in launching his witch-hunt against the left in the party has decied to take his smed on 'sanctity' parliamentary democracy. In attacking Foot has taken his fetish of parliament to extraordinary lengths. Peter Tatchell never said that he was opposed to only that moblisations working class were needed to fight this governnient.
In taking his stand on this issue, Foot has highlighted crucial questions for the whole labour movement. Is the rule of parliament sacred for all time? Is parliamentary democracy really democratic? Can the labour movement combine intervention in parliament with mass working class action?
All these questions will be crucial to meet the challenge of the British political crisis. Mass struggle is the primary motor of social change Michael Foot's views on parliament are notoriously archaic. The whole history of the labour movement, both in Britain and internationally is of victories won by mass struggle, not primarly in parliament. All the major reforms which have been gained by the working class movement trade union rights, universal suffrage, the welfare state - have been won by tremendous agitation outside parliament.
This agitation changed the political tionship of forces, creating the preconditions for the success of parliamentary legislation in workers' interests. The notion that it is enough to rely on the actions of Labour MPs in parliament is so ludicrous that we doubt whether anyone seriously believes it.
Take the question of nuclear weapons. It's Polish riot police land on roof of Warsaw fire fighters' academy possible, although by no means certain, that a Labour government would pass legislation banning nuciear weapons from British soil. But if that happened, would it be because of the acTatchell, tons of Labour MPs in parliament? What a joke! demonstrations, hundreds of meetings, mies would and pickets, resolutions, pamphlets - in short mass struggle and agitation. mass Michael Foot knows that as much as anyone else. The defeat of the anti-abortion Corrie Bill was due to the mass mobilisation of the labour and women's movement. Peter Tatchell wasn't saying anything revolutionary in his Labour Briefing article. vious.
The highest principle for socialists is defence of the working The ruling class has never confined itself to relying on parliament to defend its interests. It uses every weapon to hand When the trade unions grew stronger in the 1890s, the courts changed the laws famous Taff decision unionists for striking. As we have just seen with Lord Denning's judgement *cheap fares* policy, tradition of anti-working class judgments - no matter what parliament says The other major institutions of capitalist society — the army, the police, the civil service and the bosses are loyal to capitalism and rela- capitalist interests, and are quite prepared to use non-parliamentary means to gain their objectives In 1974 the Labour government ordered the army to break the Ulster Loyalists strike, the army hierarchy refused. bosses waged a huge extra-parliamentary campaign to stop the nationalisation of steel EMILICA because of the to light these attacks.
He was just stating the obclass, ment.
by the in- terests of their class fine trade the GLC's the courts have a long highest form of democracy Parliamentary is an important but movement an important In 1950-51 the TO THE ANTI-ABORTION BILL FIGHT