Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:04:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Louis N Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: Socialist Labour Party


On Mon, 27 Nov 1995, Adam Rose wrote:

> Scargill's call has resonated with a layer of activists. ( Actually, more
> with ex activists ). But not a single MP, not a single Trade Union official,
> has spoken up in favour of the SLP. Scargill himself has not said anything
> more about it.
> 

Louis: I am not familiar enough with the details of English politics to 
render a judgement whether Scargill's idea will turn into reality. This 
much I am sure of: the idea of an SLP makes a great deal of sense to me.

The choice between a Labor Party, which functions like the Democratic 
Party in England, and a myriad of "vanguard" formations that each have 
their own interpretation of every political issue for the last 80 years 
that prospective members must declare fealty to, is not very appetizing.

What you think is the strength of your sect--a vast library of books, 
pamphlets, and party resolutions that has the "correct line" on every 
major historical and international question--is actually its liablity. 
This baggage should be thrown out the window.

A class-struggle oriented socialist party is needed in England. I would 
be thrilled to see Scargill pull this off. Even if he doesn't, I'm 
thrilled to see him talking the idea up at this point.


     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------