Socialist Labour Party
iwp.ilo at ix.netcom.com
Wed Nov 29 12:54:38 MST 1995
>But Scargill's announcement was a bit of a surprise - to me, and
>I think to everyone else.
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?
>> 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?
>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.
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?
>> 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.
>I specifically denied that's what I meant.
Sorry if I missundertood
>> 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?
>Why should revolutionaries propose the formation of a reformist party
>In what way does this help either the class struggle or the
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?
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism