many comrades have made.
The comrades of Big Flame were remarkably open, frank and non-sectarian in approach. (ENE)
Socialist Challenge disappeared next week, we would mourn its loss. It would leave an empty space which wouldn't casily be filled again. Already in its short life it has proven the need TOC honest sectariin stimulating newspaper of the British Tar left.
So it is fair 10 ask. why won't Big Flame commit itscli to working closely with the Their main critique of the paper was that it was not a paper aimed at the masses and as such it was less accessible than their own paper, which they would continue producing Fair enough! But let us explain what we understand by a mass paper and why we think that there are enocmous pitfalls the approach of the CHELSE In the first instance even a mass paper, in our conception. has to decide which section of the masses it is going to attemps toreach. Unargamised workers, uncuiployed, residents council estates, trade utionists, Labour Parry supporters, and so on. Secondly at has to have the capacity to be able to do so. This means an organisation 20000-25,000 member. the very The early Communist Party directed agitation propaganda the politically advanced factory militants, many of whom were under reformist influence, bur it had both the members and an industrial implantation. We do not believe that either of us or even the far left as a whole has reached that stage This does not mean that one does not provide a line advance for the masses. We do VANGUARD so, however, by arming the vanguard maltants, Tesponsive to the initiatives of revoltionary socialism, and desirous of taking the strugale forwand. Our demand for the 'nationalisation workers contrat by the Labour Government' example. The Take speech by Bene was anotber. For it was a novel was of explaining that if left social democrats did start a fight the Labour Government, even within their political framewark, would be a step forward for the Now. of course. Big Flame comrades would disagree with that because of their views on the Labour Pars, precisely raises the question of which masses and where?? 11 could be argued that even in producing a line for the masses the paper has been insufficient.
We could argue that proposition but it would be argument within our approach to politics. For the last eight weeks our correspondence columns have been full of a discussion on the content and character of Socialist Challenge. Many of the letters have been critical of some aspect or other of the paper. The three sources from which most of the letters have come have been Big Flame; ex-members of the SWP and other far left groups; and members of the IMG.
We shall try to systematically answer the points which What we are opposed to and what Socialist Challenge has -their despite irritations in quarters studiously consciously aroided, has been to posture as though we were speaking to millors. That only прпCarry in the world' in BF of supporters, No one else believes it's real. It can often lead to least fantasy politics and sectananise. Wealso avoid the complementary attractions of and substituting ourselves for the most mass of workers, or worse, impersonating That again is self deception and can even become a parody.
However argument which the Big Flame comrades wilise, which in our yet. smacks of demagogy. They say that Socialist Challenge 's the Jine paper of the IMG. of have never denied that if the IMG remained organisation on the Editorial Board it would require cither amnesia or mental gymanstics on our part to prevent the peper from essentially reflecting our views. Bur in our opinion even the criticism of the IMG stamp the nocurate. We would even go so MARCE far as to say that some of the weaknesses of the paper lave such heen that on occasions we have Tailed to strengths of positions develop ed by the IMG. Some contrades pit i this way: political ocientation of Socialist Challenge on several crucial questions has failen uneasily between that of Our Common Ground' the procrassie on which the paper was launched which provides a principled hasis for revolutionary unity) and the full programme of the IMG. to the detriment of the терет.
But even if one accepted Bap Flame's concert on this scare. there is only one way to change the situation. an it seems a rick to titany Big overall Flame comrades Beiter stay with what we've cor than risk it for something that might never happen, seems to be many argument. and choice and we cannot impose opIons Hopefully we will all learn from the development of British Socialist Challenge "We've put legislation on the statute book as advanced as impresses onesell and one' •politics in thecoming period.
Some non-aligned and IMO comrades who have writter gross 1071115313 30 101 LESSE useful criticisms, which we wil Ity and take account of future changes in ibe paper. even Others have them objections on the Surplus Kalue and Under Review pages, These Two pages out of sixteen have attracted the wrath of many "Heavy", sible, 'incomprehensible* base and been only some of the adjes tives which have been used Neither these or any comrades have made criticisms oi therest of the paner. only What does this rellect? This sometimes stems from a narrow and restricted definition what constitutes a political paper isn't the Understandably paper. Lenin. Trotsky SERAC bourgeois democratic sale their Well, that is their them.
this view can agree with comrades occasion, criticism the ruling WOE CISS Guardian, Financial centred theit ruling ambitions. "inacces POLITICS La paper other of and • contrary 1o wisl many comrades believe - were not soft on any variety of syndicalism or cconomism. If Lenin, could attack on his characieristically harsh inveetive the econonism of Tsaris Russia — when every workers was infinitely more important than in a codern one can only conjecture as to how he would have dealt with those who have reduced politics to what takes place at the point of production, Thus inverting the social democratic distinefion between politics and trade Labourists say that politics is what happens in Parliament. 1s our reply to them to be: No. politics is only what happens as the point of production. That, unfortunately, has been the reply of the groups who base dominated the British far left for many decades. We teject But stop, many comrades will shout That's a distortion, We syndicalis want reviews in the paper, wc want theory, but make it more readable and accewible. Ouc 'the thisand 3l on the Edicorial class strungle Board will admit that, On we have printed for articies not caxily comprehensible. But we feel that the reflects something the crises deepet if comrades only scop Their model of workers* papers is a souped up version of the Daily Mirror, Cerlainly, the Mirror can take up some issues in a very positive, agitational Fashion, such as racism. Bur don't make a mistake about what the paper represents. It is bourgecisic. the straitjacket through which class confines COILIOSOC Stop stewards, who are even marginally interested in polities or who take their stewardship seriously do not simply read the develogs They 1C8d the Tunes, even the Times and the because these papers give bem an insight into.
class politics and We are attempting to develop UNICA an overall proletarian political intervention in British politics.
We believe that such a paper can lay the basis for the development of an embryonic socialist alternative to Labourism. This means we reject YOUR DOES AGAIN made Socialist Challenge SCABS SHALL NOT PASS ON 11 JULY Wecall for this to be the most mighty display of strength and unity in defence of trade unicmise that our movemen! seen iтycars."
and sociological motions of the paper Imply that it should be for MANY BE MOESCIO "resolutionary workers, for whatever. Iiis a paper designed attracted revolutionary socialist politics, ideas and policies for reiolving EVERY ASPECT Thus we have to produce a which does more than simply report strugee and make general propaganda 1o socialism. We haveto deal with every aspect of class socicty and coafront every weapon of the of the paper's weaknesses are due to lack of resources. We would like to have more research facilities so that our coverage of strikes beyond achin cheericaders. We would like to have local reports which. un addition to strikes, cover such The aspects as debates on Trades political invalved them. develapments in local Labour Parties. the activities of the Communist Party and otber groups, etc. If we could afford it financinlly we would have a regular correspondent in the House of Commons to report what goes on for our readers. We can assure comrades that our reports would be different to the entire bourgeois press!
What in our opinion has been arcal weakness of the paper has been that we have not been able to present hasic and elementary material of an educational character for munarts Jus towards socialist politics. We will accordingly correct this flaw in tie paper in the coming months. hold be taken as a steps sumenarise: the circulation has doubled, as compared to Red Weekly, nor because it is hetter produced or has better journalists, but HATES because the political concep tions on which it was Tounded have found an ocho. This is the most important gain we bave As we pointed out in our first we bellere that on for fundamentali. (the SATES democracyl we are correct. But Lis does aot mean that we have the answers to every question. Nor does it mean that Trotskyisn a political current which grea up in a hattle against stalinised marxism — has definitive vices philosophy, economics, aesthetics. We de believe we are strong on history and politics, though even here we have much to learn. Theletore we have lo reject the idea that every letter in our columns which criticises a particular aspect of Trotsky Leninism Should!
Immediately be replied to by the Editorial Board The usmate lopit of tha position - a theoretical absole tsa, obly too common on the Tir left would be a virtual suppression of "unorhodox ideas. On other issues we can debares ior all concerned. A case in point i the debare initiated, incidentally strong allack on syndicalism and sconomist, by Jolt Ross in our paces. For the point a this conjunciure was wel expressed by the old philo sopher Spinoza (who was not a member of the Four later nationals: "Neither to laugh nor cocy, butto understand'.
Editoriat Board of Socialist Challenge.
* IN ADDITION to the contributions to the dehale about who the paper is aimed at. we have also initiated a related discussion uround the paper's political basis. To date, wehave received contributions Fres the International-Communist League and the Revolutionary Communist Tendency.
We feel the importance of this debate cannot he estimuled, and hope to resche [urther truth members of other left organisutions us well as Socialist Challenee groups and indiciduals who have not yet laken the step to join incul readers' and supporters groups.
The Editorial Board will be collectively responding lo this debute now that it is winderway in oir polemns. and urd readers to participate also. This undoubledly Important point of discussion al the Socialist Challenec Conference which is scheduled for tite last weekend in May.
We will be priating shortl further proposals and details the mational Socialist Challenge supporters conference but take this apportunity to urge readers to contact local Socialist Challenge gomps This way readers can better influence the direction of the debure — as well as that of the paper n political preparation for the through collectis nationut conference.
by Geolf Hodgion and Perer Jenkins (both members of the Independear Labour Publications) Lanour Party and these institutions are invincible". I HOOBIET nor an anccuate starcay.
and theory. simply to UNETEE SENSE denouncine reformists.
GREASING However, magically hope new ones to SOCIALIST CHALLENGE. 9 February, 1978 page 7 Any realstic analysis of those mechanisms
----- pull-quotes -----
Socialist Challenge LenMurray: CALLAGHAN'S