An open letter to the I.S.

PAGE DURING the Nazi invasion of Russia the late David Low drew a cartoon which showed the reactionary White Guard Finnish General Mannerheim with hand on heart and simulated innocence on his face exclaiming, in the presence of his German allies: 'Mine, as you know, is a separate war'.

The Russians, history records, were not taken in by this argument.

We think that this analogy sums up the attitude of the International Socialism (IS) group to the witch-hunt of Rosemary Whippe by the press and TV. We are referring in particular to the scurrilous innuendo contained in the statement of Terence Barrett at the May 1 meeting of IS at the Holborn Assembly rooms:

'We have seen a feature of substitutionism this week with Rose Whippe, the girl who had two days off work and wanted to be victimized. The average worker can't afford to have two days off.' The detestable lack of principle and the cringing adoration of capitalist power which characterizes your movement is crudely but explicitly expressed in Barrett's slander.

Conforms

That he should have been supported by Messrs. Hallas, Palmer and Foot is not extraordinary. It is in conformity with your political practice.

Your movement is well known for scabbing the Trotskyist movement in the post-war years.

When you weren't scabbing on us you were busy cooking up some provocation against the SLL and the YS. It would not be uncharitable to say that Not a plant, says woman in Girling strike row A sample of the Rosemary Whippe witch-hunt treatment dished up by the capitalist press. the SLL provides the raison d'être for your group.

Consider your record in relation to us. In the early 1950s you broke with Trotskyism on the nature of the Korean war. Your refusal to support the defènce of a deformed workers' state in N Korea against imperialist obliteration meant, in effect, your support of the witch-hunt of those who opposed the Korean war in the Labour Party and the League of Youth.

In the 1960s, it was your paper, 'Young Guard', renamed 'Rebel', and your supporters in the Young Socialists who lined up consistently with the right-wing in the witch-hunt of 'Keep Left' and the Trotskyists in the Young Socialists.

Shutdowns

You were for the lifting of the ban on Woodrow Wyattan unregenerate right-winger who advocated the atom bombing of N Korea in 1950—but you did not lift a finger to prevent the right wing from shutting down YS federations all over the country and in expelling leading members of the YS who supported 'Keep Left'.

You identified Trotskyism with Nazism and-like now— you blamed the Trotskyists for having 'provoked' the witchhunt against them. Predictably, your services were rewarded by the right wing who solicitously encouraged 'Young Guard' and proscribed 'Keep Left'.

During the struggle inside National Association of Labour Student Organizations (NALSO) against the right wing and centrists your group openly invited the Stalinists and the 'Tribune'-ites into an unholy alliance against Trotskyism on the basis of gossip and slander against our tendency.

Reminiscent

Your attack against Rosemary Whippe is reminiscent of another incident in 1968 which proved beyond any doubt that you were quite prepared to collaborate with the news media against the Socialist Labour League and its members.

We refer, of course, to the provocation organized by your members outside the Reyrolle factory at Hebburn on the Wearside in October 1968, when your members tried to disrupt an SLL-All Trades Unions Alliance meeting for the benefit of a BBC-TV unit.

Your group cannot bring itself to support Rosemary Whippe's fight against the capitalist press and its agencies in the working class, but it has never found difficulty in supporting the most reactionary causes - the imperialistinspired secession of Biafra, the despatch of imperialist occupation forces to N Ireland and Black Power, which tries to split the working class on racial lines.

The fact that you have issued a belated statement condemning the witch-hunt one week after the event will not blind the vigilance of those who see the slander of Barrett as representing the real position of IS.

Since you have not dissociated yourself from this remark-and it is not likely that you will-we are free to draw what inferences we please.

Ennals

It is, in fact, typical of your group that you say one thing at the height of a crisis and another when the crisis blows over.

The most instructive example of this sort of skulduggery is provided by your volte-face on Ulster.

You were for the sending of troops when the prospect of an armed insurrection against British imperialism was imminent and you are against retaining the troops now that imperial 'law and order' has been re-established.

Said nothing

Similarly when the witchhunt was at its height, on the Tuesday and Wednesday of the last week in April, your paper, which came out on the Saturday, had nothing to say.

Now that the press attack has been stalled by the SLL, you are quick to denounce Fleet Street — while keeping silent on the shabby role of your leadership when the heat was on.

Basically, your method is the same as the Stalinists who were more concerned in getting out of the line of fire than in defending the victim of a vile attack capitalist press.

You know as well as we do that principled differences should not invalidate solidarity of disparate political groups in resisting a common threat from the capitalist class.

Notwithstanding our differences with your group, we have never hesitated to defend your members as we did, for example, during the court case against Geoff Mitchell, exconvenor of ENV.

This is a basic principle. of the Marxist movement. If you contravene it you imperil your own existence and you facilitate the attacks and divisive measures of the employing class.

This is too obvious even to need repetition.

Yet your leaders chose to consciously impugn this principle and, in the course of it, you heaped insult upon infamy by grossly misrepresenting the facts about Rosemary Whippe's sacking.

Lie Firstly, it is a lie to si that Rosemary wanted victimized.

Secondly, it is equally dacious to say that she two days off work.

Not even the capitalist press was able to surpass this piece of distortion by your spokesman. We quote the 'Liverpool Daily Post':

'At the meeting, Mr Frank Shaw, Amalgamated Engineering and Foundryworkers' Union convenor at the factory, said the girl's sacking was a "terrible situation".

'She had been at the company for a week, and in the second week had been off ill for one day he said. On the Friday she was given her cards' (April 28, 1970.)

And lastly, your reference to 'substitutionism' isonly belated echo of the distortion spread by the Stalinists that the Trotskyists are disrupters who try to 'substitute' themselves for the working class instead of leaving the workers captive to the traditional leadership in the trade unions.

Before we deal with this odious middle-class prejudice, we will return to the first allegation.

Unlike IS, the SLL, being a serious proletarian revolutionary organization, does not suffer from the 'martyr syndrome' which afflicts every petty-bourgeois organization in Britain and Europe.

We do not seek to be victimized or martyred, no more than we indulge in symbolic gate-smashing, flag burning and embassy stoning.

We do not advocate form of protest. In fact oppose it.

All that theatric and melodrama of protest — whether by students or workers-ever achieves is a cheap and ephemeral publicity in the capitalist news media.

All that it expresses is the hysterical impotence and political despair of the middle class; a 'sound and fury signifying nothing.

No, Rosemary Whippe did not seek to be victimized. Her record as a socialist and a trade unionist does credit to the Young Socialists.

She fought for her principles uncompromisingly — something which your paper and organization have never yet understood.

And she suffered for them. You think that this is a criticism of Rosemary? In fact it is a condemnation of the Geoff Mitchell, ex-convenor of ENV.

capitalist system and the kind of industrial relations which exist-and which your organization helps to uphold with your support of productivity dealing', etc.

battle Rosemary's first battle in Plessey's was precisely against the kind of deal which your movement recommends workers to accept - albeit with reservations of 'mutuality'.

After this struggle she was sacked by the Plessey management, who interviewed her presence of hostile union officials about her attitude to productivity deals before they did so.

Her fight at Plessey's did not escape the attention of Merseyside employers who are everywhere trying , to force through productivity deals with the support of the union bureaucracy.

The bosses have their own intelligence network, which is nationwide.

In your paper (May 2, 1970), activities le, you refecto thie the Economic League on Clydeside.

You state that a certain Mr Teacher, who runs the Glasgow Economic League branch, has an extensive card-index file on 4,000 to 5,000 militants in Scotland and that representatives of this sinister organization were inquiring into the activities of militants in the Upper Clyde Shipbuilders. different complexion on her case.

6... Your refusal to support the defence of a deformed worke's state in N Korea (right), against imperialist obliteration, meant, in affect, your support of the witchhunt of those who oppressed the Korean war in the Labour 'arty and the League of You also state that 60 or 70 firms in Glasgow are affiliated to the Economic League and that they phone Teacher when employing new workers about their previous records.

Is it not, therefore, entirely conceivable that the same thing goes on in the Merseyside area, and that when Girling's sacked Rosemary Whippe after four days, ostensibly for takıng a day oft work, they had 'other' reasons for doing so?

Otherwise, how do you explain the fact that she was sacked without her steward being present, a procedure not customary at Girling's.

Why is it that neither Barrett nor Hallas (who considers himself an authority on the SLL) nor Palmer could explain this simple little fact to their audience?

We ask this question because your speakers, in lying about Rosemary's desire to be victimized, omitted to mention another significant 'detail' which cast an entirely rubbish about actions, lots and 'dainty noses'.

This was the fact, known even to the capitalist press on the Wednesday before your meeting, that the recommendation for strike action against her sacking came from the local district committee of the Amalgamated Union of Engineering and Foundry workers (AEF) and the two shop stewards committees and not from Rosemary.

Different

Therefore, if anyone is to be made guilty of your grotesque charges of 'substitutionism' and wanting to be victimized', it must surely be the Wirral and West Cheshire district committee of the AEF.

That really is different isn't it?

The Marxist truth is always concrete.

When the strike motion was put, a group of backward and reactionary workers—in order to prejudice the vote and in order to embarrass their stewards who had voted for a stoppage on May Day in defence of Vietnam-raised a and cry about a red plant' and of Rosemary having a degree.

It was absolutely clear from reading the press that a witchhunt was launched against Rosemary at this meeting and that her democratic right to hold a job was being challenged. Read again what the press had to say:

'Set up' 'During the meeting, machine operator James Nicholas, aged 21, of Milner Street, Birkenhead, told the workers: "I think this is a plant. I don't mind going on strike, but not for a set up."

'His speech was greeted with "He Nicholas! added, "There is no room for a dainty nose in this factory"! ('Liverpool Daily Post', April 28, 1970.)

In the ensuing confusion the vote against strike action was carried. Having done his dirty work, the man who raised the cry of 'red plant' then repudiated it.

But it was enough.

The entire capitalist press picked up this filthy slander and tried its damndest to discredit and vilify the Socialist Labour League and create a lynch atmosphere to stampede backward workers to vote Tory in the next election.

It was not just a witch-hunt. It was a gigantic political hoax against the working class and not only against the League.

Thanks to the innate scepticism of the British workers towards capitalist press lies plus the discipline of the SLL, the press and ITN came unstuck.

For this success we owe you and the Communist Party nothing!

Mr Barrett, with his references to 'substitutionism' is the 'Red plant' hoax wasn't merely aimed at getting rid of Rosemary Whippe from Girling's.

It was an integral part of the combined government and employers' offensive against the shop steward system in Since Girling's is the target of a government-sponsored inquiry led by the Commission of Industrial Relations (CIR) and since the 'Red bogey' has featured in every government inquiry, the right wing in the factory decided it was better to appease the CIR by sacrificing Rosemary than to fight the management and the CIR inquiry all the way.

Their aim is to please the CIR and Wilson by keeping socialist politics out of the unions.

Hence the witch-hunt hence the statement by Nicholas:

It was also apparent that May 12, 1970 It was no accident that she [Rosemary] was in the factory. This was an attempt to thumb • nose at the probe into the industry? ('Daily Express,

Therefore what Mr Barrett calls 'substitutionism' is only a more sophisticated way of fighting socialist consciousness in the trade unions and defending opportunism - as Mr Nicholas is doing in Girling's.

A final word.

May Day is a day of working-class solidarity, against the oppression and violence of capitalism.

For you, however, it is an occasion to dissociate yourselves from those who are under attack from the capitalist class and to uphold all that is backward and reactionary in the working class.

Until you publicly repudiate the lying allegation of Mr Barrett we shall continue to treat your public statement in the Socialist Worker' (May 9, 1970) as an act of political dishonesty and cowardice. of International Marxism