From Gordon Cruickshank

[p029] Gordon Cruickshank May 1, 1958 (and what better day to write such a letter!) Labour Leaders and Socialism WE think that the main point about the social function of the Labour bureaucracy today is that the Labour leaders who occasionaily preach socialism to the workers do not themselves 90 Communications May-June-July 1958 ment in Europe, the fact that in the greater part of Asia and Africa the struggle has passed out of the phase of anti-colonialism. South Africa is not isolated from the world. believe in it. For example they do not agree with ‘the nation- alization of the means of production under workers’ control’, nor with ‘production for use and not for profit’, nor with the simultaneous use of industrial and political action to establish ‘socialism, as distinguished from mere dreams about it’. Other- wise they would not support capitalism and the arms race and the nuclear bomb. Then why do they sometimes preach socialist ideas to the working people? The answer is that given by Lenin: as a method of preserving the dictatorship of the Labour bureaucracy over the working class. The Labour Party in its original form as a federation of trade unions, Co-operatives and socialist societies had the makings of a great socialist party. Its development into a socialist party has been retarded (1) by the attitude of many trade union leaders who, having secured snug jobs for life, have risen from the working class into the middle class and hold a middle-class outlook (J. H. Thomas, Bevin, Deakin, Cousins etc.); (2) by the opening up of the party to individuai members who are neither trade unionists nor socialists but professional politicians only (Attlee, Gaitskell, Shawcross, Wyatt). These two groups together form the Right-wing leadership of the Labour movement (the Labour ‘leaders’) who oppose socialism in the Labour movement and in the world at large. The course of events provides an acid test—e.g., over the pre- sent peace struggle—which exposes the real attitude of these leaders, and either forces them forward by a kick in the pants from the rank and file. or forces them out of the party altogether. J. H. Thomas was forced out of the Labour Party—but not before he had done incalculable damage to the working-class movement. And now Sir Hartley Shawcross (a man for whom most socialists have got a healthy contempt) has been forced out. Mr (not yet Sir) Hugh Gaitskell has been forced with obvious reluctance to put himself at the head of an anti- H-bomb campaign. He could not retain the leadership unless he did. It is the job of the militant party rank and file to make the campaign for the unilateral abolition of the bomb so hot that the Right-wing leaders cannot control it. However, it seems to us worth while making the point that because the division between the reformists and the socialists exists not only inside the Labour movement but also in society at large, therefore one has to regard the reformists inside the Labour movement as in fact the Left wing of capitalism, as its agents inside the Labour movement (we don’t suppose every comrade would put it in those words, but the point could be made in milder language!). It is clear therefore that there is no chance of transforming the present Labour Party into a mass revolutionary socialist party by simply changing the leaders. As Trotsky put it: ‘Even if we were to allow that the next parliamentary elections will give the Labour Party an absolute majority, which is not assured in any case; if we were further to allow that the party would actually take the road of socialist transformation—which is scarcely probable—it would im- mediately meet with such fierce resistance from the House

[p030] COMMUNICATIONS of Lords, the King, the banks, the stock-market, the bureau- cracy and the Press that a split in its ranks would become inevitable and the Left, more radical, wing would become a parliamentary minority.’ This is still, fundamentally, true today. Moreover, Rochdale means the Tories’ name is mud. So does Kelvingrove. So does Torrington. But the Labour Party has not picked up the votes the Tories lost, because the Labour leaders are afraid to lead. They give the workers nothing to vote for. It was the same at the last General Election. We heard a life-long Labour man say then that he had not voted as it was ‘a damned waste of time’. The only way to win more workers for socialism is to go into the workers’ day-to-day struggle and support them against the capitalists every time. Never mind if they are not militant Labour men and revolutionary socialists. They will become so increasely when they see that the militant Labour men and the revolutionary socialists are with them in the fight, while the Gaitskells and Bevans always let them down. Therefore the main thing is direct action by the rank and file. It cannot ‘be left to the Labour leaders. The Jeaders are thinking of their own petty careers and the chances of their wives and daughters being presented at Court. That is why rank-and-nle committees of trade unionists, whether official or unofficial, will become increasingly impor- tant.