Is there space in Labour for a Red?

There can be little doubt that since the Thatcher years, this country has moved more to the right. The political heyday of the left was probably at its summit during the Miner’s strike. On March 12th, 1984 Arthur Scargill declared strikes in the various coal fields and this ultimately resulted in 1,000 pickets attempting to prevent a sole scab bath attendant from entering the threatened Emley Moor colliery.

Since then the Miner’s have been defeated and overall trade union membership has declined in this country. Current estimates put membership at a meagre 24% of the working population and with no noticeable sign of the trend improving.
On top of that, the Labour party, never known for its hardline socialism finally divested itself of its leftward leanings when, in December 1981, a National Executive Committee inquiry team was set up, which reported the following June. The Hayward-Hughes inquiry proposed the setting up of a register of non-affiliated groups who would be allowed to operate within the Labour Party. The inquiry sent a series of questions to the Militant tendency. The Militant general secretary, Peter Taaffe, told the inquiry that the Militant's Editorial board consisted of five people, with an additional sixty-four full time staff.
The inquiry found that the Militant was in breach of Clause II of the party constitution, and that in the opinion of the inquiry the Militant tendency "would not be eligible to be included on the proposed Register". This allowed Neil Kinnock, then leader of the party, the opportunity he needed and mass expulsions of Marxists from the party soon followed.
The drift to the right was followed by Tony Blair who, in 1995 led an assault on Clause lV of the Constitution. The original version of Clause IV, drafted by Sidney Webb in November 1917 and adopted by the party in 1918, read, in part 4:
To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.

However, Blair and New Labour did not want to be held to a programme of nationalisation, arguing that we had moved into a post-industrial era where it was necessary to work alongside capital and not against it.

So, with this kind of history is there truly a place for socialists and Marxists in the Labour party? In many respects it is difficult for those of us on the left. The movement has become fragmented and disorganised. Even the Communist party, once the guardian of the soul of Marxism, is split into various groups and it is hard to identify the philosophical differences.

Of course Socialist Workers Party continues to trundle along, but they have tended to sit more on the fringe rather than contain the bulk of left-thinking individuals. As for the Labour party itself – well with New Labour now consigned to our history books and a new leadership things look slightly rosier for the left. But Ed Miliband is nothing like his father and even though he served his internship with Tony Benn, he is not a Bennite.

Nor should we assume the National Executive, or the National Policy Forum is likely to drift to the left either.

The bastion of hard left socialism in the Parliamentary Labour party is arguably the Labour Representation Committee, but with only about a dozen members, they pose little threat to the more traditional groupings like Tribune or Compass. Indeed, its chair, John McDonnell could not gain sufficient votes to be added to the candidates for the leadership of the party.

So with such anti-left feeling about, why should a Marxist stay in the party? Easy, and there are several reasons:

1. Because there is really nowhere else to go – none of the other groupings offer any real opportunity for power
2. Because it is the Labour party that has direct links with the trade union movement and Marxists should rally around this flag, even when they are in a minority
3. Because the hard evidence shows the UK will not commit to a worker’s revolution – if that was going to happen, it would have taken place in 1984 with the Miner’s strike. Marxists must be willing to compromise and accept the democratic road to socialism
4. It is the duty of socialists and Marxists to act as a political vanguard to fight within the party to change it and mould it into a far more left-leaning and radical organisation dedicated to worker control.

Being a socialist in a social democratic organisation such as the Labour party is not easy, but it is possible – Tony Benn, John McDonnell, Jeremy Corbyn and Dennis Skinner have shown that. As Marxists and socialists we should not give in, we should continue to fight for what we believe to be right.

I confess to being an unapologetic Red - a Marxist and there are many times I think of leaving the Labour party. Certainly I would find more bonhomie with Communists, Socialist Workers, or even the Socialist Labour party. But I stay where I am because this is where I believe I need to be – trying to convince comrades within the party to accept socialist principles.

In many respects it’s a thankless task – but where in any of the writings of Karl Marx did he ever say it would be easy?

Mark Kennedy - old news?

There is something intrinsically untrustworthy about our police force. Not your typical British bobby of course – s/he remains the bastion of everything we hold sacred – personal safety, community engagement, respect for authority and the rule of law. Or, am I just being a tad naïve?

Recent press revelations about the Mark Kennedy case raises a plethora of issues government, the media and the public as a whole should discuss. Not least of these questions must be – are we content the police use undercover agents to infiltrate legitimate democratic protest movements?

Of course, nothing has been proven yet. But, if we assume for a moment that Kennedy has been telling the truth then it suggests Kennedy’s (and others) insertion into campaign groups came with the full knowledge and authority of his handlers. But why?
The most logical answer is that police and UK security managers are concerned about the protection of property – ranging from ‘sit-in’s’ at universities and colleges, the blocking of fuel to power stations, or breaching perimeter fences at airports and military bases.

None of these campaigns are new. Just ask the Greenham women I the 1980s whether they faced police infiltration during their campaign, or the Anti-Apartheid movement during the 60s and 70s. Even more politically ‘acceptable’ movements like Amnesty International and Stonewall have not been without problems from police involvement.
So why is Kennedy so relevant today? The answer is simple – he isn’t. What he did is symptomatic of a deeper problem. Let me demonstrate. All families live by rules – do the chores, don’t lie, come home on time, don’t have sex outside the relationship etc … but the greatest of these rules is: don’t talk about the rules.

Now, if we assume Britain is one very big ‘family’ it is apparent that Kennedy breached the ‘golden rule’ – he talked about the rules. You see, we have known for years the police have been watching us. Any demonstrator will have seen the cameras trained on our faces. Indeed, the questionable funding of Socialist Worker Party and possible links with the CIA has long been discussed in boozy pubs amongst those on the left. Whether they are in fact funded by the CIA remains unclear, but it has certainly proved to be a cause of debate for many years.

Equally, police infiltration of CND and the peace movement has long been known. There is no surprise therefore they have now extended this to include climate change campaigners. The question is how do we react to the news?

The answer is simple – we cannot afford to simply demand the withdrawal of police from one sector of political discontent. Agent provocateurs should have no role in modern society and those on the left (including people like Ed Miliband) should be doing everything to ensure their immediate withdrawal. The left need to vocalize loudly that the police have been doing this for a long time and it needs to come to an end.

Unfortunately, socialists in this country are much more likely to do what they have always done – grumble loudly as they discuss latest reports in the Guardian and by the end of the month accept the inevitable and assume infiltration to continue.

So much for the angry left! But please feel free to prove me wrong.