cerem oniously thrown out of office at the last election, the debate about policies and direction in the Labour Party has hotted up.
For socialists, such a debate is crucial because it is within the Labour Party that is being hammered out exactly what opposition must be mounted against the Tories and what government must, replace Thatcher when she is finally removed.
Unfortunately, many left organisations seem to view this debate -which is gaining the attention of wide layers in the unions - almost as a non-event. Only last month, Socialist Review - the monthly journal of the SWP - contributed its sideline comments.
WRANGLE?
The main thrust of the article -written by Ian Birchall - is to show how irrelevent, for the real class struggle this debate really is. The fight to 'democratise' the party, begun at the last conference, is seen as a 'long debilitating wrangle' and the opposition to the right wing, centred around Benn, as "limited'.
It is clearly true, as Birchall says, that there are severe limitations on the oppositional 'groundswell' building up. The Bennite lett, despite their rhetoric, have done against the Tory oftensive. Moreover, despite the calls for democracy, they have not yet sought to challenge the leadership head-on by calling for the removal of Callaghan and others who refuse to abide by the decisions of conference.
POINT?
But this is hardly the point. What the SWP doesn't seem to understand is that the fight for party democracy or different policies -however limited they may be - is rooted in the radicalisation of thousands of trade unionists who are seeking an akternative to the Callaghan leadership.
When Benn calls for MPs to be subject to mandatory re-selection, when he opposes cuts (at least verbally), he is voicing the feeling of thousands of workers who are trying to turn their party - the one they built, finance and vote for -into a tool of anti-capitalist struggie. LESSONS Perhaps, in this respect, it might be useful for Birchall and other SWP nembers to brush up a little on their history. They might find that the Labour Party was born out of the struggles of the unions at the turn of the century and that - for all its faults - it remains the movement.
With this under their belt, they might even take another step forward and realise that this is why 10 million workers continue to vote Labour every year and will continue to do so for some time to come.
a struggle against its bureaucratic leaders.
TWO-PRONGED at present, will take two prongs. The first will be an attempt to make the party adopt policies in the interests of working people.
Party which launched the mass which has pioneered the anti-nuclear fightback and which gave posals shows that this is already beginning to happen.
place at the organisational level to force the Labour leaders, once icies. The big debate that is now opening up over mandatory reSIDELINES From there, they might also realise that a fight for alternative policies in the unions must, necessarily, overspill into the Labour Party in That struggle, which is developing The fact that it was the Labour anti-cuts demonstration last year, serious support to the fight against Thatcher's racist immigration proMEDECINE Secondly, the fight will also take in office, to implement these polselection, election of the leader of being binding on the government are clear examples of this.
All socialists, if they are serious about getting involved in the way forward for the labour movement and not just commenting on it, should be in the Labour Party arguing for a clear perspective It may well be, as Birchall says, that the Bennite left has no real intention of leading a struggle for socialist policies. It is no answer, however, to stand on the sidelines denouncing him. Such a posture can only cut the SWP off from those thousands of workers who do support him and who do believe his policies are a real alternative to those of the right-wing Rather than standing outside denouncing him - like spectators at a cup final - the SWP should be in the Labour Party, arguing its positions and helping to put Benn - and Callaghan - to the test before their thousands of supportStrangely enough, in a truly paradoxical way, the end of Birchall's article spells out the basic weakness of the SWP's position. He writes: "Tribune has devoted many articles to Thatcher's policies on wages Below, Mike Rodney answers an article "The Labour Left against Thatcher in the June issue of Socialist Review.
and anti-union laws: some of them are interesting and well-informed. But all are characterised by a sense of looking at the trade union movement from the outside, of commenting on its policies and predicting its achevements. but not at any price fighting for a line inside that movement".
Only too true. But shouldn't the SWP drink some of the medecine it prescribes for others? Shouldn't it stop looking at the Labour Party from the 'outside' before it becomes peripheral to the fight now opening up?
SOCIALIST ACTION 20p
August
----- pull-quotes -----
NEW PAMPHLET LABOUR PARTY Wich Way?