CROYDON RAM UNITES AGAINST FASCISM
On Saturday 5th July, the Croydon Radical Action Movement held a march through the town centre. The Croydon Radical Action Movement is an alliance of all shades of left political opinion. The march was against fascism and, as the fascists regard us all as red scum, our differences are minimal and the march comprised Stalinists, Trotskyists, social democrats, anarchists....in fact everyone except the SLL.
The fascists organised a counter-demonstration from their national headquarters (Mr. A.K. Chesterton, head of the National Front resides in Croydon). Posters condemning CRAM for largely fictitious crimes appeared overnight and NF members tried (unsuccessfully) to intimidate marchers by driving cars straight at them.
They also had a traditional para-military march headed by a loudspeaker van tailing the CRAM march. The comrade with our megaphone brought smiles to the faces of the crowds with his satirical references to the gentlemen behind us, who retaliated by making themselves even more ridiculous by interspersing their Mosleyite slogans by chanting "We are not Fascists!" in a most indignant tone!
Derek McMillan
TROTSKYISM IN CEYLON
An article appeared in a recent issue of the "state capitalist" journal, SOCIALIST WORKER, by one Mike Kidron, currently on a visit to Ceylon, allegedly about 'the Trotskyist movement in that island.
Kidron, on the one hand, explained how the Lanka Sama Samaja Party expects to be in the next Ceylonese Government and how, on the other hand, despite the LSSP's radical programme, it has to make many concessions. The latter are inevitable and unavoidable because Ceylon is an under-developed country with the need to build up its resources and is under the pressure of the international bourgeoisie. This is why, according to Kidron, the Ceylonese Trotskyists are compelled to persuade the working class to make sacrifices.
The article is both dishonest and an expression of consistent "state capitalism". I understand that a Ceylonese comrade has written a full reply and I look forward to seeing this.
However, in the mean time certain points have to be made:
(1) The majority of the LSSP were suspended from the Fourth International for their decision to enter the bourgeois government of Ceylon. A minority split off and formed the LSSP (Revolutionary) because of its 'total opposition to the "entry of the LSSP into the bourgeois government. The LSSP(R) is now the Ceylon section of the Fourth International; its secretary, Bala Tampoe, is also the leader of the militant trade union, CMU, which has led many industrial and political struggles in recent years, usually against the efforts of the LSSP. Mike Kidron fails to mention these salient facts.
(2) It is monstrous that Kidron should defend the policies of the LSSP. The LSSP entered a government which made many attacks on the working class. No doubt my Ceylonese comrade will document these [illegible] sufficient for me to deal with one aspect. The majority of readers of SOCIALIST WORKER have no way of knowing that the main component of the bourgeois government the LSSP entered, the SLFP, is a racialist party. It has a policy towards the stateless Indians in Ceylon similar to that of Enoch Powell - it favours deporting them back to India to absolute poverty.
(3) Kidron's theory that revolutionaries in the non-industrialised countries have no other choice than to be the advocates of the working class making sacrifices to facilitate industrialisation has nothing in common with Trotskyism, Marxism or revolutionary socialism. It is in total opposition, for instance, to Trotsky's theory of the permanent revolution.
Revolutionaries in the under-developed countries (exploited countries would be more correct term) have the duty to fight for social revolution as the only immediate step towards solving the problems of the masses in those countries. This economic determinist theory of Kidron, a corollary of the theory of "state capitalism", is non-marxist in essence, leaving out the effects of the exploitive social relations within these countries. It is the ending of these exploitive social relations which gives a fund for building the economy without reducing the standard of living of the workers. (Rapid industrialisation and the laying of the basis for a socialist economy would, of course, require assistance from the economically advanced countries.)
Kidron's theories, like those of other "state capitalists" are similar, in essence, to those of the Mensheviks, who said that because of the low level of industrialisation in Russia it was not ready for a workers revolution.
Kidron's article is not a one-off aberration, it is part of a pattern, for example, in an article [illegible] on Pakistan, published around the time of the upheaval in that country last year, Nigel Harris called for the Pakistan left to support Bhutto. The latter is a rich landlord, former Foreign Minister in Ayub Khan's Government, who at best would be a Sukarno-type figure, at worst (and more likely) a Kerensky, who would seek to bring Pakistan back into the western camp.
During the Algerian war of national liberation the Socialist Review group (the name under which the "state capitalists" went under in those days) supported the MNA (in common with the Healy group). The MNA ended up by fighting alongside the fascist OAS against the FLN. The "state capitalists" have never explained this little error [illegible].
3. Two former leaders of the Trotskyist movement [illegible] than Anil Moonesinghe (he actually became Transport Minister); older Trotskyists will remember him as one of the founders of the Socialist Review Group [illegible] 1950's and a very keen advocate [illegible].
These mistakes flow from the world view of "state capitalism," which writes off the possibility of social revolution in the "third world" until the workers in the advanced countries have made their revolution. It is completely in accord with the pessimistic outlook of "state capitalism" which considers that all the gains of the Russian revolution have been lost.
The majority of the members of the International Socialism group do not, as yet, understand the implications of "state capitalist" theory. Most of them do not, in fact, think the question relevant to their political activity. The leaders of I.S. have recruited people on the basis of contempt for theoretical clarity in their efforts to rapidly construct an all-embracing broad activist organisation.
However, as all the great Marxists have demonstrated, wrong theory leads to wrong practice. If members of International Socialism are to avoid the path of [illegible] they should [illegible] repudiate these ideas of Kidron [illegible] be the main component in any coalition which includes the LSSP in the next Ceylon general election. [illegible] Burnham [illegible] for Barry Goldwater, in the 1964 election campaign. Shachtman is now on the right wing of the American Socialist Party, he supports American policy in relation to Cuba and Vietnam. The Socialist Review group had relations with his group, the ISL, until Shachtman dissolved it in the early 1950's.
Dave Windsor (18/7/69)
THE IRISH STRUGGLE
[A] national campaign has been set up to support the Irish Civil Rights Campaign. The Irish Civil Rights Solidarity Campaign also stands for self-determination for Ireland. A number of local branches have been established (usually after successful Bernadette Devlin meetings). For full [details] write: J. Lawless, 22, Duncan Terrace, [illegible]