should distinguish us from all other parties, us a party of social revolution. That is, that we are a contingent together with the socialist countries, the liberation movements, the international working class and pesce forces, in the forefront of the antiImperialiststruggle. the Brities Road be Socallan Deshs All other Communist Parties: including the Italian, French, Canadian, Spanish, The United Irish, USA, ete., in fact every other party, adopt a political resolution at their party congress which deals with the relationship of forces in the world and at home; the immediate and long-range problens facing the party and working class; & vision of the future society and 1. The leadership has put forward a new draft programme. Can trends that oppose it pur forward a complete alternative of similar length for circulation through the Party and for voting at Congress?
2. Does the rule book allow a clear polarisation between the leadership and the pro-Moscow grouping in the debate? Or does it allow a united leadership on one side and a pulverised, atomised collection of ind ividual 800-worders on the other?
3. The leadership has been organising public meelings on a draft not per agreed by the membership and invites Tribunites, SWP and IMG speakers onto the Platform to debate this draft. and attack it. Can the currents among the Party's own members opposing the draft also speak on the platforms against the speakers from the icadership? And if not, then isn't this apparent "democracy" on the part of the Executive Committee in reality a means of inhibizing open and serious debate amongst the Party members?
4. If the debate is to clarify to the maximum the differences between the main trends of opinion within the Party then can the opposition groups and trends call supporters of their views in different parts of the country to meetings to clarity the views of the trend and put them down in the most effective way in a common resolution or discussion document?
Would this not minimise distortions of opponents positions and cilminate some red herrings? Would it not also mean that instead of having to plough through hundreds of different documents and thousands of different resolutions, the membership could have a few basic political documents from the main currents to read and digest? And is this not a thousand times more democratic than thousands of bis of opinion that no hard-pressed working person could possibly have the lute to completely master as a delegate to the Congress" 5. Can the leaders of different trends travel to membership meetings throughout the country as of right and pu for by the Party centre, to put their peat of view to the membership. or is it only the leadership that can exercise these rights? And can the sup porters of these different trends choose who their best speakers are, so their point of view can be put over in the best possible way at such meetings? Or i5 this right confined only to the leadership?
Jen Bloomfield THE STUDENT MOVEMENT TODAY Roy Hughes MPon devolution 6. Can cach trend reply to points from other groupings as the debate develops, via internal bulletins? Or is the idea of developing the debate, advancing the discussion, something that should be scrapped in favour of the right of cach individual to write HOU words" Are funds so short as to exclude the possibility of both?
7. Can the membership discover the different trends within the leadership at the starl of the pre-Congress dis and minority trends OLIVER MACDONALD within the Executive Committee put their views to the membership and try to gain support for these views before a Congress? Is the membership banned from forming tendencies and factions while the leadership is bound to act as a mined faction against minority trends in the membership?
Some comrades in the Communis Party may not know the answers to all these questions. The leadership cer tainly knows the answers. And so does anybody who knows the rule book of the Communist Party of the Sovie Union: the rules of the CPSU and the CPGB are not in essence any different. (That is why the "Frenchites", though denied elementary minority rights, don't challenge the riles.) Most mem. bers of the Communist Party think thai these rules embody democratic centralism, Leninist norms for "inner Party life'.
BOLSHEVIK PARTY If they look at any of the debares inside the Bolshevik Party durint the revolution for example the Trade Union debate between Lenin and the dangerously-mistaken Trotsky in 1920they will see that a really revolutionary Party like the Bolsheviks understood what democratic central ism really means and it has nothing in common with the bureaucratic centralist model that the British Communist Party rule book still embodies.
The present norms for Party debate (with all the liberal Trills of public discussion including a forthcoming Granada TV show of the debate so that millions can join in!) add up to a situation where the membership is unable to really clarify the differences, get to the bottom of them and democ ratically decide on a course of future action. 100 flowers can bloom in Comment. The more differeor brands the better because they add up to a fragmented series of responses to the great sun which is the leadership.
----- pull-quotes -----
d to ath