It is a measure of the crisis of Labourism that two books* have been published this month that chart the present disaster course. It is the first that is the most surprising and indicates the depths of disillusionment and disaffection that Wilsonism has caused amongst the ranks of the previously faithful. The contributors to "Matters of Principle" are very much men of the centre: academics, technocrats, benevolent social engineers and meritocrats to the last man; precisely the group that Wilson aimed at with his coupling of socialism and science and the whole "white heat of technological revolution" rhetoric.
These men are uneasy when they criticise the Labour Government and continually stress what they consider to be the positive aspects of Labour's record, but criticise they do. They are not shaken by the Prices and Incomes policy - most of them would probably support it - their dissatisfactions are at once more particular and more diffuse. The particular failings with regard to race, education, governmental method, foreign policy etc., are meticulously noted. But it is a wider unease that motivates these apologetic revolutionaries: "Piecemeal social engineering makes sense only if we have a prior notion of the purposes of the engine."; "A party of radical reform must state [illegible]". [These] contributors have found that pragmatism has turned into opportunism. Their solution is a return to "principles" or, more concretely, to the aims of building a participatory democracy. It is this, they feel, that is so lacking. One contributor comments that the only decision in which the public has felt it has had a say has been the retention of the Esso tiger. The answer then to the drift in Labour's policies lies in producer and consumer cooperation as implied in Clause IV.
WILSON THE LEFT MYTH
Paul Foot is less ambiguous in his diagnosis of the complaint and, consequently, has a clearer analysis of what ought to be done. Foot carries through his argument via a study of Harold Wilson. His first task has been to demolish the myth of the "left-wing" Wilson. The record stands very plain. In the post-war Labour Government, Wilson operated the Board of Trade as an annex of the CBI. His ideology revolved around the premise that only socialism could guarantee the real growth and health of private enterprise and already his speeches were studded with the phrases: "dead wood in the board rooms" and "merchant venturers". He even received the rebuke from the arch-conservative Herbert [Morrison] [illegible] indecisiveness during the 1949 devaluation crisis; a lapse that enabled his rival Hugh Gaitskell to gain the ascendancy. It was Gaitskell, very largely, who was responsible for the introduction of Prescription charges. Wilson swung into opposition behind Bevan and started to posture as a man of the left. He went to the extent of resigning from the Government, although considerable evidence exists that Morrison forced him to resign; his letter of resignation was never published.
This temporary set-back proved to be the making of Wilson. He could, from then on, combine consistently right-wing policies with invocations of the name of Nye whenever he needed Constituency support. This dual nature was the corner stone of his success but at the same time explains the extremes of disenchantment felt by many of the Constituency left. During Government Wilson and the Labour Party had to make a choice between right-wing policies and left-wing verbiage.
The economic crisis left by the Tories allowed no room for manoeuvre. Either capital or labour had to be attacked. The seamen's strike drove Wilson into the open as a staunch defender of capital and a red-baiting opponent of the unions. Foot's book is a valuable document in the story of the decline of reformism, although not all his formations are uniformly precise and occasionally he takes a somewhat simplistic view of the process. What certainly is show[n] by the book is that a void has been left in the Labour movement by the demise of reformism as a valid option, and that it is the marxists who must fill that void.
A DECISIVE CONFERENCE [?]
As matters stand it appears almost certain that the Labour Party conference at Blackpool will follow the TUC in voting solidly against the Government's anti-working class policies, gazing into the crystal ball a bit more deeply, we can be fairly confident that a policy will be adopted somewhat similar to the Socialist Charter. This is to be hoped and every socialist should work for this.
The Socialist Charter is an ambiguous programme - it has to be welcomed because it is an attempt to organise around a political programme but, unfortunately, many concession[s] on programme were made in its formation. There is, for instance, no position taken of opposition to the Incomes Policy. Many of the economic measures advocated boil down to an alternative capitalist strategy. The left has paid dearly for mistakes of this kind in the past: remember the confusion caused when Wilson adopted TRIBUNE's advice and devalued.
But even this is secondary: the main thing that is lacking in the Labour Party is a fight. If victory for the Socialist Charter can be used to start a fight in the party for an alternative left policy, we will have made a great step forward.
In order to launch such a fight the rank and file will have to be drawn in. The way in which the [illegible] does NOT [illegible] massive [illegible] participation [illegible] the left should call its own conference to thrash out a fighting strategy and a new programme in a completely democratic way. This is the only chance there is to reverse the decline of the left in the [illegible].
* Matters of Principle, edited by Tyrrell Burgess, Penguin, price 4/-.
The Politics of Harold Wilson by Paul Foot, Penguin, price 6/-