Following on from the T.U.C. conference defeat of Wilson's economic and political policies at Brighton a whole series of struggles have developed on the railways, docks, in the motor car.industry and even in teaching. These struggles are in different stages of development, but each one of them is very restricted in its aims and appeal. The most significant, that on the docks, seems to be doomed to defeat by a process of attrition (we sincerely hope that our assessment is wrong) and the railway struggle seems scarcely more likely to win its main objectives. It is sad to say that in a period when the trade union movement as a whole has rejected Government policies a fight against those policies seems futile. What is wrong? And how should the left seek to remedy the situation? First we need to note that most of the struggles taking place today are essentially defensive struggles. And they are defensive struggles in a period most unfavourable to defensive struggles, i.e., one in which unemployment is growing, Secondly, they are struggles which do not link the particular industrial battles with a general overall political perspective. For instance, the National Union of Railwaymen has backed the railway work-to-rule, thus coming slap-bang into conflict with the railway bosses and, behind them, the Labour Government. Yet no one would know from the political stand that this union takes that it is even critical of the Labour Government. Likewise, The National Union of Mineworkers is desperate to stop the closure of pits in a situation of high unemployment in all the main mining areas, yet it has nominated for the treasuryship of the Labour Party, Callaghan, the main architect of unemployment-inducing policies in the Labour Government. Numerous more examples could be given: the lesson is clear, it is no use combating particular aspects of the Government's plicies whilst carrying out support for their general line. This approach is one which is least likely to mobilise mass support for opposition to the Government and, therefore, is doomed to failure, But even assuming that one adopts a fighting stance towards the Labour Government and its vicious anti-working class policies one can be impotent unless a general anti-capitalist strategy is elaborated. The present struggle on the docks is most commendable from the point of view of general militancy. But the lack of response to the anti-Devlin strikes should be analysed by the Left. This journal can add nothing to the analysis contained in the article elsewhere in this issue by Tony Topham. But the points he makes need generalising: it is of highest importance that all struggles today are both generalised and made specifically anti-capitalist. Not anti-capitalist in an abstract sense but in the sense that demands are made which link the understanding and aspirations of the workers with real erosions of capitalist power. The demand for workers. control is a case in point, but these also remain at the level of abstract slogans unless they are made the property of large numbers of workers. In a period of struggle - which is what we are entering - slogans particularising the concept of workers control can gain a ready response. More than that: they can mark out the boundaries of an alternative strategy: one which can mobilise workers and yet remain anti-capitalist in
eT NSTNOS