From J.H, Saunders (a Raleigh shop steward)
I have read the memorandum and found it of great interest, and constructive in its purpose. First, we must ask ourselves what is the ultimate aim of the Socialist Party? My own definition of this wuld bes: all frontiers have to be eradicated voluntarily and the world geared to extracting a PE ae
ive full benefit to all mankind. + to achieve this the barriers o eaten, religim and sole PRONE Sone is already rocking these barriers.
Capitalism is yielding ground. It is conceding a few crumbs to delay the inevitable end, and at the present the working class is apathetic enough to accept slight improvements in its standards of living and to remain complacent. The introduction of a new special socialist education scheme could connect the day-to-day life of socialists with the ultimate aim of the Socialist Party. From David Steele (Young Fabians)*
That the left should educate itself and others is unquestionable. That it should set up a separate and distinctive educational orgenisation of its own to do this is much more debatable. There are two pdnts that I would like to make. First, opting out of the new TUC directed scheme may result in our losing more ground than we gain, and second, that in a separate organisation we will be saddled with the unsavoury reputation of a propaganda body disguising itself as a university. Let me enlarge on these points in turn.
The absorption of the NCLC by the TUC agency will probably leave scant possibility of student initiative to put the kind of broadly educational classes that we want instead of narrowly defined trade union curricula. If the TUC agency does arrange other than industrial relations classes, then it is highly likely they will be on political and economic subjects - but we cannot guarantee the bent that these will take or even that they will be put on at all. With the organisation controlled as it is, from the centre, we can have little say on what lines it will be run. Granted all this, we will gain nothing and lose a great deal by opting out at this early stage before we have the facts of the way it has moved to persuade otherSeeee
The second point is bound up with the whole question of what is socialist education. Why is there a need for a separate independent socialist educational organisation? I can hear the WEA asking this question. If there are classes demanded on socialist theory or Marxism, or any of the subjects on which we would like to see courses why not let the students request a tutor through the WEA? With sufficient students in any one place, is it likely that the WEA would refuse to put on such courses?....There are signs that in the revival of factory classes the WEA is moving back to its original conception of workers' education. Cannot these be used and expanded?
The toughest question is raised when we ask whether the tutors must be members of the left...Few educational organisations today would deny their teachers the right to make judgements. What I claim they do have the right to deny them is to be partials that is, to deliberately withhold facts or views which might lead to a contrary opinion to be formed...One difference from the WEA is accepted, that all the tutors in a new organisation would call themselves socialists, which would guarantee a certain approach from the start. However, do not most socialist teachers at one time or another find themselves in the i is their reception there so bad that they cannot carry on their work reely? * Somewhat shortened for space reasonse