Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:54:38 -0800
From: iwp.ilo-AT-ix.netcom.com (CEP )
Subject: Re: Socialist Labour Party


You(Adam) wrote: 
>
>But Scargill's announcement was a bit of a surprise - to me, and
>I think to everyone else.
>
    Carlos Replies:
    I'm sorry, Adam but I can't let it go.  The SWP DID not foresee the
    SLP.  What is that telling you about a) SWP characterization of the
    situation; b) developments in the working class and c) insertion    
    and connections of the SWP with the class?

    Carlos wrote:
>>     Why is
>>     that is so much resistance from the SWP to work, not
>>     just in unity in action, but in united workers front or
>>     in a revolutionary united front with other revolutionary
>>     Marxists tendencies such as Militant? 
>>
>   
    Adam answered:
>What are you talking about ?
>We work in united fronts all the time - I could append
>a rather similar list to Steve's at this point, except 
>mine would have the ANL in it and his wouldn't.
>But a united front for an agreed joint action isn't the same 
>as merging political differences. Strike together, march 
>separately, as Trotsky said.
>
    Carlos Replies:
    A joint action is unity in action for an specific action (i.e.:
    for a counterdemonstration against the fascists, etc).  United
    *Workers* front (I don't know why you alwasy forget the class
    nature of them) is a programmatic agreement between *working
    class organizations* for a longer period of time and to pursue
    specific, no short term, objectives (i.e.: a united left electoral
    union slate; united working class electoral front; etc) Did the
    SWP had any of those?


    Carlos wrote:
>
>>     When I raised the question of your growth you responded
>>     that was possible for prolonged period of times a linear
>>     process of growth until the situation become revolutionary,
>>     or that is what I understood.
>
    Adam responded:

>I specifically denied that's what I meant.

    Carlos replied:

    Sorry if I missundertood
    
    Carlos Asked:
>
>>     Why should be Scargill, and not The Militant and the SWP who
>>     will launch the idea of the SLP is they are more important than
>>     what Scargill represents? 
>

    Adam answered:

>Why should revolutionaries propose the formation of a reformist party 
?
>In what way does this help either the class struggle or the 
revolutionary
>left ?

    Carlos Replies:
    How do you know "a priori" that it will be a reformist party? Why
    to give up on the potential components of such a process? Is it
    possible that i could become a centrist party (not reformist, not
    revolutionary)? or even a revolutionary force if people like the
    SWP and Militant get together and participate in it?

    Since the SWP didn't predict the idea of the SLP and Scargill's
    move, how can they predict, with a fatalistic assertion, that it
    will be reformist or won't be?

    Comradely,
    Carlos




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

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