirated by a few seitences from Trotsky's writings.
According to Roberts the basic formula of Trotsky's transitional programme can be reduced to an abstract and mechanistic schemal system an crisis, party must present socialist solution, masses will he come up against the operation of the bourgenis political system. Any genuinely anti capitalist more ment will sooner or later have to face the question of the prevailing forms of bourgeois political power. In the bourgeois democracies this comprises a super structure of Governments and parties which rest on the consent of the masses, and a state apparatus which rests on armed bodies of men. The state repressive apparatus is the lynchpin of bourgeois social relatiens. neladine the Covernmental system Jl8ciE In normal times a bourgenis democraric regime will approximately reflect the relationship of class force within sociery. The writings of both Gramsel and of Trotsky furnish essential insights for understanding the operation of bourgenis democratic systems Whereas Gramsci focussed on the cultural and ideological reproduction of consent 10 bourgeois socia elations, Trossky Focussed on the political forms tha the expression of this consent assumed Cramsci acknowledged that the operation of Bourgeois hegemony in a bourgeois demacracy iavol ved the ability of the ruling class to make cconomic pondessions (c. Prison Norehonks p. 182) to thie dominated classes, but be never examined the different mechanison by which these concessions were made. In Gramsei's later writings he has very lirle lo say ahout the role of the reformist parties or of trade unions in a hourgeois democratic system; in his earlier writings mere is a clearly ultra-left implication tha they are simply capitalst instinitions.
In is this ahsence in Gramsci's political thought that has permitted simultaneoesly a 'culturalist and an altra-left reading of his work where the insepreier makes up for the deficiency in his own way. It soems quite likely that the unra-left interpretation Gramsci (to he found on both the Italian and British far left) is closer to Gramsei's own predilections than the calruralist reformisen chat is convenient for the Trotsky's accoun: af the functioning of hourgeois democratic regimes gave grear weight to the role of reformist workers parties it securine popelar consent to thie prevailing order. In a crucial passage be writes:
in a develoned cupia ist society, durine a denge ratie* regime, the bourgeoisie Jeans for support primarily upon the working classes, wbich are beld in check hy the reformists. In its most finished form, this systeal finds it expression in Brian during administration ole Labour Covernment as wall &: during that of the Conservatives.... In the course of was conducted in terms which would apply to any advanced capitalist country and was silent on the specific features of the prospects for British capicalLOHE The more popular productions of tbe CPGB managed to avaid Costeilo's hysteria only to replace in with tepid anti-Tory cant and homilies on the need far a Labour Goverument commitred to left policies. Yet during this period militanis of the CPGB were weil placed to give a new polirical dimension to the struggle agninst the Heath government. The LCDTU, which was orgarised and led by these militants, played a bajor role in the mobilisations gainsi Heath and had the potential of becoming a pericanent Tocus for the most advanced militants, politicin the tade union sugge that had co-ordinaring regular, democratically-organised conferenoes, would have begun to develop as an independent pale of working class poliries: given the passivity of the Labour Party during this period there was a burning need for such a locus for those invoived in ibe struceles that were destroying the goverument.
Instead the LCDTU confined itself to pertunctory one-day rallies, heavily controlled by the platform and excluding democratic discussion of different concep tions of the way forward. LCDTU supporters were not encouraged to develop a programme of activity on a local basis. Had the LCDTU developed in the ways indicated, not only would it have boen able to turnish more effective support to the miners land the forced to adopt these solutions by the abjective logic of the crisis, daal power, revolutioi." By contrast, we are told, Gramsci understood that in Westera capi talist societies the stale is only the outer ditch' of bourgeois power and the real hasis of this power is the ideological hegemony of the bourgeoisie. The task of *the working class lod by its party is to engage in a "war of position" and to establish a rival proletarian hegemany before it can seize power.
Roberts suggests that The British Road to Socialism lays out the path to proletarian begemony and, after raceuary delays, so proletanian power, because 1n Gramscian fashion it takes account of the specificity of British traditions, colture institutions, etc It must he said that Roberts displays no care, of even interest, in establishing Gramsci's real argument concerning the 'war of position', the state as an 'outer ditch", the 'starting point" of internationalism, etc. There is little excuse for this since the editors of the excellent English edition of the Prison Notebooks, from which Roberts quates, explicitly war the realer of at least some of the problems involved see the Introduction', Pp206.9 and spoifically footnote 35, p. 236).
Enrico Berlinguer - Historic Compromiser their own strongholds and bases of proleturium demnerucy: the trade unioes, the politica parties, the odecarional and sports clubs, the coopera wishin the formal limits of hourgenis democrac this bas been proved by theory and experience. An these howarks of worker Genocracy within fi bourgeois state are absolurely essential for taking the revolutonary roed." (The Strugele Against Fascism in Germuny p. 158.9). Shrewsbury Twol in the period before February 1974, bur it would also bave constitured a formidable obstacle to the subsequent actions of the Labour The faslure of the CPGB during this period was desermined by a mumber of considerations: it did not want to alienate Jack Jones and otlier left trade union leaders; it Teared coat such an initiative would oscape its control; and it feared the reaction to any open Communist political initiative.
[f] Of course this conclusion is reached not simply by analysing the new economic crisis into which capitalism is plunged, but through identifying the strictly political disarray of the bourgeois order -such as the difficulties of establishing successor regimes in Spain, Portugal and Greece: the historic Tanure so acniove national incogramon witnen ne British and Spanish states: the unprocendented test to bourgeois poincar insurunons in rance and lol) that will be posed by governments based on workers panies acc 12) When respurces permit.a selaction of discusion bulletins produced in the IMG on these points will be published.
[3) Roberts could have quoted, but does not, the conclusion of the Red Weekly's brosdahost which declared that it would 'soon be necessary not only to drive the Tories from office but to smash all the Institutions through which the ruling class exeroise their power'. This atatement seemed to dispense even with the prallminary of Institutions of duel power.
Thus, for example, Trotsky was the lending opponent of the "war of manoeuvre and the strategy of the offensive in both the military and poonical debates of the carly twenties to which Gramsel is referring in the passages quoted hy Raberts. The theses on the United Front which Gramsci is endorsing were, in fact, presented at the Comintern Congress by Troisky, (as Gramsci elsewhere indicares, P. 250l in opposition to most of the Iralian Communises who sponsored the "theory of the offensive in the political sphere.
Given the dates on these texts (they are all written in the carly thirties) and the circumstance that Gramsel's notes were heing smuggled out of Italy by friends in the Soviet Embassy, it is quite likely thar the real target of Gramsci's strictures was Stalin's Third Period policy, These notes are in any case often incansistent and obscure even though at the sanse line they may be suggestive and brilliant. Thes sometime it is the scate which is the auler disch, in other passages it is the superstructural inscrutions which constitute the "trenches while the repressive appararus is the inner fortress of bourgeois power. Somerimes the starting point of revolutionaty polities is the inter national cass" (the proletariat) and it is che task of this Inrernational class to master the original combina tion' represented by the national conjuncture, in other passages the starting point must be the national conjuncture and it is the goal (socialist revolution) which It will nor be appropriate for us bere to seek to unravel the dialiactical movement of Gramsel: thought which would explain some of these apparent Inconsistencies. We simply insist that grasping the real incaning of the Prison Notebooks is a much mone demanding task than Roberts seems to roalise. We must also insist that however complex and cryptic Gramsci's thought may be. he never adopred u reformist standpoint towards the bourgeois slate and the need for the working class to destroy that state it a path to socialism was to be opened up.
It is therefore quite wrong for Roberts to introduce Gramsei's argument in support of the strategy of The British Road to Socialism, and especially to do so without any serious anempt to cocane beanne real positions.
Tarian democracy was an advance upon the standar revolutiooary critiques of bourgeois democracy. Early Communise wring on bourgenis democratic regime unilaterally stressed the over-powering pressure of the bourgenis context on the one hand, the twin influences of corruption and the scock exchange ( as Engels and Lenis called it and the different ways lo which parliamentaras COMIS and pulverised the Silize-cuters on the other see the powerfel passage on thia in George Lokacs" Lenin, pp65-6 Contemporary Marts reasorch on the capitalis
P.C.I VOTA COMUNISTA C To change things vote Communist' its state and does indeed fragment and disorient the mass of the electorate. The exceptional interest of Trotsky's writings on Germany is that they point towards the way in which bourgeois democracy not only reflects the power of the bourgeoisic, but also seeks to incorporate the working class through its own independent organisations. Of course the type of proletarian representation encouraged by bourgeois parliamentary assemblies is that which perverts and falsifies the basic interests of the working class fully aware that political representation can assume degenerate and distorted forms.
The novelty of Trotsky's analysis corresponds to the relative novelty of the phenomenon of mass working class parties, consolidating a large share of representation in bourgeois democratic assemblies and being ahle to envisage the formation of theit own governIn Russia, of course, conditions had been utterly different: trade unions were extremely weak and the Social Democrars had no chance of forming a Government under Tsarism. The watchwords of 1917 gave some intimation of the problems involved, with their appeals Mensheviks, invocation of workers control. trensitional demands, etc. But the virtual impossibility of constructing a proper bourchois state and political system amidst the debris of Tsarium, and under the pressure of war, meant that this experience was extremely foreshortened and exceptionally unfavourable for the bourgeonie.
In Gene Baly and, later, Spain, even weak Arms proved capable of effec andy defearing and conta ng the working class prior to the victory of fascism. Hur the eruption ol workers pouncib or their equivalent in the wake of electoral Proletarian Democracy IN GRAMSCT'S WRITINGS, by contrast, there is on occasion a dangerous amhiguity on the question of proletarian democracy. He sometimes conflates the role of the vanguard party and that of soviet type bodies, Instead of theorising the relationship between the two. Thus in 1920 after the failure of the Turin workers councils Gramsci impatiently declared:
a revolutionary movement can only be based on the proletarian vanguard, and must be led without prior consultation, without the apparatus of repres entative assemblies. Revolution is like imperative war: it must be minutely prepared by a working class General Staff just as war is by the army's General Stall Assemblies can only ratify what has already taken place, exalt the successful and implacably punish the unsuccesful." (Political Capacity', New Left Review, to 51, Sept-Oct 1958, p57).
A similar theme in The Modern Prince leads him to argue that the hegemonic party should be -MORT lithie and that there should be homogeneity berween the lendership and the rank file. (Prison If these peremptory remarks are read carefully, and in contest, they clearly relate to the imperative necessite tor a revolatony party ulco In 15 agreement on the fundamental questions. Gramsci was certailily aware of the dangers of "bureaucratc centraliem* (Prison Notebonks p. 185-9). But be did not discuss the relationship betacen the indispensable revolutsonars vanguard and the sovercigny al the soviel. Gramsci's ambivalence on this question leads nat to culturalist reformisa bus to the potion of one purty suviels. It also induces a blindness to a central its extreme organisational disunity The experience of Stalinism made Trorsky acutely sensitive to queen dato ta danger voluntaristie and administrative 'solutions" to it. Trousky contrasied the political differentiation and companion of a healthy workers movement with the bureaucratic straitjacket of Stalmism:
*The dynamic of political consciousness is excluded the hascorical process in the interests of administrative order, In reality classes are hetero gencous, they are torn by inner anagonisms, and arrive al the solution of common problets to otherwise than through an inter strugale of tendencies. groups and parties." (The Revolution Beirayed, pl45).
Troisky saw the soviet, or its preparalory form. the touted front. as providang framework for both oiled action and politica differentiarion.
VOTA UNISTA victory for the major workers parties, or in response to the threat of military coup against a Government based on workers parties, bas also pointed to the рослине страс comtans contalca o bourgeois democracy (France and Spain in 1936, Chile in 1973). As Norman Geras has written:
*The organisational strength which the working class is able to build up can become a serious threat to bourgeois rule once it begins to be released in the direction of proletarian seif-activity and self-organisation which overflow bourgeois democracy's constricting framework and paralyse its Tunction as the political expropriator of the initiatives of the masses Bourgeois democracy itself furnishes points of support from which such iniciatives towards proletarian democracy and power can be launched. " 16] Historically, bourgeois democracy has served the function of favouring that section of the ruling class which is best able to integrase the masses. But when the parliamentary "barometer" of class relations indi cates an approsching store then die mechanisms of political integration can be broken. In these circum stances a Government comprising workers parties can only sustain itself by basing itself on the extraparliamentary power of the working class and its allies - by promoting Soviet-type bodies and initiating a break with capitalism.
The circumstance that the democratic bourgeois regime nests on mass consent, and secks to incorporate the worken organisations, dictates the strategy and tactics that revolutionaries should adopt: hence thi central debates within the Foorth International on thi nature of transitional demands and a transitional prograinme, and on the question of the united front Hence also the attention gives to the possibiting of the no amount of huffing and puffing or Gramscian posturing is going to transform the CPCB or the Internacional Socialists into the "hegemonic party' of the working class.
The path of proletarian democracy is not valued by Trocskyists simply for itself but because it represents the only method of tapping the full energies of a developed workers movement. In the advancod capitalist states, where the bourgeoisie has many Portuguese building workers besiege the Provisional Government in support resources at its disposal, only an unfettered mobilisasion and expression of proletarian power will be capable of destroying the political power of the bourgeoisie. There will be no hureaucratic centrist short-cue to socialist revolution In Roberts" article there is a syscematic evasion or denial of proletarian democracy. Thus Roberts refers derisively to the Fl beiag split from top to borrom (p4T), to the -factional STILE which confounds organisations bike the ING' and lo. Trotskyis theory being "open-ended" in its inuediase procrical implications (p55). For Roberts advocacy of a united frobl within the workers movement means either the CP's "principled conceps of 'Siralegic unity of the left? or Practical manoeuvre designed lo destroy the Laments" within the bourgeois regime, that set out to break with capitalism and to develop a workers power capable of settlics accounts with the bourgeois state apparatus.
All rhese political preoccupations have roots in the discussions of the carly years of the Comintern and hefore, but with Trotsky's writings of the thirties, and the subsequent debates within the Trotskyist move ment, they were systematically related to the exper lence of class struggle in the advanced counties. As Trotsky insists in his writings on France, the relationship that should exist berwoen the political vanguard masses is one of dialogue in which the vanguard will have much to learn about the real situs tion of the masses and about the best means of developing an anti-capitalist struggle (7]However although spontaneous and "inherited' anti-capitalise reaccions have a fundamental significance for Tratskyists, naturally they coonor by them selves bring down the capitalist order. Popular iDove. ments against the bourgeois order always contain spontaneous or "inherited" reactionary elements (e.g racism, sexisen eic) as well as mare advanced iditas and tactics than the revolutionary vanguard could dream up by itself. The task of the revolutionary party for Tratskyists, and of the "hegemonic" party lor Gramsel, Is that of giving caberence and direction to the movement of the masses.
It is quite false lo counter-pose a "mechanisric' Tratskyiss conception to a more complex and dialectical Gramscian conception. Trotskyists, and eve Trotsky bimself, have heen respocsible on occasio for vanguardist errors which mis-estimared the readi ess of the masses to undertake a strugale agninst the bourgeois order. But Trotsky and the Trotskyist - but the masses have their own ideas of how to change things.
For Roherts the advocacy of revolutionary politics must necessarily isolate the frozen unity which is sought within the left': for Trotsky 'the struggle of the party to win over the majority of the class must in no instance come into opposition with the need of the workers to keep unity within their fightiog ranks. (The Struggle Against Fascism in Geraumy, pl64) For Trotskyists the uniled front is so far from heing a transient "cunning manoeuvre' that its highest form is the soviet, within which the different political currents of their wage seck la win over the majorily Roherts rebukes the IMG several times carefully selected quorations from Lenin's Left Wing Communism, and it is true that ultra-left errors on the question of the Labour Party have appeared in the publicarians and practical work of its revolurionary orgánisalion — present authors (R). Yet Roberts and the CPOB have consenienily forgoren, firstly. That tis work in no way rejecied the overriding necessity for Finding the tha: Lenin argued thar Communists should condict a systematic campaign for affiliarion to the Labour Party The CPGE enjoys corsiderable influence within the democracy which enables such errors to be correcte and overcome. The acceptance of the right of organised political currents to compete for leadership within the revolutionary organisation and the fight for a a whole are the only sure antidptes to vanguardin errors.
(4], We will leave on one aldo tho question o whether the family or religion are unimportant prope of the prevailing order in pre-capitalist social forma tions, since no historical or anthropological evidance Is advanced point 15) There ls also a dangar of class reductionism in proposing the struggle for proletarian hegemony in the cultural and Ideological Seld, since this can involve a sectarian nihiliem towands the cultural achiavementa of the bourgeoisie or neglect democratic demands that are not purely proletarian in character. It in signiticant that the big delest of Christian Democracy in Italy on divorce wee the result of the campaign sponsored by the pelly Radical Parly and opposed by the Italian Communist Party.
16] Norman Geras. The Legacy of Rosa Luxemburg p61. See pp51-83 for a reluable discussion on the question of bourgecis democracy and pp111-133 on transitional demande.
17) For an Important discussion of the relationship between the revolutionary vanguard and the massas see Emest Mandel. The Leninist Theory of Organisa tion. IMG 1975. If Roberts had not bean bent on caricature he might have devoled some consideration to this essay by manoe not used to figar for the right of the party to affiliate collectively with full rights as a constiluent part of the Labour Party. In fact, the lenders of the CPOB seem lo prefer to shelter behind the Labour left and to deny Communist politics an open forum within the Inhour moveniem. The Labour leadership will. of course bitterly oppose the right of the CPGB, IS or IMG tD affitiatero the Labour Party, hut those on the left aho refuseto insist on that right become accomplices of an unrepresentative and indemocratic party regime A vigorous and successful electoral intervention by the forces to the left of the Labour. Party based on resistance lo the policies of the Government and a series of transistional demands is under present circumscanoes an indispensable accompaniment la a fight for the right lo affline to the Labour Parry. Up Till now neither the COB nor the far lest has yet heen able to pul up a serious challenge to Labour, as either local or national level. Given it historical implanta tion in the Belish workers movement, the repeased failure of the CPOR in cicctions represents a crippling political defent for the Parts and the conception of socialism which is promoles Because of its hiscoric.compromise with Scalinism the CPOB has long abandoned the approach to purliament indicated by Denin in Teft-Hing Communism. In response to a letter from a member of the CPOB when it was a very different organsatipn Lenn The writer of the lener is pertily clear on sho point that only workers Soviets, and nor Parliament, can be the instrument whereby thie aims of line prociariar can be achieved. And, of counse, those whe have failed to understand this up to now are weeterare reactionaries, even if they are the moil mighty educared people, most exponeneed politiciats, most sincere socialists, most crudite Marsist, and most honest cilizens and family men. But the writer of this letter does sat even ask, in does not oscar to luin 15 ask, whether it is possible to bring abour the vilery of the Soviets pect Parliament withour getting pro Soviet politicians into parliament, wilhour daintegra ting perbamentarianism TTON within, success of the Soviels in their forth conung rusk of within pa raunch -far dispersing parliament.
The task of popularising workers power and socialism which the CPOB has so signally failed to accomplish must now be carried out be DiheTs, Certainly the time is long overdue when the revolutomary socialist alternative, excluded by the Labou leaders from the offial political structures of the labour movement, should he vigoroosty asserted in local and national politich [al See Robin Blackburn, "Let it Bleed'. Red Male no 3 1970. For # comection see Robin Blackbum 'Labour and the Marxist Leff' In Now Stalesman, 14