One of the big events of January, 1969, will be a debate between the representatives of TRIBUNE and BLACK DWARF on the theme of the "Labour Party, Parliament and Socialism." Michael Foot and Eric Heffer will, we understand, defend the concept that socialism can best be fought for in Britain via Parliament. Tariq Ali and Bob Rowthorn will oppose this view. In a certain sense it seems strange that it should be necessary to have such a debate: the evidence of all our experience is that every time the labour movement in this country obtains a success through the ballot box, the cause of socialism suffers. If we look around the world we can see no example of socialism being achieved through parliament. An example, much used, Sweden, reveals that capitalism is just as strongly entrenched in that country as it was when the social democrats became the Government decades ago.
Mr. Eric Heffer, the one time editor of a magazine called REVOLUTION, will use, no doubt, the example of the degeneration of the Soviet Union to show the dreadful folly of the revolutionary road. In fact, a sober assessment of that degeneration points the other way. The main factor in the degeneration of the Soviet Union was the failure of the revolution to spread outside of Russia. In turn, one can say, that it was the parliamentary illusions of sections of the German working class, utilised by social democrats and centrists, which paved the way for the victory of reaction in Germany after the first world war. The defeat of the German working class was the most important aspect of the failure of the revolution to spread outside of the Soviet Union.
It is no accident that the degeneration of the Soviet Union has been followed by the adoption of the parliamentary road by those communist parties under the influence of the Kremlin. In early summer of 1960 we saw one of [illegible].
In Britain there is an organic link between the working class and the Labour Party which tends to regenerate illusions in the parliamentary road. Because of the multiple ties between the unions and the Labour Party the organised working class has come to identify itself with that party. In the [illegible] of a meaningful alternative this relationship can survive shocks even as great as the Ramsay McDonald betrayal.
This is inextricably bound up with illusions in the parliamentary road to socialism. In fact one can define the Labour Party as [illegible] of those illusions. But today how many people really think that the Labour Party will bring them socialism? To pose the question even more sharply: how many people, apart from the [illegible] revolutionaries, even think in terms of a socialist solution? Those who preach the parliamentary road to socialism may not have achieved much but one thing they have done is to destroy the prestige of socialism in the eyes of millions of people.
This, then, is the state of battle on "Labour, Parliament and Socialism": the parliamentary road to socialism means no progress at all. Because Labour has opted for the parliamentary road it is no nearer bringing about social change than it was when it was launched over 60 years ago. 1969 may see big battles but those battles will not take place in Parliament. In 1969 the main force in socialism in Britain will be the radical youth - also to a man they reject the parliamentary road to socialism. No matter who wins the verbal battle on January 25th in Central Hall, that argument has already been settled.