No sooner had Kinnock taken over as Labour leader than the witch-hunt against the Left began, preparing the way for him abandoning the Miners when the strike began, in the same way he had turned against his own Labour Councils that were opposing the Tory Cuts and other attacks on Local Government. Some of this was played out, at the time in the columns of the newly formed North Staffs Labour Briefing. In the first edition of NSLB, I wrote an article on why the Left should oppose the “centre-right” Kinnock. Indeed, the true nature of Kinnock was shown by the fact that the so called “dream ticket” of Kinnock-Hattersley was supported by John Golding.
My description of Kinnock as centre-right, was disputed in a letter to NSLB2 by Dick Hall. Dick was an old Stalinist. Dick was much better educated than many people realised, his university education not reflected in his job as a pottery worker, but a discussion with him was like a discussion with a bot that formed its sentences on the basis of a series of clichés and mantras, always delivered with a smile, and a glint in his extremely crossed eyes. In his letter, he objected to my description of Kinnock, accusing me of basing it on “rationalisation”. His argument rested on the fact that Kinnock was a member of the Tribune Group. The Tribune Group itself of course, for a long time, had been little more than a group of soft left careerists, which also acted as fellow travellers to a Communist Party that was moving ever more rapidly rightwards, and whose Popular Frontism had led it into unprincipled alliances with liberals, and religious leaders.
As I pointed out in my response in NSLB 3,
More importantly, one should assess people by their actions. Kinnock's actions clearly define him as centre-right. Since his election he has failed every test of the class struggle, e.g. his statements over the NGA.
Comrade Hall concludes by accusing me of sour grapes, and calls on me to build for a Labour Victory in 87/88. Firstly, the article was written before Kinnock was elected. Secondly, its attitude to Kinnock conforms totally with that of the Briefing Network. Thirdly, the best way to build for a Labour victory is to get rid of Kinnock and his witch-hunting policies (Tariq Ali, Militant, S. Wythenshawe, Blackburn, etc. etc.). Whilst we must all work for a Labour victory it is also necessary to point out that an uncritical vote for a Kinnock government would be a defeat for the working-class. A Kinnock government will attack the working-class, as did its predecessors. We should say – 'Vote Labour, but prepare to fight'.”
The point made, here, about the position being consistent with that of the Briefing Network was important, because the reality was that, whatever the shortcomings of the politics of Labour Briefing, and the National Network, it was a politics of a Left that was based upon principles of class struggle, whereas, it became clear that the NSLB was simply a shell in which a timid and late maturing, local soft-left had found its own bit of “left cover”, whilst continuing to promote its own opportunist and electoralist politics. Every month, I attended the National Labour Briefing Editorial Board meetings, in Birmingham, at Digbeth Civic Hall, and it soon became clear that the positions taken by the NSLB grouping were not consistent with the platform of Briefing.
No comments:
Post a Comment