The Newsletter, vol. 4 no. 151

(147

fe 186 Clapham High Street, London, S:W.4 - Telephone [email protected] _ » SATURDAY, May 14, 1960 . CONFIDENCE ss -_ .The Newsletter is quite a different paper today from what it was during the months when it first appeared. It is almost exclusively turned towards the trade unions and the Labour Party, and week in and week out it hammers away advocating policies for socialist struggle

WHEN the Russian rocket scored a bulls-eye on the the American spy-plane, it shattered the illusions of many of those who believe in summit talks. With less than a week to go before the summit Christian Herter, boss of the US State Department arrogantly retorted to Russian protests—we shall carry on with similar flights. And Russia in turn threatened action against the American bases.

For months now the canons and bishops have been blessing the summit banners. This Sunday, Hewlitt Johnson is due to speak at an eve of summit rally in Trafalgar Square, and no doubt he, too, will enlist the services of the good Lord. The Labour leaders, Left and Right wing, can only gaze hopefully at the capitalist statesmen and hope that all will be well. Conforming to Moscow's dictates the Stalinists trot dutifully behind Macmillan beseeching him: 'Speak for Britain.'

Meanwhile for the capitalists, it is business as usual. Britain and America continue to increase their arms expenditure. France has tested two atomic bombs with the promise of more to follow. The US has got the 5,000-mile-range solid fuel ICBM Minuteman missile ready for action. Off Long Island the Navy submarine 'George Washington' is testing underwater launching tubes for the deadly Polaris missile. The 3,000-mile-range Titan missile is ready to go, already well tested.

At the end of last month the House Appropriations Sub-Committee decided to concentrate on 'offensive missiles and bombers' and to throw out 'expensive defensive systems'. Committee Chairman, George Mahon, explained the meaning of the word deterrent in his dictionary by saying 'you launch an attack before an aggressor . . . no other deterrent can be relied on.'

American magazine 'Time' made the blunt comment: 'It (the Commitee's policy) was miles away from the concept of "preventive war".'

Not above politics

In the meantime, Eisenhower has been giving some sharp lessons to those who insist that the summit is above politics. Warning that he would tolerate no interference with military expenditure by welfare schemes, he threatened Congress that he would fly back before the summit was concluded if 'domestic requirements pressed him'. He meant if Congress passed a billion-dollar housing bill and a bill granting Federal employees a 20 per cent. rise in pay. One White House official stated: 'If the Democrats want to make sure that Nixon doesn't go to the summit then they had better not mess around with spending bills while the president is gone.' For the American Communist Party who want to protect Ike against the 'more reactionary sections' of big business, this must present quite a problem.

A carte blanche for zealous military chiefs to launch a rocket whenever they think necessary; bigger military bills and the dropping of even the most modest welfare proposals are the prices demanded by American capitalism of those who want Eisenhower at the summit.

Chinese sceptical

Unlike the Russians, who constantly sing their paens of praise to the summit, the Chinese are cynical about Eisenhower the 'peacemaker'.

On April 12 the 'Peking Daily' reprinted in English an article by Yu Chao-Li which had originally appeared in 'Hongoi (Red Flag), organ of the central committee of the Chinese Communist Party.

Making the point that 'certain representative figures in US ruling circles seem to be paying greater lip service to peace than hitherto', Chao-Li says: 'They hope to create the illusion among people that Eisenhower and his kind are capable of laying down the butcher's knife and turning into buddhas'. Chao-Li might have added that amongst those representatives creating illusions in Eisenhower, the Kremlin is not the least guilty.

After Khrushchev's autumn visit to the US, Moscow described the course of Washington as one 'genuinely in favour of peace' and as one being consistent with the 'new reality of the nuclear age which has made war impossible.'

Chao-Li then goes on to say, 'today, just as Lenin pointed out more than 40 years ago, the danger of war still lies in the imperialist system. . . . There has been no change whatever in this fundamental nature of imperialism since the end of World War II.' Chao-Li is absolutely correct in this analysis of imperialism, but then he must explain how it was possible for both Soviet Russia and Mao's forces to find themselves allied with the British, French and American imperialists during the last world war.

Chao-Li's endorsement of Lenin's position on imperialism certainly comes slap bang against the line of the Russian Salinist leaders. At the 20th Congress in 1956 the delegates voted that 'capitalist countries can be persuaded to abandon war and to co-exist peacefully with those countries that have overthrown capitalism.' But Chao-Li speaks for a government which will not be represented at the summit and which is fearful of the deals that may be made there by the imperialists and the Soviet bureaucracy.

The Chinese know full well that the replacement of Syngman Rhee by Huh Chung and General Soong Yo Chan doesn't end the tensions on the Korean peninsula or obviate the danger of war. The conditions that led to war in July, 1950, still exist. All the Americans have done is to change the jailers of the South Koreans.

In Japan, despite student riots and socialist opposition in the Diet, Premier Nobuseke Kishi is intent on ratifying the US-Japanese security pact. Mao and his government understand exactly who that pact is aimed at.

The position of the Chinese Communists—for there can be no doubt that Chao-Li wrote with the full authority of the Party—is a correct one. Their characterization of the type of peace sought by American imperialism as 'nothing but a peace with US global domination . . . a peace in which socialism is eliminated, and revolutions in all countries are strictly "verboten"' sums up not only the summit plans of the Americans, but also those of the British and French imperialists.

The status quo

Fearful of the revolutionary forces in Africa, dismayed by a turbulent middle-East, with the pro-NATO regime of Turkey's Adnan Menderes beginning to founder, unable to maintain stable pro-capitalist regimes in Asia, world imperialism is bursting at the seams. In the metropolitan countries, the working class forces still remain intact and undefeated and show their fighting power in repeated industrial battles with the employers.

At the summit the imperialists will seek to obtain guarantees from the Soviet Union which will permit them to ride the storm. No lasting and stable peace can be built at Geneva, but what can arise from that conference are a number of cynical agreements designed to maintain the status quo—for what else does peaceful co-existence mean?

For the international working class, the status quo means, north and south Korea, Viet Minh and Viet Nam, east and west Germany, French Algeria, Verwoerd's South Africa, stinking little slave-owning oil kingdoms like Saudi Arabia and the subordination of the class struggle to the 'politicians of peace'.

The acceptance of past summits has led to the very conditions that today threaten world war and nuclear destruction. The reliance by Gaitskell, Gollan, Mollet, Thorez and Foster on the representatives of capitalism to secure peace has prevented a working class struggle against war.

The international Labour movement must recognize that today the forces for world peace are powerful and strong, but that they are not to be found in the gilt and mirrored palaces at Geneva. Only the independent struggles of the working class can stop war, because only that struggle is directed against the capitalist system.

‘ MF puplication tt was on May ny. 19s fourth year of an open Marxist organization, the Socialist Labour La ar ae . , , Fryer put the first copy of this paper, in printer’s jargon, to ‘bed’. It was an event of far greater importance than any of those connected with The Newsletter at that time could have known. No other newspaper of the Left has been witch-hunted like The Newsletter, Banned by Transport House, it has been attacked and ee peuny the seading organs of the capitalist PESS me . was : : : .

Fryer who, whilst he is no longer with us, must be given the credit for having launched The Newsletter under conditions where even his stoutest friends gave it only a few weeks to survive. Yet it is no secret that the backbone of The Newsletter was not simply the undoubted talent of Peter Fryer; it was the hundreds of Trotskyists who remained faithful to Marxism and who had struggled for nearly a quarter of a century before Khrushchev made his 20th Congres speech. , These were the people who worked for the paper and sold the paper, Lheir ranks have now considerably Ine creaset’. cy nave been jor y some ob me mds capable of the intellectuals and workers who left the Communist Party over the Hungarian uprising. It is this lasting unity which continues to defeat the witchhunters and those who call their tune.

There were people who said that The Newsletter would only continue so long as there was discontent insi inside the Cmmunist Party. In his editorial comment i is editori on the first issue Peter Fryer emphasized that “TheNewsletter has no intention of being obsessed by the . . } crisis within the Communist Party.’ He was absolutely right. Crises come and crises go in that organization just the same as in the Labour Party. The education I . . of Marxists must take into account not simply the advantages of a crisis but, above all, the patient, hard ws : work hich has to be put in, in order to prepare for It is during the unspectacular, relatively peaceful ae : periods in the struggle for a Marxist party that the fainthearts generally discover they have some funda , . -mental differences with Marxism. But for the patient work of the 25 years before Khrushchev made his Fryer to edit.

We are now in a period where the Labour Party and the Communist Party, whilst still undergoing a crisis in policy, continue to attract fresh members. This is inevitable as there are new people being drawn towards olitical activity almost every day. The task of Marxists is not made more difficult by such development. It simply means that they must learn how to be patient and to build steadily within the mass movement which attracts these recruits the powerful foundation for the revolutionary party of the future. Only those who have educated themselves in the art of combining Marxist theory with practice can survive and develop inside those organizations. , It champions the struggle of the colonial people and especially the great African revolution. The Newsletter is now the weekly journal League.

= The future requires that much more has to be done in building fh, The Newsletter. ep lans_ have been in preparation for some time for the publication of a /atget weekly paper presented in a more popular style than the present news-sheet. We are pleased to say that these plans are now well advanced. When the Socialist Labour League meets in conference on June 4, 5 and 6, a resolution containing a programme for che sion. This resolution will launch a national circulaWe drive, a special Sea ede fund will be opened. f € aim also 0 ae xk like ers some idea what their mere paper WI te h h S we an wh ene eek vith ne si y than 0 mlv thank all ier “The ades Who iave Th WN vl since May 1 > “I be great y ther oft e Newsletter was only possible because of their etforts.

Ramon Mercader, alias Frank Jacson, who murdered

speech there would have been no Newsletter for Peter © “Meaning whatsoever for the British Communist Party. Leon Trotsky on instructions from Stalin, has been released from prison in Mexico City three months before his 20-year sentence expired. According to press reports he travelled to Cuba, where it is believed that he has boarded a Soviet ship. The Czech Press Agency has announced that Mercader will settle in Czecho- .

Can there now be an y doubt about Stalin’s guilt ., for this terrible crime? Why does the Daily Warker remain silen t abut Mercader’s release? Why doesn’t ir ° J. R. Campbell explain how the man whom he described as a ‘disgruntled Trotskyist’ is now offered as ylum in Czechoslovakia? . aes The leaders of the British ae Communist Party are just as guilty as those in Moscow who sent Mercader to Mexico City. They have . ‘ covered up the crimes of Stalin, irrespective of the evidence that has since been produced exposing these crimes.

J. R. Campbell and the Daily Worker will be forced by histo by history to accept their share of the blame for Trot- : , skys murder. Their silence is one more powerful « demonstration that so-called de-Stalinization has no ~* : 1e- .

The Socialist Labour League is pleased to announce the publication of : Where is Britain Going D Including an introduction, a preface for America, and the preface to the German edition Publication date will be announced early in June Enquiries from: Socialist Labour League 186 Clapham High Street, London, S.W.4

SINCE last December a discussion has been taking place inside the Socialist Labour League around a proposition presented by Brian Behan that the League should decide at its Whitsun conference on June 4, 5 and 6, to declare itself ‘an independent revolutionary working-class party’. One of the main arguments justifying this fundamental change in the strategy of the League was presented by Behan in a 21-page statement to the National Committee on January 16 and 17....It said: ‘I feel that all the tendencies towards slump are present and will become sharper as time goes on. The post-war expansion boom is over and wage increases as a result of labour scarcity gone for ever.’

The proposed change and Brian Behan’s economic conclusions were rejected almost unanimously by the League’s National Committee. His only supporter was T. Scott, an alternate member of the National Committee.

His document was circulated throughout the membership and since the pre-conference discussion opened at the beginning of April it has been under discussion in all the branches of the League.

At the National Committee meeting on April 12, Brian Behan announced the formation of a faction which consisted of himself, T. Scott and a few friends; approximately 12 members of the Socialist Labour League were involved. Arrangements were made for the spokesmen of this faction to ‘address branches and aggregate meetings of the League in the pre-conference discussion.

However, Brian Behan, as the main spokesman for the faction, did not confine himself to a discussion on his political perspectives. He took the opportunity on a number of occasions to visit branches and make serious charges against leadimg bodies of the organization which he had not previously presented to these bodies, as was his duty, since he was a member of them.

The London Executive Committee, which is the main body responsible for the carrying out of League policy between meetings of the National Executive Committee and National Committee, summoned him to appear before it to answer for such conduct. He replied on April 29, stating that it was not his ‘intention to take part in the proceedings of the London Executive Committee’ since he had ‘no confidence in its ability to settle anything whatsoever’.

The London Executive Committee decided as far as possible to avoid creating a situation that would make it necessary to take disciplinary action against Brian Behan and his factic before the conference. This decision only made matt: a worse. Instead of concentrating his attention on the po ats cal issues, Brian Behan continued with his unfounded al Aittitions against leading committees and members of the I degaunder conditions where he avoided taking responsibil sepie Serene the work of leading committees. ity for It therefore became necessary for the ‘London J Committee to send a delegation to one of the bra Axecutive “es ings where Brian Behan was speaking and ask bh’ nch ‘meetan undertaking that he would not split from + 4m, to give Labour League before the conference. He was Ae ‘Socialist he would give an undertaking that he would also ‘asked if documents through the channels provided by t’ orly ‘circulate He refused to give these undertakings by d he ‘constitution. would not answer any questions. He the ectaring ‘that he porters of his faction in the branch to foll: a usked all supNow him‘out of the branch meeting. The branch, in turn, p st down a motion for his expulsion and the expulsion of those who had left the meeting with him.

A special meeting of the National Executive Committee was held next day, Saturday, May 7, and preferred charges against Brian Behan. He was summoned to the meeting of the London Executive Committee on Monday, May 9, to answer these charges and give reasons why he should not be expelled from the League. He failed tn attend this meeting and he was accordingly expelled from the League. Three members of his faction who refused te give undertakings that they would abide by the discipline of the League were suspended until the conference, where a motion for their expulsion will be proposed. Two other members of his faction who walked out of the branch meeting with him, have also been expelled. They will all have the right to make a personal appeal to the conference at Whitsun.

The indiscipline of Brian Behan apd his friends underlines once more the incompatibility @§ sectarianism and revolutionary Marxism. The Socialist Labour League was proscribed by the Labour Party not Because it broke the rules of that party, but because “ merely asked for the right of Marxists to have a form Of organization imside the Labour Party. We requested thse facilities early ih 1959 at a time when the witch-haating press were falsely declaring that we were a conspitacy in the Labour Patty. We firmly believe that the Marxists nave as much right to an open ofganization in the Labour Party as the Fabians. We offered to discuss the problem with Transport House, but this was rejected and instead the leadets of thé Labour Party proscribed the Socialist Labour League an@ banned The Newsletter.

Since then the crisis inside the Labour Party ‘has grown around such matters’%&s Clause Four, the H-bomb and defence.

The people who _ proscribed the Socialist Labowr League are now «een dy huritreds of thousands of Labowr Party people to bes eoripletedy bankrupt in policy. Gaitskell is rapidly beco: ming the nost discredited leader of the Labour Party sincey Ramsay "MacDonald.

T te fottation of the Socialist Labour League was not ’nter gfed as a’split away from the Labour-'Party, but as a step t sudtds ‘Maintaining the unity of the WLabour Party by en° guraging a serious discussion on socialist policy. Bans ghd prosériptions have fed to more splits in the Labour Party than dkything else. They have been in no small measure ifesponéible for the defeat in the ‘general election. In their ‘Wake thas come nothing but fruétrdtion and apathy.

The Socialist Labour Lesgue,' despite the proscription, con‘ Siders itself as ‘an integral part of the Labour movement. We consider that our main task is‘ to assist the rank and file of the Labour Party and ‘the ‘tfade ‘unions to accept and struggle for a socialist ‘policy ‘inside'the movement. It war because of this that we gave critical support to Labour candidates in the general election “and ‘continue to do so in the present council electioris. The “Socialist Labour League believes that the unity of ‘the ‘Labour movement can best be preserved on the basis of ‘a ‘polity which will enable the party to go forward towards socialism in Britain.

We consider that the time for the formation of a revolution- ; ary party in ‘Britain will arise when the people who support the Labour Party and the trade unions arrive at the conclusion, through their own experience, that such a party Is necessary. That time has not yet come.

The Socialist Labour League is in the vanguard of the struggle against all bans and proscriptions. To form an independent party on a sectarian basis would only isolate the

_ Marxists prematurely from the mass movement: and play right into the hands of the Right wing, who would like nothing better. Brian Behan himself strongly condemned this ‘course of action when he wrote in The Newsletter on June 13, 1959:

‘As the problems facing the working class become more acute so does the working class seek ways of fighting, within the Labour Party, for the socialist policies that alone can solve the workers’ problems.

‘This has happened in the past, too. But always in the past the Right has been able to defeat the Left, in one of two ways:

*(1) By forcing the Left to go outside the party and set up . independent parties.

‘Both the Communist Party and the Independent Labour Party were correct to fight for their. right to have policies and journals and organizations in the Labour Party that enabled the Left to challenge the Right.

‘Both were wrong when they turned their backs on the Labour Party and left the field clear for the Right. This sectarian policy helped the Right wing. . . .

‘, . . Unlike the Communist Party, the Socialist Labour League does not seek to pull the Left out of the Labour Party into a small sectarian organization. We answer the [TABOUR reformists’ attacks by remaining inside the: party and. carrying forward the fight against the reformists and for a socialist programme. — ‘The Socialist Labour League is able to unite with the Left in the Labour Party because it has no separate interests from the Left. Around our programme can be forged the widest possible unity.’

In the course of the discussion which has been democratically carried out inside the Socialist Labour League, Brian Behan has constantly run away from the political issues and sought to build up a personal faction around gossip and wild allegations. This is characteristic of sectarians who fail to understand the responsibilities of Marxists in relation to the mass movement: political issues are replaced by subjectivism. The great strength of the Socialist Labour League can be seen from the fact that the political position of Brian Behan has already been decisively rejected in the course of the pre-conference discussion.

His repeated acts of indiscipline have called forth a number of resolutions which demand his expulsion.

The Socialist Labour League will not swerve from its course, We regret that we are unable to take Brian Behan with us, but as a responsible Marxist organization we are left with no choice but to expel him.

of the economy.

An observer from South Paddington Labour Party, JOHN FAIRHEAD, said: ‘I believe this Committee will begin a movement which will answer questions posed in the Labour

Fi By Our Political Correspondent ‘ -Some 70 delegates and observers representing trade union branches, Trades Councils and Constituency Labour Parties, attended the inaugural conference of the ‘Clause Four Campaign Committee’ in London’s -Caxton Hall last. week.

Chairman Councillor JACK LEWIS and secretary. Councillor RON SPURWAY, outlined the aims of the Committee, which are to secure at ‘forthcoming Trade Union and Labour Party Conferences, the maximum number of mandated delegates pledged to reject the addendum proposed by the Labour Party national executive to Clause Four.’

Spurway said the Committee intended ‘to campaign within the unions to ensure that the greatest possible number of. union branches affiliate to their local Labour Parties and that their delegates fight for the nationalization policies of their unions.’

A good discussion took place from the floor. Councillor MILLER, Paddington Amalgamated Engineering Union delegate, said: ‘I welcome the setting up of this Committee and I am prepared to help in any capacity.’

Industrial . sub-committees Brother GOULD, who represented the Esher Labour Party and is an AEU shop steward at London Airport, considered that ‘the Committee’s proposition of establishing industrial sub-committees so that particular campaigns could be run in each union was very good.’ An AEU and Electrical Trade Union sub-committee’ have already been set up.

The delegate from the Bromley Labour Party, R. TAYLOR, said: ‘On many issues the Trade Union leaders are even more to the Right than the Labour Party leaders, hence the need to campaign inside the unions.’ He felt that the conference should go even further and include in its aims ‘the strengthening of Clause Four by demanding the nationalization of industry under workers’ control.’

Brother BEECH, a member of LSE number three branch of the ETU, showed with a wealth of figures how the nationalized industries were being used to subsidize the private sector Party since 1945.’

No_backsliding Welcoming the decision of the AEU national committee to oppose any alteration to Clause Four, Brother SINGER, a delegate from Wembley number: three branch of the AEU, warned against backsliding and said: ‘The rank and file must . see that this decision is implemented.

Brother DENNIS GILLIGAN, who was a delegate from — Dagenham No. 5 AEU branch, and is vice-chairman of Bark-ing Young Socialists, quoted the fight of the young apprentices, the Aldermaston March and the ycuth participating in the anti-apartheid movement: ‘All these trends must be brought into the fight inside the Labour Party for socialist policies.’

The conference unanimously endorsed a resolution pledging a fight against the NEC addendum and calling for the nationalization of all basic industries.

On sale at the meeting was a threepenny pamphlet: ‘Defend Clause Four’, which outlines the reasons for nationaliza‘ tion and explains how the Committee propose to carry out their campaign.

Strong opposition This conference shows that in both the Labour Party and trade unions there is a strong rank-and-file opposition to .the policies of the Right-wing. Represented at the Caxton Hall, were 14 Labour Parties, 18 AEU branches, five ETU branches, four Trades Councils and six Young Socialist Groups. General. Secretary of ASSET (technicians’ union), HARRY KNIGHT, sent a personal message of support to the Campaign, This opposition must, however, not simply confine itself to resolutions. To be successful it must build a strong base. in both the Labour Parties and the unions and show the relationship between the fight for more nationalization with the struggle against bans and proscriptions; it is important for those associated with this Clause Four Campaign Committee to remember that. the Socialist Labour League and The Newsletter were proscribed for consistently opposing the Gaitskell wing of the party in their attempts to remove nationalization from the programme of the Labour Party.

_GAITSKELL MUST. LEAD OR GO A STATEMENT BY VICTORY FOR SOCIALISM ‘The following statement has been issued on behalf of the Executive Council of ‘Victory for Socialism’ in the nantes of Sydney Silverman, M.P. (Chairman), Ian.

Mikardo (Vice-Chairman), Miss J. Richardson (Secretary), Sydney Hyam (Press Officer) and Hugh Jenkins (Treasurer):

The abandonment of Blue Streak means the abandonment, for all practical purposes, of the policy of the independent nuclear deterrent. Since the Government’s defence policy has always been based, and according to the Government is still based, on that policy it is clear that at present the Government has no defence policy at all.

* The official defence policy of the Labour Party is in no better shape. For three years the Party has been split by the question whether Britain should retain, or not retain, independent nuclear weapons. It is now clear that this was a fictitious, unrealistic and empty dispute. Britain has never had an effective independent nuclear weapons policy, has no such policy now, and can never have one, for it is officially admitted that we depend on America for the means of delivery. The abject folly of a leadership which has sacrificed the possibility of power for delusions of independent nuclear grandeur is one of the tragedies of our time. The abandonment of Blue Streak has shown the Opposition to be as naked as the Government in the councils of the world. * Recent decisions by the Co-operative Party, USDAW and the AEU underline the fact that the Labour Movement is becoming more and more convinced of the military, economic and political bankruptcy of attempting to maintain peace by a balance of mutual terror. All the powerful arguments which have at last persuaded the Government that independent nuclear deterrents afford the country neither security nor defence are equally valid for collective nuclear deterrents which have the additional disadvantage that they are even further removed from any semblance of democratic control.

* It is urgently necessary that the Labour Party should drastically overhaul the whole of its defence thinking and the foreign policy with which it is bound up. No one really believes that either the Soviet Union and its allies or the United States and its allies have any aggressive intentions against each other. Everyone knows that China ought to be admitted to the United Nations. The NATO and Warsaw Pacts should either be scrapped or superseded by a pact of non-aggression and mutual security and the creation of a nuclear-free zone in Europe.

The United Nations Charter must be made to work. Substantial disarmament under full control and inspection must be commenced. The renunciation of nuclear weapons should be accepted without waiting for agreement about other things.

The Labour Party should today declare without equivocation for these things and make it clear that it unconditionally renounces the testing, possession and manufacture of nuclear weapons and their use from British territory.

That is, we believe, what the British Labour Movement SS a ssSSSSSSSSSSSENSINNGSS? A New Pamphlet on Clause Four From MacDonald to Gaitskell Price 3d. from 186 Clapham High Street, London, S.W.4 wants. It is, we. believe, what the country wants or will soon want. It is for the Labour ‘Party to-give the lead. If the present leadership will wholeheartedly and in good conscience give the country that leadership, they will not lack for loyal and enthusiastic support. But if for any reason they cannot or will not, they must give way and make room for those who can and will.

Dear Friends, The weather was warm and sunny in Southern California, but what a sad, sordid and shameful day! We have just heard the news of Caryl Chessman’s judicial murder.

We are as horrified as many of you in England are, by this bloodthirsty act of vengeance. Public opinion in this State was divided over the case, especially since the monopoly press kept insisting that Chessman be sent to the gas chamber. There were many protests, but no big organized movement on his behalf. As a fellow worker in my office said, ‘I didn’t believe they'd really do it.

I talked to two of my neighbours an hour after the execution. One of them, of Swedish descent, said: ‘Such a thing could not have happened in my country. We've abolished capital punishment.’ The other, an Irish Catholic housewife, was almost weeping. She blamed the Jewish prosecutor for Chessman’s death, forgetting that it was a Catholic governor who permitted the gas pellets to be dropped. ' How to explain to her that this was not a religious but a class-motivated crime? Well-to-do murderers almost never get death sentences in California. This penality is almost exclusively inflicted upon the poor and the defenceless. Chessman was preceded ‘to the gas chamber several weeks ago by Lawrence Wade, a poor Negro.

In the end Chessman was sacrificed on the altar of Governor Brown’s political aspirations—who has hopes of becoming President or Vice-President. Even though he proclaimed himself opposed to capital punishment, he permitted Chessman to die.

Governor Brown is a ‘liberal?’ Democrat. He was put in office two years ago with the support of organized labour and, incidentally, of the Communist Party.

The TV commentators this evening report that the European press is proclaiming in big letters: SHAME!

We socialists did what we could this past week to halt the crime. We sent a telegram of protest ta the Governor from our May Day meeting. Some of us participated in the demonstrations in front of the State Building on Sunday. The Presidential Candidate of the Socialist Workers’ Party, Farrell Dobbs, who is here in Los Angeles on a national speaking tour, spoke out on Chessman’s behalf. — .

What an image this country has presented since World War II! First Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Then the execution of the Rosenbergs. . . . Now Chessman! And some people think this government of the rich will bring peace and justice to the world!

- are expressing their individual. views. But behind the scenes.

Making up the Balance Sheet in South Africa Six weeks have now elapsed since the massacres in Sharpeville and Langa: gradually South Africa is returning to what passes for ‘normal’ in that country. That is to say that the state of emergency still continues and as a result of it a hundred or so Europeans and about a thousand Africans lie in prison awaiting trial. (These include all the known leaders of the African National Congress, the Pan-Africanist Congress, some of the Congress of Democrats, a few liberals, some missionaries, and some European ex-Communists who have not been involved in politics for several years. Others have escaped to Swaziland or to Britain.)

But the normal processes of law which make it possible to arrest Africans for breaches of the liquor laws or the pass laws: to imprison some and send others back to the reserves, these have begun to work again. And they are being applied with increased severity, particularly in areas of known militancy.

It would be well to assess what has happened during these six weeks. Has this been a defeat for the forces of the revolution? To what extent have the conditions for the continuing exploitation of the people of South Africa by capitalism been undermined? What are the prospects for the future of the working class movement in South Africa? These are the questions we must ask; and I agree with Benita Teper (Newsletter, April 23, 1960, page 129) that all those who have some knowledge of Africa should pool their information and .set the debate going. She was right to point out, too, that some of my own estimates have been proved false; in particular the suggestion that the pass laws would not be re-imposed without a bitter struggle was wrong. These laws are an essential part of the system of exploitation and control of the African working class, and could not be abandoned so easily. the Federated Chamber of Industries, the spokesmen for the. Rand business tycoons, and the finance houses in: the city — of London and New ‘York, are active. They are. pressing for changes in the apartheid policy of the Verwoerd Government. And they are likely to be successful. Of course, there will be no open admission on the part of the Nationalists, but. gradually the policy will be dropped. Or at any rate that. is what they hope to do.

The extent to which they are successful in sidetracking the: revolution, which is what they are trying to do, will depend on their own situation in South Africa. The objective. situation is ripe for revolution. There have been semi-spontaneous strikes, the masses have hurled themselves into: the struggle with enthusiasm. The working class has seen the: power it has to bring industry to a standstill; it has begun to. be conscious of itself as a class. It is possible that they will fall back again into passivity—but I do not believe that this is likely. The tide is running in favour of the revolution in all the colonial areas. The masses need desperately an organization which will rise above their internal divisions into Zulus, Xhosa, Sotho, etc.

I believe that the Pan-Africanists can provide such an organization. And that only in the course of the struggle will specifically proletarian demands be presented. The prime need, therefore, at this time is for the setting up of a Provisional Government in Britain, Ghana and elsewhere for the purpose of directing the struggle of the African people against their oppressors. The subjective factors of the revolution: the party, the means of organizing the masses will be worked out in the process of the Struggle.

Such, at any rate, is my view of the situation in South Africa. I welcome criticism and other suggestions. In a later article I will discuss the nature of Pan-Africanism and :ts significance in the African Revolution.

CENTRAL AFRICA THE QUEEN MOTHER ARRIVES— By Our Political Correspondent

A MEETING was held recently of workers in the field of working-class history, with a view to forming a society to encourage and facilitate such work. Historians of many points of view were present, belonging to several generations and including both univers- ity and non-university researchers. It would be improper for me to anticipate with details the official announcement which will appear in due course, but

‘aiid -fite’ wadies: and those ‘of ‘organizations 4 ‘in the. margins of Monthly.’

the maiff movémént.: For instance, tan anybody tell: me where ¥ art find: a ‘complete set Of *Busman’s Punch’, the monthly journal of the London busmen’s rank-and-file movement of 1932-1937? Not long ago I thought I had tracked one down, only to learn that it had been destroyed in the course of a domestic spring-cleaning shortly before. Again, in spite of kindly help by a number of old-timers, I have been unable to assemble a complete set of ‘Controversy’ for the period when it was a duplicated publication, the internal discussion bulletin of the Independent Labour Party in 1933-1936.

Invaluable material for the history of the working class is every day lost without trace either because those in control of it do not realize its value or because they have no space to keep it and do not know where it could be sent. It is hoped that the new society will prove able to improve this situation.

Honest Injun ?

Last week I referred to a speech of Stalin’s in 1925 on questions of foreign policy, published in the official ‘Works’. Those volumes (will they ever be continued beyond the beginning of 1934?) are well worthy of some study by comrades who wish to see how Stalinism has evolved to its present form, the various phases through which it has passed since 1924 (volumes 6 to 13).

In using these volumes, however, it is necessary to appreciate that the editors (or perhaps Himself in person?) were unable to resist the temptation occasionally to ‘improve’ a speech or an article years after it had been delivered or published. Thus, Stalin’s address on ‘The Political Complexion of the Russian Opposition’, as it originally appeared in the journal ‘Communist International’ of November 15, 1927, opened like this: ‘Comrades, previous speakers have spoken so well and so soundly, especially Comrade Bukharin, that little remains for me to say.’ But in the version given in volume 10 of the ‘Works’ (English edition, 1954), the words ‘especially Comrade Bukharin’ have disappeared... .

Again, in Stalin’s interview with the German writer Emil Ludwig, in December, 1931, he said that the Soviet people had a special liking for the Germans. When Ludwig asked the reason for this, Stalin replied: ‘I simply mention it as a fact.’

_At any rate, that is how he was reported in the pamphlet version of the interview published in 1932; and there was no special encouragement -to the socialist and communist workers of Germany in such a statement. But in volume 13 of the ‘Works’ (English edition, 1955), Stalin appears as attributing on this occasion Soviet fondness for Germany to the fact that ‘it gave the world such men as Marx and Engels.’

Many other instances could be quoted. The translation of the ‘Works’ into English is a great advance on previous versions, but this real improvement is accompanied by too much ‘improvement’ of the sort one puts in quotation marks. I understand that the chief translator was Clemens Dutt, brother of the more famous ‘Raji’. This is, alas, the same -C. P. Dutt who wrote in the ‘Communist Review’ of Febru_ ary, 1935, criticizing some unsatisfactory edition of one of Marx’s writings: ‘We shall always be vigilant to see that dis‘-tortions are not allowed to appear.’ Without Comment It appears that in the film ‘The Angry Silence’ you see an A.J.S. motor-cycle, a bottle of H.P. sauce and a jar of Robertson’s jam. The makers of these three articles have arranged with the makers of the film to produce showcards for shops in which the glamour of the stars in the film is associated with their products. Presumably they expect that this will have an effect on sales; and I’m sure we all hope it may.

Douglas Goldring The May issue of the Stalinist publication Labour Monthly contains a note on the recent death of Douglas Goldring, whom it describes as ‘a friend and supporter of Labour I have before me a iettér’ dated “April Ul, 1959, ‘written by a : PRE a Goldring to the then editor of .The ‘Newsletter, commenting on R. P. Dutt’s allegation in the Labour Monthly that; we were financed by Wall Street. ‘If I were you,’ wrote Goldring, ‘T’d treat the matter as a huge joke and have a roar of laughter at his expense. . . . As an alternative, I should ‘have thought the best reply to ‘Dutt’s notes of the month -was completely to ignore them.’

So let the great man put that in his pipe and smoke it.

.

Liberalisation necessary Let the debate begin! I will go back to my original contention (Newsletter, February 20, 1960, page 60) that this whole operation was devised by Macmillan as the representative of capitalism to bring pressure to bear upon the Verwoerd Government. His ‘wind of change’ speech in Capetown was responsible for sparking off African resistance to the pass laws. In this way he has been able to raise the issue of apartheid at the Conference of Commonwealth Prime Ministers. The run on the Stock Exchange in South African shares is another example of this same pressure being exerted. Liberalisation of the policy of the South African Government towards the working class is necessary for two reasons: first to provide for the expansion of manufacturing industry through the more intensive exploitation of African labour; second, to lay the basis of a stable government in the most heavily industrialized part of the African continent, through the creation of an African middle class.

At present the South African Government is speaking in several different tones: different sections of the ruling class As the Queen Mother landed from her luxury plane in Northern Rhodesia, there were violent scenes throughout the protectorate. The governor, Sir Evelyn Hone, immediately banned the United National Independence Party in the Western Province, which includes the copperbelt area, and hundreds were arrested by the police and thrown into jail. The movement for national independence now sweeping Africa is undoubtedly well to the fore in the minds of those who are leading the struggle in Northern Rhodesia. Here, as elsewhere, the determination of the people to fight imperialism is invincible. Whilst the Commonwealth prime ministers meet in London, the Africans rally for action.

It has been said that the Queen Mother has a way with her servants in Clarence House This is clearly not the case in Northern Rhodesia. Queens may come and queens may go, but the people are determined to ignore the propaganda methods of imperialism by fighting to bring its domination over the African continent to an end.

I hope readers of The Newsletter will watch out for it-and will do what they can to ensure attention to any appeal from the society which is received by their trade union or other organization.

One of the main reasons for forming such a society is to do-something about the wastage of records of all kinds which constantly goes on in the movement. This especially applies to the publications and other papers of unofficial and rank-

This week has seen a decisive blow against those who seek to break the apprentices’ strike. Despite false press reports of lads returning to work, the strike continues to grow. On Monday, came the news that over 7,000 apprentices in Belfast were out. Boys in Wigan and Bradford have since joined the strike.

The All-Britain delegate conference in Glasgow last Saturday did not hesitate. ‘We stay out until a firm offer is given’ was their decision. Lads in Manchester were quick io respond to this lead. Ten thousand apprentices poured into Platts Fields. Hugh Scanlon, Confederation district secretary, after praising the display of solidarity, appealed to them ‘to return to work. Before the words could pass his lips a mighty roar swept the field: ‘No, no, no, no.’

Apprentice spokesmen then took over the meeting. ‘We want a date for talks and a guarantee of cash. We must stay out and that means everybody stays out. We will not allow any reurn.’

Finally, Scanlon was allowed to put his appeal to the vote. Four hands were raised in support.

Where is Carron ?

A march into town was then decided on. Stretching for what seemed a mile, and ten abreast, the apprentices surged along the streets. As they passed the Amalgamated Engineering Union headquarters the shout went up, ‘Where is Carron? ’ The winds of change must have shaken the tiles in Peckham Road that day.

On Merseyside, 800 apprentices voted unanimously to stay out at their meeting on Tuesday. ‘Is anyone going back 'o work tomorrow?’ asked a member of the strike committee.

ne Published by Socialist Labour League, 186 Clapham High St., London, SW4 Registered at the GPO as 2 newspaper By OUR INDUSTRIAL CORRESPONDENT ‘No!’ roared the lads. ‘The strike will end when we get the money.’

Now the urgent thing is to bring the adult workers fully , behind the strike. The lads have shown that they will not be intimidated either by the employers or the Right-wing trade union leaders. It is the job of every shop steward to explain td his members the need for full support and to prepare for action in the lads’ favour. The employers and union leaders have got to be shown that the apprentices do not stand alone.

By Our Industrial Correspondent As the apprentices’ strike nears the end of its third _ week, there is every indication that it is gaining support, particularly in the south.. Efforts are now being made to establish a liaison in the London area between Napiers and those on strike at Vickers-Armstrong, Weybridge. A campaign throughout London’s factories will undoubtedly produce important results.

Meanwhile, the Clyde apprentices staged a demonstration in Glasgow with such slogans as ‘All we get for five years’ tuition is a bad dose of malnutrition’, ‘Never have so many done so much for so little’. Afterwards 44 apprentices were arrested as they marched through a shopping arcade shouting slogans. They will be charged with disorderly conduct.

The great weakness of the strike is the failure of the adult workers to provide adequate support, apart from finance, for the apprentices. If the Clyde were to down tools and stop for even a day it would act as a warning to the employers that the boys must not be left on the streets to starve. ssl see ssesusesssenesesnsnsesenrpeseesenessanansssouse Printed by Plough Press Ltd. (TU), r.o. 180 Clapham High St, London SW4

This week has seen a decisive blow against those who seek to break the apprentices’ strike. Despite false press reports of lads returning to work, the strike continues to grow. On Monday, came the news that over 7,000 apprentices in Belfast were out. Boys in Wigan and Bradford have since joined the strike.

The All-Britain delegate conference in Glasgow last Saturday did not hesitate. ‘We stay out until a firm offer is given’ was their decision. Lads in Manchester were quick io respond to this lead. Ten thousand apprentices poured into Platts Fields. Hugh Scanlon, Confederation district secretary, after praising the display of solidarity, appealed to them ‘to return to work. Before the words could pass his lips a mighty roar swept the field: ‘No, no, no, no.’

Apprentice spokesmen then took over the meeting. ‘We want a date for talks and a guarantee of cash. We must stay out and that means everybody stays out. We will not allow any reurn.’

Finally, Scanlon was allowed to put his appeal to the vote. Four hands were raised in support.

Where is Carron ?

A march into town was then decided on. Stretching for what seemed a mile, and ten abreast, the apprentices surged along the streets. As they passed the Amalgamated Engineering Union headquarters the shout went up, ‘Where is Carron?’ The winds of change must have shaken the tiles in Peckham Road that day.

On Merseyside, 800 apprentices voted unanimously to stay out at their meeting on Tuesday. ‘Is anyone going back ‘0 work tomorrow?’ asked a member of the strike committee.

Published by Socialist Labour League, 186 Clapham High St., London, SW4 Registered at the GPO as = newspaper By OUR INDUSTRIAL CORRESPONDENT ‘No!’ roared the lads. ‘The strike will end when we get the money.’

Now the urgent thing is to bring the adult workers fully behind the strike. The lads have shown that they will not be intimidated either by the employers or the Right-wing trade union leaders. It is the job of every shop steward to explain to his members the need for full support and to prepare for action in the lads’ favour. The employers and union leaders have got to be shown that the apprentices do not stand alone.

———— —————————eeeEEeeEeEeSeSeESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSFSFSMSCfHsésFSseF By Our Industrial Correspondent As the apprentices’ strike nears the end of its third week, there is every indication that it is gaining support, particularly in the south. Efforts are now being made to establish a liaison in the London area between Napiers and those on strike at Vickers-Armstrong, Weybridge. A campaign throughout London’s factories will undoubtedly produce important results.

Meanwhile, the Clyde apprentices staged a demonstration in Glasgow with such slogans as ‘All we get for five years’ tuition is a bad dose of malnutrition’, ‘Never have so many done so much for so little’. Afterwards 44 apprentices were arrested as they marched through a shopping arcade shouting slogans. They will be charged with disorderly conduct.

The great weakness of the strike is the failure of the adult workers to provide adequate support, apart from finance, for the apprentices. If the Clyde were to down tools and stop for even a day it would act as a warning to the employers that the boys must not be left on the streets to starve.

Printed by Plough Press Ltd. (TU), r.o. 180 Clapham High St, London SW4