As we showed in the last issue of Red Weekly, there are important political differences between the International Marxist Group on the one hand and the Workers Socialist League and Trotskyist Opposition' comrades (whose letter of resignation from the IMG was published in Socialist Press, 14 January) on the other. In particular we showed how the WSL departs from Trotsky's method of approach on the united front and unity in action.
We now turn to the accusation made by the ex- MG comrades in their state. ment of resignation that the recent Uncu secretarat neses on britam tre be published in International later this mont) contirm te present nquidationist line of the John Ross leadership by projecting 'other forces than Trotskyists to solve the crisis of leadership'.
They accuse the United Secretariat of telling the thousands of workers that have broken in action against the policies of the Wilson Government that their strug Mes wH ony De success u benn and omer fort bureaucrats replace wuson 'Such positions, say the comrades, are the direct result of the Pabloite heritage ...These people have been saying the same thing for over twenty years.' Let us look at mese accusanons.
The IMG advances the slogan of replacing the Wilson-Healey leadership' as part of the outcome of mass struggle against the Labour Government. The working class has in the last nine months been hit by Wilson's victory in the Common Marker Tererenaum. soarine unem ployment and talling living standards. But despite the decline in militant action, the working class has not suffered the sort of defeat which could nullify the gains reached in the period of heightened class struggle since 1968. The present defeats can be reversed through a new upturn of the working class struggle But under the present social, economic and political conditions, such an upturn will not simply involve an increase in direct struggles, but a crisis of the labour movement at every level and on a whold range of issues - not only on defence of Hoos du vus slanuaus our on teame Spain, abortion and many other issues.
ine existence or a raDour Government, whose party is based on the trade unions and mass organisations of the working class, combined with an economic crisis so severe that every significant economic decision is taken at the level of the state, means that the crisis will grip not only the trade unions but also the Labour Party. Every single struggle will Involve a airect clash witn ine leadersnip of the Labour Party and its supporters in the trade unions, be they shop stewards or national officials.
All the reformists and centrists will attempt to head off or divert this clash. The Tribunites, for instance, will seek to contine this movement to pressurising Wilson and his team to change their ways This is evident from Eric Heffer's articles in Tribune, explaining that while he stood against Healey in the NEC elections and telow lent Mr orman Alkinson challenged Callaghan for Treasurer, nevertheless "the issue of leadership...is not posed'.
We oppose such views. The interest of revolutionaries is not to soften and divert these conflicts, but on the contrary to give them the sharpest possible form, raising them to the political level of a demand for a challenge to the leadership of the labour movement at every level.
The slogan of replacing the Wilson-Healey leadership ignis to carry ine strug gle against them through to the end, rather man conning it to pressure. Inis Is not counterposed to the fight to mobilise the masses. In fact, only the mobilisation of the masses can defeat the offensive of the capitalists and bring about the change in the relation of forces which can defeat the Wilson leadership. This is why we demand tat te lerts arop tneir pressure tactics and fight directly for the removal or the wilson-Healey leadership Does this mean that the IMG will meekly stand aside for the lefts' of the Tribune Group, as the ex-IMG comrades and the WSL maintain? The United Secretariat "Theses' state the complete oppOSITION The first key task of the hour' the USFI propounds is the message that the fight against the Healey measures is possible without any specifically political precondition being solved first*. Moreover, the "Theses' go on to make very forcefully the point of not relying on any left leadership.
sul we sovise you strongi norto repeat the same mistakes of giving blind credit to any leaders - left or right - in the Labour Party....Do not have any confidence in person or persons: concentrate on the programme of action which we pro pose to vou - which is that section of our transitional programme which is the answer to your current needs and which brings us a step forward to a socialist Britdille the slogan put forward of Benn or the LaDour let to Dower In fact nowhere in the Theses" is Mary ieauersuo m ine class In fact we consider that it is the SL This means demanding that such forces should carry through this struggle to we ena: not maing bemnd the torty paras es that it is a question of policies not personalities, but mounting a direct challenge to the leadership. This is not "handing over the leadership to the lefts', but as Trotsky put it, fighting to 'drag the reformists from their asylums' and place them beside us in the class struggle.
Neither are such calls merely a 'trick to 'expose the fact that the lefts won't fight'. If the lefts take even a quarter step forward, this can be used to take the wor Broad workers over whom they exercise influence a bigger step forward, leading to furtner demands for action trom une icaders. it is in the course or inese concrete struggles that the working class will be able to iudge the record of the letts against that of the Trotskyists and so provide the best conditions for building a revolutionThe problem confronting revolutionares is now to provide a centransea tocu: to the fragmented struggles of the class. Ine Usri ineses puttorward the resor ution to this problem as being the formation of a class struggle tendency in the labour movement which woue sroup to gether all those forces who not withstanding many differences on long term strateg ies for socialism are nevertheless prepared to fight against the betrayals of the Wilson Government and for the immediate interests of the working class...
Politically. we tight for such a class struggle left wing to be formed on the basis of the only platform which can provide a real solution to the crisis that confronts the masses; our programme of action... while avoiding ultra-left errors, which refuse to enter any united action unless it is established on our programme.' LIONS By rejecting such a course of struggle, the WS reject any practical way of approaching the problem of how to implem ent the slogan of 'make the lefts fight. They recognise the necessity of struggle against the leadership of the Labour Party only in a formal way. It is a paper battle confined to speeches, leaflets, and the pages of the Socialist Press The way in which such vital questions of political line and tactics are taken up in the resignation statement of the comrades of the 'Trotskyist Opposition' serves not to clarify differences, but merely to obscure them in the framework of Durascolosy such as ECISIOnSH VCrSu Trotskyism, Pabloism versus Trotskyism', etc. such onrases tuna vular bonnica air erences into organisational splits based on so-calee munced cuesdons This is the method of Healyism, which -ine comrades ome woe are tie to break with. On some questions they have in our opinion taken a big step down that We note that in their theoretical supplement, "Trotskyism Today', the comrades write: "In the view of the WL one mam burpose or the miernanonar discus sion should be the re-opening of political discussion with the USFI and its component sections... For this purpose the USFI leaderships and sections cannot be regarded in advance as having placed themselves outside the world Trotskyist movement.' This is a welcome change from the slande and filth that Healy impotently pours on the Fourth International. Healyite On other questions, however - for example, the statement of the ex-IMG members and its positions on the united - the WSL remains within Healy's framework. Most notably, in confusing the diff erence between a party and a faction, and in perpetuating organisational separation from the Fourth International, they revcal mat mey nave nor made a senous study of the ditference be ween Healvism and Trotskyism on organisational ques We will be printing articles on these ques - tons in tuture issues or kea weekly. It is through open discussion of these ques tions that we believe the comrades can most effectively carry through their break with Healyism. THE EDITORIAL BOARD