One thing needs to be made crystal clear in this discussion about the nature
of the SLP. It is resolutely anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist and it is
absolutely wrong to call it social democratic, as social democracy strives
to reconcile the exploited and oppressed to capitalism/imperialism.
Another thing that is a serious mistake is to imagine that the Labour Party
has "links to the working class" in any sense other than one might say a
tape worm has links to its host. It has in the past been chief purveyor of
class collaborationism in the ranks of the working class. It is now just a
Tory Party Mark II. Its links in the trade-union movement are to
trade-union bureaucrats who for the price of a middle-class lifestyle do
their utmost to suppress any attempt by the working class to struggle
against the appalling injustices of today's Britain suffered by those who
are poor.
Every attempt to change the Labour Party, which was class collaborationist
and imperialist from the outset, has failed miserably, with the Labour Party
growing steadily more right wing throughout as the interests of the
bourgeoisie that it serves demanded greater downward pressure on the working
class. It presided, as did the Tories, over rising living standards
following the Second World War when simultaneously the bourgeoisie feared
the European working class might follow the path of the Soviets and
capitalist crisis had temporarily waned as post 2WW reconstruction was
underway. Now that there is a massive crisis of overproduction which caused
the crash in the far east, which is gradually spreading its tentacles to the
US and thence to Europe, Labour and the union leadership pull out all the
stops to push down working-class living standards and to keep workers
quiescent.
The Socialist Labour Party recognises that we have to get rid of capitalism
if we want to serve the interests of the working class. You can't call that
social-democratic!
--
----- Original Message -----
From: "Javad Eskandarpour" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [MLL]Marxist-Leninists and the Working Class Movement
> Comrade Hillier,
>
> Thank you for your informative e-mail on the political position of the SLP
> in Britain and your political position.
> If I am not mistaken, the point of this discussion is how to build
> revolutionary Marxist-Leninist parties in different countries at this time
> of confusion, vacillation, and anti-Marxism-Leninism, and yet of the
revival
> of the revolutionary Marxism-Leninism in a higher theoretico-practical
> dimension. If this is the point, then I would like to propose that we
> discuss this issue clearly and distintly (to borrow Descartes'
phraseology)
> as to the fundamental aspects of a revolutionary party instead of
outlining
> some "general" principles with no details becuase, for example, anybody
with
> a slight acquaintance with Marxism-Leninism "knows" (in "general") the
main
> task of a revolutionary Marxist-Leninist party in leading the
working-class
> to overthrow capitalism and establish socialism (as a lower phase of
> communism) is in establishing and proceeding with the dictatorship of the
> proletariat. So, let us take one theoretical step at a time, which has
many
> steps in itself at the same time.
>
> Marx, Engels, and Lenin are, of course, our starting point in our
theortical
> understanding of how to build a revolutionary Marxist-Leninist party.
Thus,
> let us focus sharply on a great idea by Lenin that "the role of [a]
vanguard
> fighter can be fulfilled only by a party that is guided by the most
advanced
> theory"(What Is To Be Done?). This great idea of Lenin is the result of
> Lenin's scientific understanding of the role of revolutionary theory in a
> revolutionary working-class movement. That is why Lenin states that
"without
> revolutionary theory there can be not revolutionary movement"(ibid), which
> many people "know" and repeat often in order to express their appreciation
> of a revolutionary theory, but with a preference to some abstract
"practical
> activity". Lenin's oft-repeated passage is often repeated without his
> statement after this passage: "This idea [of a revolutionary theory--JE]
> cannot be insisted upon too strongly at a time when the fashionable
> preaching of opportunism goes hand in hand with an infatuation for the
> narrowest forms of practical activity"(ibid). Now, I do not want to
proceed
> further after my citation of Lenin's great idea of the importance of
> "revolutionary theory" for a revolutionary working-class movement and a
> revolutionary marxist-Leninist party in turn without going into its
details;
> otherwise, we would end up with our "Proverbs and Psalms" in the tradition
> of the biblical ones. Until next time!
> Javad
>
>
>
>
> ------Original Message------
> From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Jim=20Hillier?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: April 24, 2001 9:55:14 PM GMT
> Subject: Re: [MLL]Marxist-Leninists and the Working Class Movement
>
>
>
> --- Javad Eskandarpour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Comrade Hillier,
> >
> > If (according to you} "he truth is that there is not
> > such a broad layer of
> > militant workers at this time", then it seems that
> > the Marxist-Leninist
> > parties and organizations would like to work with
> > already "militant" workers
> > instead of making them "militant" through their
> > leading revolutionary theory
> > and practice!
> > Javad
> >
> >
> >
>
> Comrade Javad, there is no Marxist-Leninist party in
> Britain at the current time. If there were, it would
> both have better links with the militant sections of
> the workers, and would be inspiring militancy through
> its practice and its guiding theory. The SLP is not a
> Marxist-Leninist party, though it does have people in
> it, including myself, who hold Marxist-Leninist
> positions. It is, rather, a left social democratic
> party, whose political line is best characterised as
> class struggle Labourism, a current with deep roots
> within the history of the British working class as I
> am sure you will agree. What I wrote was a statement
> of fact, not an advocacy of tailing after the militant
> workers. A communist party does not tail, it leads.
> The question now, though, is how do we build such a
> party? In Britain, as in many other countries, we MLs
> have failed to build a strong party rooted in the
> working class. In other countries, there are parties
> with a far better record, which is why I asked other
> comrades for their views as to how this had been
> achieved.
>
> I hope this has clarified my position for you.
>
> Comradely regards
>
> Jim
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
> or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
_______________________________________________
Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
